MAASTRICHT - The total outside in the March stabbing to death of Arnold Vink 77 in Brunssum was eighty euros. Both prime suspects split that amount between the two of them. That is what the 17-year-old neighbor boy of Vink, who has confessed to having stabbed the man to death, stated to the police.The other main suspect - with his 22 years the only adult in the company of four suspects - is said to have stolen that money from a purse that was in a jacket pocket of Vink. He himself denies ever having been in Arnold Vink's house. He only stood on the lookout outside, he insisted yesterday in court in Maastricht. Prosecutor W. Smits believed none of this and demanded six years in prison against the man.

He then asked the court to punish the 17-year-old prime suspect under adult criminal law and demanded four years in prison plus tbs against him. In case the court does decide to apply the juvenile criminal law, he demanded the maximum sentence of two years of juvenile detention plus "juvenile tbs," placement in an institution for juveniles, minimum two and maximum six years).

The prosecutor considers the statements of 17-year-old prime suspect Ali more credible than those of the others, all three of whom describe their own roles as marginal. Only the case against 22-year-old Mustapha was heard in public. In the cases against the three minors, the courtroom doors remained closed. Mustapha's counsel H. Ruysink argued for acquittal. "These boys absolutely never wanted this. There is no intent whatsoever here." Lawyer S. Weening of the 17-year-old Ali, he said afterwards. In case the court did not follow him there, he asked for his client's dismissal from all prosecution. He invoked self-defense: Ali would have been overcome by intense fear and therefore stabbed.

Ali stated that he single-handedly broke into Vink's home on March 5. On that occasion he not only took a VCR and jewelry, but also saw on bank statements that the elderly man had 20,000 euros in an account. According to him, it was decided in consultation with his three companions to rob Vink, with the intention of depriving him of his debit card and code. That is also why, according to his reading, the four of them made sure that the man was at home that March 9th around ten o'clock in the evening. "He was seen watching TV," Officer Smits said. The other three denied having known that the older man would be home: they thought Ali was going to break into an "empty" house. Officer Smits wondered aloud why it would be necessary for three men strong to be on the lookout for a burglary in an abandoned house. Again according to Ali, he and his 22-year-old buddy Mustapha, both masked in some sort of balaclava, knocked on Vink's closed back door on that dark March evening.

When the latter opened the door, Ali pushed him inside. According to him, Mustapha also stepped inside, closed the door behind him and walked through to the living room. Finch set to screaming and grabbed a kitchen knife lying on the kitchen counter. Ali took that and stabbed the elderly man several times in the neck and chest. His gloves were covered in blood, he explained. Other than in the kitchen, blood traces were not found anywhere, reason for Officer Smits to argue that someone must have still been in the house. After all, the first floor had clearly been searched. "Mustapha, while Ali struggled with and stabbed Arnol Vink, searched Vink's home in a horrifyingly cold-blooded manner, looting eighty euros."

Defendant Mustapha feels, according to the probation department, that he did no wrong except disgrace his family. Like Mustapha, his father downplays the entire incident, according to the Parole Board. The suspect was thrown out of the army last year after being sentenced to six months' probation by the court's military chamber for several thefts. Prosecutor Smits asked the court to enforce this sentence as well now.

Against both other suspects last week, Smits demanded three years, one of which was suspended against the 17-year-old, or, applying the juvenile justice system, two years of juvenile detention, including eight months of probation) and against the 15-year-old, one year of juvenile detention, including two months of probation.

The court will rule in the four cases on Oct. 27.

The defendant(s) in this case are assisted by: