Lawyers ask court to acquit Stint founders over fatal Oss crash that killed 4 children

The defense team in the case involving the company Stint has requested an acquittal for the company’s founders. Lawyer Carry Knoops stressed on Tuesday that the September 2018 railway crossing accident in Oss, which claimed the lives of four children, was not caused by the Stint vehicle running out of control.

Knoops stated, “The Stint did not go out of control. That was technically impossible and did not occur. The brakes were working correctly.” She also dismissed the possibility of a mechanical fault and highlighted that footage shows that the Stint did not stop at the railway crossing.

The Public Prosecution Service (OM) recommended prison terms of five years and four months for the Stint business owners on Monday, along with corporate fines totaling 360,000 euros. Knoops commented, “Following the accident, the prosecution conducted an investigation assuming the Stint was to blame. In legal terms, this is known as tunnel vision.”

The defense tried to prove that the Stint was not a dangerous vehicle using technical details, such as radiation and braking distance formulas. They argued that the prosecution cited shortcomings based on rules that, from a legal perspective, did not actually apply to the Stint.

“The prosecution claims that no technical defect has been proven, yet it has not been definitively excluded. That is merely an assumption. This entire case rests on the prosecution’s assumptions, and you cannot justify sending people to prison for five and a half years on that basis," Geert-Jan Knoops said.

The defense likened the case to the Rubin vase, a visual illusion where one can see either a vase or two faces, to show that the dossier can be interpreted from multiple perspectives. “At no point during the trial has any scenario been presented that allows us to say with certainty: this is exactly what happened.”

Carry Knoops also contextualized the number of Stint complaints from 2011 to 2018: “There were 44 reports, excluding service messages. How does that make it a dangerous vehicle?” She described the deadly accident as a “tragic incident caused by human error, where the driver went through the railway barrier.”

The government granted permission for the Stint to be introduced on public roads, but according to Knoops, it failed to provide adequate oversight. “That cannot be held against the defendants.” She said the Stint manufacturers “did everything possible to bring a safe product to market. The OM has failed to recognize that the development of the Stint was a lengthy process in which safety was always the top priority.”

The two suspects, Edwin Renzen and Peter Noorlander, delivered their final statements to the court. “We understand how the years since the accident have been for those involved and the impact it has had. We empathize with that. Yet this trial does not reflect who we really are or how we conducted ourselves.”

Most of the victims’ relatives did not hear the comment, as they had either already left or were deliberately exiting the courtroom in protest.

The court will rule on the case on February 13.