{"id":175197,"date":"2025-01-27T09:00:24","date_gmt":"2025-01-27T08:00:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=175197"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:27:40","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:27:40","slug":"day-one-of-hearings-substantive-trial-against-fouad-l-begins","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2025\/01\/27\/day-one-of-hearings-substantive-trial-against-fouad-l-begins\/","title":{"rendered":"Day one of the trial: Fouad L. believes he ‘prevented a bloodbath’"},"content":{"rendered":"

487 days after the attack on Erasmus MC, the substantive trial against former medical student Fouad L. begins. The former student is facing charges including murder, arson, threats, and possession of weapons. Five full hearing days have been reserved in the extra-secure courtroom of the Rotterdam district court.<\/p>\n

\"\"

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tTessa Hofland<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

Session closed<\/h2>

The session concluded around 4.45 pm. The case will resume on Tuesday morning at 10.00 am. Tomorrow, victim statements are among the items on the agenda. You will be able to follow the trial again via EM.<\/p>\n

3.50 pm: Risk of recurrence?<\/h2>

The anger over failing to obtain his degree is still present, which greatly concerns the experts. The rage appears undiminished, L. lacks a social support network, and all of this contributes to the risk of recurrence. \u201cThe level of planning he is capable of is also deeply worrying\u201d, said one of the experts.<\/p>\n

The experts recommend TBS with compulsory treatment. This treatment should begin as soon as possible. The judge finds this complicated, as it could affect the length of the prison sentence. Many people expect him to be imprisoned for a long time. What if L. serves 28 years in prison first and only then starts the treatment? \u201cIt\u2019s about reducing the risk of reoffending stemming from his disorder. We know that early intervention is key. The sooner you begin compulsory treatment, the higher the chances of success\u201d, the expert concluded.<\/p>\n

Not once does L. turn to face the experts sitting directly behind him, even though the discussion is all about him.<\/p>\n

3.30 pm: Desperation or disturbed?<\/h2>

The experts from the Pieter Baan Centrum considered declaring Fouad L. entirely unaccountable for his actions, they explained. Due to the mounting pressure in L.\u2019s mind, the depersonalisation issues, the social difficulties, and his autism spectrum disorder combined with other factors, L. found himself trapped, according to the experts.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis is no longer someone who can make 100 per cent rational decisions. We estimate his accountability to be reduced to 25 to 50 per cent.\u201d<\/p>\n

The judge pressed the experts: was it an act of desperation or the result of mental disturbance? No direct answer was given.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s a matter of getting inside the defendant\u2019s perspective\u201d, one of the researchers said. \u201cWe ask ourselves: where did he take the wrong turn that landed him here, at the Pieter Baan Centrum? When he arrived, I thought: what do we do now? It seemed obvious that he was unaccountable for his actions. But through many intensive hours of evaluation, we saw him make decisions that made us question their logic. Why would those professors, those committee members, and others deliberately try to obstruct you?<\/p>\n

\u201cHe cannot perceive the emotions he elicits in others. He cannot deal with those emotions. He ends up trapped, unable to find an adequate solution anymore.\u201d Why L. resorted to violence, they could not determine. He became stuck in a rut, one so deep it resembled a chasm, the experts said, describing his state of mind.<\/p>\n

3.00 pm: Concerns, but also high grades<\/h2>

It is a question being asked across the Netherlands, and also by the judges: how could it be that L. got on the verge of becoming a certified doctor? There were significant concerns during his studies, but also high grades, which confirmed he had the capabilities. For example, L. received a 9 in Radiology. When the experts from the Pieter Baan Centrum spoke, the judge posed this very question.<\/p>\n

The expert replied: \u201cThere are situations in which people with Asperger\u2019s can function very well, but in patient interactions, and thus in dealing with emotions like grief and fear, issues arise. He may be excellent at handling diagnoses, but patients are part of that process too. I believe that is where he goes completely wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n

Another expert from the Pieter Baan Centrum added: \u201cMedical interns come and go, and by the time you notice where the problem lies, they\u2019re already gone. If an intern is eager to learn and works hard, like L., it takes time before any issues become apparent. By the time he was exposed, he had already moved on.\u201d<\/p>\n

14.45: \u2018Do you think you deserve punishment?\u2019<\/h2>

The judge asks L. directly: \u201cDo you think you deserve punishment?\u201d L. assumes he will be punished, he says.<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019m asking you: do you<\/em> think you should?\u201d the judge repeats. L. is silent for a moment before he responds: \u201cThat\u2019s actually a very good question. People who murder others should be punished. So, I deserve punishment. But, and maybe this won\u2019t make me popular: I think I should be punished, but I don\u2019t feel guilty. It doesn\u2019t feel like I chose this. As if I decided: I won\u2019t become a doctor, so I\u2019ll just go and murder three people.\u201d<\/p>\n

Becoming a doctor had been L.\u2019s goal since his fifth birthday. The judge notes that this dream is unlikely to ever become reality. L. says he no longer looks to the future. \u201cI was tortured to death by Erasmus MC and came back as some kind of Frankenstein\u2019s monster.\u201d<\/p>\n

L. says it felt like a bucket filling up more and more. \u201cDespite all the setbacks, gaslighting and opposition that made no sense\u201d, he almost obtained his degree. Until a community police officer approached the examination board with concerns. According to L., that made the bucket overflow. At that point, he could no longer entirely suppress his dark fantasies.<\/p>\n

14.30: \u2018I handle emotions differently\u2019<\/h2>

According to the court, the psychological report from the Pieter Baan Centre is \u2018an unusually comprehensive report\u2019. L. was not surprised about the content. He knew he had Asperger\u2019s, which had also played a role in all the issues he encountered during his medical training. \u201cYou sometimes accidentally tell people the truth\u201d, he says about his autism spectrum disorder. \u201cI told lecturers or doctors that I didn\u2019t find their work very important or interesting.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to L., that was the reason for his suspension. \u201cNot for a week, but for years! Lecturers get very angry about such remarks. It only happened twice. When someone asks for my opinion, I wrongly assume they actually want to hear it. But what they really want is to hear their own opinion coming out of your mouth.\u201d<\/p>\n

The judge read in the case file that lecturers and doctors were concerned about whether L. would be suitable for patient contact. Absolute nonsense, says L. \u201cI handle emotions differently. If someone is emotional, I tend to figure out why they are sad, try to solve it. I\u2019m more focused on the solution than the emotion itself. I naturally approach emotions more functionally. I see that as a positive thing. Some people are very emotional; others are more analytical and solution-oriented.\u201d<\/p>\n

Doctors are also said to have claimed that L. lacks empathy. In response, he says: \u201cThat feedback was bullshit. I can prove that accusation doesn\u2019t hold up in practice.\u201d<\/p>\n

The judge increasingly gets the impression that L. feels he was bullied out of the study programme and asks: \u201cWho would benefit from getting you out of the programme?\u201d L. responds: \u201cThat ENT doctor was just angry. With Asperger\u2019s, you sometimes unintentionally rub people the wrong way.\u201d He is referring to the ENT doctor who made a complaint about L. during his internship. After that, L. was suspended for two years. During that suspension, L. says he began fantasising about violence, because he was so furious.<\/p>\n

Throughout the hearing, L. seems most interested in how the programme treated him, which he confirms when the judge asks how he views his own case file. \u201cI find it much more interesting whether you, as an independent judge, think I was treated fairly.\u201d The judge refuses to comment on that but again asks for L.\u2019s opinion. \u201cIt\u2019s not fair to tell me I should go do something else. Why can\u2019t they just teach properly?\u201d<\/p>\n

13.45: Caring person<\/h2>

In the morning, L. described himself as a caring person. The Public Prosecution Service picks up on that. If he\u2019s so caring, why didn\u2019t he think about Marlous\u2019s other children or the students in the classroom where he shot lecturer Jurgen Damen, the prosecutor asks.<\/p>\n

\u201cI did think about them\u201d, says Fouad L. about the students in the classroom. \u201cIn the original plan, the intention was to not take their safety into account.\u201d Was he not concerned about the consequences for those students? \u201cNo, I was just glad that measures were taken to ensure there would be no casualties among the students.\u201d<\/p>\n

If L. thought this would provide comfort to the present students, he is sorely mistaken. He touches a raw nerve. One of the students in the public gallery finds it too much to bear and temporarily leaves the room.<\/p>\n

The judge presses on. What does L. think of the fact that people are still suffering? \u201cI hope that if they exercise their right to speak, I\u2019ll get a better understanding of that\u201d, he says. The judge sharply responds: \u201cYou\u2019ve read the file about how they experienced this. And you respond with a remark about the process?!\u201d<\/p>\n

It then becomes clear that L. requested the case file but hasn\u2019t read those statements. He wanted to see if the CCTV footage was included in the file. The judge still needs to decide whether those recordings will be added. L. wants to see them in advance. \u201cOtherwise, it\u2019ll be quite shocking for me.\u201d<\/p>\n

13.30: \u2018You\u2019re trained as a doctor. I assume you know how to check if someone is still alive.\u2019<\/h2>

The prosecutor and judges continue to press L. on certain points, to his irritation. Not for the first time, they ask whether the former medical student checked if Romy was still alive. The girl died of her injuries in hospital.<\/p>\n

L. asks: \u201cWhat do you mean?\u201d The prosecutor responds: \u201cYou\u2019re trained as a doctor. I assume you know how to check if someone is still alive.\u201d The remark resonates with the audience, who seem to appreciate the sharp questioning.<\/p>\n

The former medical student does not understand why they keep pressing this issue. He would rather focus on his chronological explanation. The judge clarifies.<\/p>\n

Judge: \u201cYou take no responsibility at all. You describe facts, actions, but there\u2019s no sense of accountability.\u201d<\/p>\n

L.: \u201cThat\u2019s correct, because I don\u2019t feel it.\u201d<\/p>\n

Judge: \u201cYou act as if you were powerless.\u201d<\/p>\n

L.: \u201cI don\u2019t feel like I had much choice.\u201d<\/p>\n

The prosecutor makes another attempt: \u201cIt\u2019s striking that you sometimes take quite a while to answer seemingly straightforward questions. The judge already mentioned: it seems as if you\u2019ve never really thought about it. What\u2019s going on there?\u201d<\/p>\n

L.: \u201cThe plan wasn\u2019t rationally put together. It also feels like it wasn\u2019t my problem.\u201d<\/p>\n

The prosecutor asks whether \u2018Partition\u2019, the voice in his head that supposedly forced him to commit his crimes, isn\u2019t just a ruse, since L. stated in a previous declaration that he didn\u2019t want to or couldn\u2019t take the blame. L. reacts sharply: \u201cIt\u2019s not fair for you to quote a statement where I was criticising myself. I think that\u2019s a bit underhanded.\u201d The anger in the public gallery rises once again.<\/p>\n

13.15: Prosecutor begins questioning<\/h2>

After the break, emotions are already running high among the relatives of Romy and Marlous. The public gallery holds its breath as the prosecutor opens by asking Fouad L.: did you realise it was a child who opened the door? \u201cI saw a body\u201d, he replies.<\/p>\n

In his statement to the police, Fouad L. claimed he fired once at the girl. However, the investigation suggests he fired twice. Fouad L. speculates on how events unfolded: he shot Romy, went back home to set fire to his apartment, then returned to his neighbour\u2019s house, where he shot the girl again, pursued the neighbour, and killed her. \u201cThe person who opened the door, they had to be\u2026 had to be killed. I can\u2019t give a logical explanation.\u201d<\/p>\n

12.05: Break \u2013 much needed for those in the public gallery<\/h2>

The hearing is suspended until 13.15, 15 minutes longer than initially planned, as many attendees may need to go through security again.<\/p>\n

Most people in the public gallery are well-prepared and have brought their own lunch. In the hallway outside the courtroom, words of comfort and encouragement are exchanged where possible. Hugs provide solace to others. That Fouad L. cannot explain why their loved ones were killed stings. He often went no further than \u2018that was the plan\u2019.<\/p>\n

The nineteen lawyers representing victims and their families approach their clients to check on their well-being. The people describe their emotions, the crushing sense of powerlessness and the hope that the perpetrator will be held accountable for all the pain and fear he caused.<\/p>\n

11.30: 'I feel very positive about myself. I prevented a bloodbath'<\/h2>

Immediately after it became clear he would not receive his medical diploma, a plan began to form in Fouad L.\u2019s mind, he says. He describes how he could no longer contain his anger over the medical programme. He says he debated the plan with himself, describing it as an \u2018internal conflict\u2019. Initially, his plan was to kill everyone who had \u2018once looked at him the wrong way\u2019.<\/p>\n

\u201cI had an internal conflict\u201d, he says. \u201cWhat is the minimum I need to do to get out of this? It was a negotiation with myself in my head. Something had to happen. That may sound strange. Killing people isn\u2019t right \u2026\u201d<\/p>\n

The judges press him on his reflections about the plan, buying the guns, deciding who to spare, shooting his 14-year-old neighbour Romy, his 39-year-old neighbour Marlous, and 43-year-old lecturer Jurgen Damen. The shock in the public gallery is palpable when Fouad L. says Romy\u2019s death \u2018has no meaning\u2019. He cannot explain why he fired twice at her, while other victims were shot more times. He claims not to recall stepping over the girl\u2019s body to enter the house. \u201cIt feels like it happened on TV\u201d, he says.<\/p>\n

Some attendees are visibly overwhelmed when Fouad L. states, \u201cI feel very positive about myself. I prevented a bloodbath\u201d, referring to the \u2018worse\u2019 plan he initially conceived.<\/p>\n

11.00: 'I could have been a great doctor'<\/h2>

Fouad L. is still deeply resentful over the suspensions and what he perceives as unfairly negative assessments of his suitability to be a doctor. According to the judge, he had promised the programme to work on his communication skills and even consider leaving the course.<\/p>\n

Regarding his two-year suspension, he says: \u201cWhat they\u2019re really saying is: leave! They even literally said to me once: maybe you should do a different study.\u201d<\/p>\n

Judge: \u201cYou said you would consider that.\u201d
\nFouad L.: \u201cThat was just politeness.\u201d<\/p>\n

He explains that as a medical student, you are expected to respond politely and agreeably, which is what he did, no matter how unfair it felt. \u201cIf I had just been able to graduate in 2017, none of this would have happened. This point is very important to me\u201d, he says.<\/p>\n

Fouad L. expresses no remorse or regret. \u201cI also feel a considerable distance from what happened. That might sound odd. I know I\u2019m guilty of what happened, but I don\u2019t feel guilty for what happened. That\u2019s just how I feel\u201d, he says.<\/p>\n

When the judge remarks that she does not find the decision by the examination board to withhold his diploma \u2018incomprehensible\u2019, L. reacts indignantly. \u201cSorry? I think that\u2019s a bit unfair to say because I\u2019m convinced I could have been a great doctor. Everything just went terribly wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n

Fouad L. described the fire in the Education Centre as part of his internal negotiations over his plan. \u201cThe idea behind it was that I needed to do this so that the examination board wouldn\u2019t be harmed. It was never my intention to harm the examination board. I even quite like the chairperson.\u201d<\/p>\n

So why was there still a fatality at Erasmus MC, the judge wants to know.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere had to be at least one death at Erasmus MC. That was the decision\u201d, L. says.<\/p>\n

\u201cHow so?\u201d, asks the judge, not for the first or last time. \u201cWas it drawing straws?\u201d<\/p>\n

L.: \u201cIt could have gone in many ways, but this was simply the decision that was made.\u201d<\/p>\n

10.15: Review of facts with Fouad L.<\/h2>

After outlining the charges against him, the former medical student takes the floor. He has prepared a detailed chronological account of his life, which he wishes to read out, but the judge prefers a dialogue. L. shares that he wanted to be a doctor from the age of five, describing it as a goal that earned him positive feedback.<\/p>\n

\u201cWas it a passion or an obsession?\u201d, the judge asks about his dream of becoming a doctor. \u201cAn obsession\u201d, Fouad replies immediately. \u201cIt went much further than an obsession.\u201d<\/p>\n

10.05: Trial begins<\/h2>

\u201cWe are here to discuss the events of 28 September 2023 at Heiman Dullaertplein. Horrific events took place there\u201d, begins the judge. \u201cHorrific events also occurred at Erasmus Medical Centre. These events have had a profound and lasting impact on many people\u2019s lives. The court is aware of this.\u201d<\/p>\n

Relatives and victims are warned that they may hear new and potentially distressing information. If it becomes too overwhelming, they are allowed to leave the room and return later. Tension is palpable in the public gallery. The moment has arrived: the substantive hearing against Fouad L. begins.<\/p>\n

9.00: Queues in front of court<\/h2>

As expected, it is busy outside the Rotterdam District Court. Many relatives and victims, as well as a significant number of journalists and courtroom sketch artists, are waiting in line for the security checks. The judge had previously stated that anyone wishing to attend needed to arrive on time. The first substantive hearing begins promptly at 9.30 am.<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

Read how the schedule for this week looks<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t