Ad

Fouad L. back in court on appeal. This is what the case is about

The appeal against Fouad L. begins on Thursday 12 November. The former medical student was sentenced to life imprisonment for the attack on Erasmus MC and three murders. Both L. and the Public Prosecution Service disagreed with the ruling. Four questions and answers about the case at the Court of Appeal.

Why is the case back in court?

In early 2025, former medical student Fouad L. stood trial for the murders of his neighbour Marlous, Marlous’ daughter Romy and lecturer Jurgen Damen, as well as arson, making threats and possessing a firearm. L. said on the first day of the trial that he wanted revenge. He was furious because his medical degree had been postponed until after he had taken a psychological test, despite having earned all his credits. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.

Both the Public Prosecution Service and L. appealed against the ruling. For different reasons, they want L. to receive compulsory psychiatric treatment. The Public Prosecution Service believes this is the best way to keep L. out of society. L.’s defence considers the events ‘inextricably linked to the disorder in his brain’ and argues that L. needs help. At the preparatory hearing, L. said that he also believes he should receive treatment.

In 2025, and still today, the Public Prosecution Service sought a 30-year prison sentence and compulsory treatment. After 30 years in prison, L. would then be transferred to a secure, closed facility. This treatment can be extended indefinitely if there is too little progress. The aim is always for the person to return to society. The judge was clear in her ruling: she saw no prospect of L. returning to society.

What is the central question in this case?

The central question on appeal will be: was Fouad L. criminally responsible? L. previously said that he negotiated with an imaginary computer about the scale of the attack. As he described it, the computer effectively forced him to take revenge.

In 2024, the Pieter Baan Centre concluded that L. was substantially diminished in his criminal responsibility. The judge reached a different conclusion. In her view, someone who could complete a medical degree, plan an attack in detail and make changes to it up to the last moment could be held responsible for what he had done. It is for the Court of Appeal to decide again whether L. was criminally responsible.

Fouad L.’s guilt has never been in doubt. He was arrested at the scene, countless witnesses saw him, he was captured on camera and he confessed.

Fouad L. was sentenced to life imprisonment last year. Does that really mean life?

Yes, it would mean that L. would spend the rest of his life in prison. The Netherlands is the only country in the European Union where a life sentence really means life. However, like everyone else serving this sentence, after 25 years he may apply to the State Secretary for Legal Protection for a pardon or a review of his sentence. The European Court of Human Rights once ruled that a life sentence without any possibility of release is inhumane. That is why there must be a one-off possibility of a pardon.

If a pardon or review is requested, a special investigation team must issue an advice. The Advisory Council on Life Sentences will look at L.’s behaviour in prison and whether there is a risk that he will commit further offences. The victims and bereaved families and relatives will be interviewed again as part of the investigation. The team will always take their views on L.’s possible release into account. The state secretary will then make the decision. If a pardon is granted, L. will be released after 30 years.

Will the entire trial be held again?

No. On appeal, the case is reviewed again by a higher court. This is done by the Court of Appeal, which is different from a district court. Quite a number of days have been set aside for this case: six in total – 12, 13, 16, 18, 23 and 25 November.

The hearings will include a discussion of evidence presented earlier and new research findings. L. was examined again by the Pieter Baan Centre last year. Experts from the centre will explain their findings. All the victims and their relatives also have the right to address the court. This is not compulsory, but anyone who wants to can tell the court what they have been through because of L. and how they are doing ever since.

Ad