Amsterdam court gives fashion consultant 42 months for rape, sexual abuse of minors
An Amsterdam appeals court sentenced fashion consultant Martijn N. to 42 months in prison on Monday for two rapes, sexual abuse involving two underage boys, and one sexual assault, overturning a lower court ruling after finding five of ten alleged sex offenses proven. The incidents include a situation in which one victim’s throat was squeezed and another, a 17-year-old boy, was overpowered despite verbal and physical resistance.
The Amsterdam Court of Appeal rejected parts of the prosecution’s broader case but still imposed a significantly higher sentence than the 18-month term issued by the lower court, of which eight months were suspended. The Public Prosecution Service had demanded seven years in prison.
The court established that the proven offenses took place between 2011 and 2021, involving young men who had met N. through arranged encounters. Two victims were 15 years old at the time.
Several complainants stated they froze during the sexual encounters, were unable to speak up, or only later realized what had happened.
The case became one of the largest Dutch criminal proceedings involving sexual violence against men, following investigative reporting by Het Parool and NRC involving more than 100 interviews. After publication, 18 men reported to police.
In total, ten alleged cases were reviewed on appeal. The court convicted N. in five: two rapes, sexual abuse of two minor boys, and one sexual assault. In the remaining cases, he was acquitted.
The court rejected the prosecution’s argument that N. had a recognizable pattern of behavior that could be used as supporting “link evidence” across all cases. Instead, judges assessed each case separately, examining credibility, corroboration, and whether coercion could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and whether any coercion was intentional.
In one rape conviction, the court placed significant weight on findings that N. squeezed a victim’s throat. The judges described this as “without question a violent act that, in those circumstances, one can force someone to undergo or perform sexual acts.”
N. denied coercion throughout the proceedings. During the appeal hearing, he acknowledged being “too dominant" but said no coercion occurred. “If someone clearly says no, then no is no,” he told the court.
In another case involving a 17-year-old victim, the court found he resisted verbally and physically but that N. continued, describing the conduct as behavior that overpowered the victim.
The court said N. could not hide behind his claim that he only adopted a dominant role in sexual settings, stating his belief that partners were always free to say no reflected a serious underestimation of the impact of his behavior.
For the sexual abuse of two 15-year-old boys, convictions from the lower court were upheld. The court described it as “shocking” that N. knowingly arranged meetings with minors and engaged in rough and dominant sexual conduct.
The final sentence was based on an initial calculation of 50 months, reduced by six months due to the age of some offenses, media attention, and slightly diminished culpability. It was then further reduced by two months for violation of the reasonable-time requirement.
The court also ordered compensation payments: 6,100 euros to one victim, 5,000 euros each to three others, and 4,000 euros to a fifth.
N. was absent from the sentencing. His lawyer, Gerard Spong, said the defense is considering filing an appeal in cassation to the Dutch Supreme Court, which would only review legal and procedural correctness, not the factual findings.
