WILLEMSTAD – A young man has been acquitted of an armed robbery involving three minors after the Court of Curaçao ruled that there was insufficient objective evidence to support a conviction.
Although all three victims identified him as one of the perpetrators, the court found that their statements alone were not enough to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The investigation did not include technical evidence that could link the suspect to the crime.
The robbery took place in the early morning hours of December 14, 2025. The three boys were sitting in or near a vehicle, talking or sleeping, when they were approached by two individuals wearing dark clothing and balaclavas. The attackers were armed with knives.
During the robbery, one victim had a knife held against his throat and was struck in the face. Another victim had a knife pressed against his body. The perpetrators stole several personal belongings, including gold chains, mobile phones, bags, wallets, bank cards, watches, clothing and house keys.
All three victims stated that they recognized one of the attackers as a former friend. After the robbery, they followed the suspects and believed they recognized the scooter used by one of them. They later went with several other people to the suspect’s home, where a confrontation and fight took place. The suspect was arrested shortly afterward.
The Public Prosecutor’s Office had requested a three-year prison sentence, with six months suspended, after deducting time already spent in pretrial detention. The suspect denied any involvement and stated that he was somewhere else at the time of the robbery.
The court acknowledged that the three victim statements constituted legally valid evidence. However, the judge ruled that the statements were not sufficiently convincing for a criminal conviction.
According to the court, the victims were friends with each other, already knew the suspect and had previously experienced disagreements with him. In addition, the perpetrators’ faces were largely covered during the robbery.
The court also pointed out that no technical evidence had been collected. There were no available telecommunications records, no stolen property was found on the suspect or at his home, and a balaclava he owned could not be linked to the robbery.
The photo identification process and the recognition of the scooter were also not considered independent supporting evidence, because the victims already knew the suspect and his scooter before the incident.
The judge further ruled that the suspect’s refusal to reveal where he had been during the robbery could not be used against him. A defendant is not required to prove his own innocence.
The court emphasized that the acquittal does not mean the victims were lying or that the suspect could not have been involved. It means only that his involvement could not be proven with sufficient certainty.
The suspect, who was born in 2006, was immediately released from pretrial detention. A civil claim for damages amounting to more than ANG 3,600 could not be handled within the criminal case following the acquittal. The victim may still pursue the claim through civil court proceedings.