WILLEMSTAD – The Joint Court of Justice in Curaçao will examine on Thursday, October 22, whether the murder conviction of Vernond Rombley should be reopened following new forensic investigations that raise serious questions about his identification as the gunman in a fatal supermarket robbery more than a decade ago.
Rombley, who was sentenced to 15 years in prison in 2016, has consistently maintained that he was wrongfully convicted of the December 2014 robbery and murder of 34-year-old Chinese shopkeeper Zufeng Li at the Wah Mei minimarket on Mirla Platéweg in Willemstad.
The upcoming hearing could represent a significant development in one of Curaçao's most controversial criminal cases, which has attracted attention in the Netherlands through the documentary series De zaak-Rombley and the involvement of the Dutch Innocence Project.
The defense team, led by Dutch attorney Geert-Jan Knoops, is seeking a review of the conviction based on forensic findings that could undermine the identification of Rombley as the shooter.
Central to the case is surveillance footage showing two individuals entering the supermarket, where the owner was shot and killed during a robbery.
According to the defense, forensic analysis of the footage indicates that the gunman was considerably shorter than Rombley. Investigations conducted by forensic specialists suggested a height difference of approximately seven to ten centimeters.
The defense also points to differences in physical appearance, particularly Rombley's distinctive dreadlocks, which were reportedly not visible on the individual captured by the surveillance cameras.
These findings have raised questions about whether Rombley was correctly identified as the person who fired the fatal shots.
In an earlier stage of the review proceedings, the Court ordered the Netherlands Forensic Institute (NFI) to conduct an independent examination of the height of the gunman shown in the surveillance footage.
The institute subsequently carried out additional investigations in Curaçao, including a reconstruction at the supermarket, to assess the reliability of the identification evidence.
The new forensic findings are expected to play a central role in determining whether sufficient grounds exist to reopen the criminal case.
Rombley's original conviction was based partly on WhatsApp messages in which he appeared to admit involvement in the killing. The messages were sent to several young women, including an ex-girlfriend.
However, Rombley has maintained that the messages were not genuine confessions but attempts to impress others by presenting himself as a gangster.
His defense attorneys have also questioned aspects of the original police investigation and the reliability of the identification evidence.
The case gained international attention in 2023 when Dutch public broadcaster KRO-NCRV released the three-part documentary De zaak-Rombley, examining the conviction and the possibility of a miscarriage of justice.
The documentary followed Rombley, his family, and his legal representatives as they investigated the circumstances surrounding the murder and sought to establish whether he had been wrongly convicted.
Rombley was 19 years old when he was convicted. After serving a substantial portion of his sentence, he was conditionally released from the Sentro di Detenshon i Korekshon Kòrsou (SDKK) in December 2024.
Despite his release, the conviction remains in place, and his legal team continues its efforts to have the case reviewed and ultimately overturned.
The proceedings scheduled for Thursday will focus on whether the new forensic evidence provides sufficient legal grounds for reconsidering the original judgment. A decision to reopen the case would not automatically mean that Rombley is acquitted.
The case also raises broader questions about the reliability of eyewitness identification, the interpretation of digital communications as criminal evidence, and the role of modern forensic techniques in reviewing older convictions.
For Rombley and his family, the proceedings represent another opportunity to challenge a conviction they have disputed for years.
The Court has not yet announced a decision on the latest review request.