874
submitted 3 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

Dutch beach volleyball player Steven van de Velde, who served time in prison after he was convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl, won his second match at the Paris Olympics and received an even harsher reaction from the crowd on Wednesday than for his first match.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Humanius@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

So I'm not overly familiar, but I can try to summarize what I know.

Steven van de Velde is a Dutchman who went to the UK and raped a 12 year-old. He was sentenced to four years in prison for this by a UK court. Later he was extradited to the Netherlands, so he could sit out his sentence in the NL. However in the Netherlands, unlike the UK, sex with a minor is not automatically considered rape and needs to be proven in court. (Note: That is my understanding of the difference in interpretation) Because of this his conviction was reduced to "ontucht", meaning sexual misconduct. (Even though what he did would probably also be considered rape in Dutch court).
As a result, he was out of prison after 13 months.

Now, Dutch attitude to these kinds of things, in my experience, is generally (but not always) that if you have paid your time, and have shown remorse for your actions, then it should probably not affect your future career prospects. The justice system is supposed to rehabilitate after all. (That is my experience though, and my experience may be biased, so don't take this as gospel)

Hart van Nederland did a survey, and apparently only 27% of respondents think he should not be allowed to compete. 63% of respondents think he should be allowed to compete, and 10% don't have an opinion either way. (Note that Hart van Nederland is not the most reliable of sources, but it gives an indication)

From what I have seen in Dutch circles this controversy is a lot less pronounced than it is in other countries. That's not to say it is entirely uncontroversial, but it's not quite to the same degree as I'm seeing internationally.

Personal opinion:

I don't think his sentence should have been lowered to "ontucht". I think what he did is morally reprehensible, and he should have sat out the full sentence for raping a minor. That is a failure on behalf of the justice system though, and van de Velde is not personally to blame for that.

~~That said, given that he has shown remorse for his actions, and has finished the sentence that the legal system imposed on him, I don't think he should have been barred from competing in the Olympics on behalf of the Dutch team.~~

Edit: As Flying Squid mentioned I might be mistaken that he has shown genuine remorse.
If he hasn't that changes my opinion on the matter.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago

given that he has shown remorse for his actions,

Remorse?

After his release in 2017, van de Velde complained about "all the nonsense" reporting on his crime in the media, claiming that the term pedophile did not apply to him, without expanding further.[1][20] At the same time he stated not yet having read any of the reporting he was criticizing.[21] The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) in Britain condemned his comments at the time, stating that his "lack of remorse and self-pity is breathtaking".[15]

Return to sport

Van de Velde returned to international competition in 2018. He excused himself in an interview, saying about the rapes that occurred when he was 19-years-old, that he: "made that choice in my life when I wasn't ready, I was a teenager still figuring things out. I was sort of lost".[22] He has since described it as "the biggest mistake of [his] life".[23]

The Dutch Volleyball Association allowed him to resume his career as a beach volleyball player. In 2024, he was controversially selected to represent the Netherlands in the 2024 Summer Olympics.[24] However, in order to "establish calm", the Dutch Olympic Committee isolated van de Velde from the rest of the Dutch team, and barred him from talking to media.[25] An online petition calling for his removal from the Olympics had 80,000 supporters.[26]

His "remorse" was over getting caught. He has never offered the slightest bit of apology to the victim.

[-] Humanius@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

If he hasn't shown genuine remorse than changes my stance.
Given what I had read on the matter I was under the impression he had shown remorse. Particularly the "biggest mistake of [his] life" remark.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

True remorse would involve an apology to the victim. At least I think most people would think so.

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

I disagree with that. There’s no need to put the victim on the spot like that. True remorse definitely doesn’t involve rejecting culpability like that though.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

How is making a public apology to the victim putting them on the spot? I would say that a public apology is almost literally the least he could do for her.

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

It means she has to decide if she’ll listen to it, when and how she’ll be able to process it, and whether she forgives him. All of that in public? Not a chance in hell I’d want my rapist to do that.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Only if people expected her to respond, which they wouldn't. The press would not be clamoring to see if she accepted it. They haven't even named her as far as I know, since she was a minor, so they wouldn't be able to.

Because all of that would be true regardless of whether he apologized in public or in private.

I've never heard anyone take a stance against a public apology before. This is honestly a very strange stance.

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It’s still just hanging there, over her head, even if nobody expects an answer.

I've never heard anyone take a stance against a public apology before. This is honestly a very strange stance.

Weird, most of the people I’ve talked to while witnessing public apologies agree that they’d feel awful to receive. I don’t really talk about it in other scenarios, so I don’t know how common it is.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

It’s still just hanging there, over her head, even if nobody expects an answer.

Which would be just as true if he apologized in private.

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Thread got removed for me, possibly because I swore, but I don’t think it’s productive for the victim unless they seek it out. It’s too easy to load it with double meaning and use it as an opportunity to hurt them further. The only way to avoid that would be to use boilerplate language that doesn’t mean anything.

[-] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

I absolutely don’t suggest a private apology! He should just leave her the hell alone forever

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

You are against apologizing to someone you've hurt? Really?

[-] SirDerpy@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

That squid guy is quite ridiculous. He regularly throws reason out the window to feed his ego by bashing whomever he can pass shallow judgement upon.

"Not to excuse it in any way but this took place, I think, 10 years ago and I think, as a general rule I think we need to allow for the possibility of rehabilitation," Mark Adams said at the IOC's news conference on the day of van de Velde's debut.

That's where I think the mob goes wrong. Rape is a pretty big mistake. But, the best people I know today are that way in total rejection of who they once were. They've never brought it up. I confront them when I see myself in them.

Van de Velde was given a four-year sentence in 2016.

...at the time of his sentencing that he appeared via video link at Aylesbury Crown Court and wept as he heard his victim ended up self-harming and taking an overdose.

After serving part of his jail term in England, he was sent back to the Netherlands where his sentence was adjusted according to Dutch laws.

...after his release had sought professional counselling.

His actions seem to demonstrate compliance and remorse.

The Dutch volleyball federation (Nevobo) said van de Velde was "proving to be an exemplary professional and human being and there has been no reason to doubt him since his return".

Meanwhile, the country's Olympic committee said van de Velde had met all the qualification requirements for the Olympic Games "and is therefore part of the team".

Source

Those empowered to judge him have judged him forgiven.

On what basis should we believe differently?

[-] SirDerpy@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

We could find a stupid or good reason to discard each and every individual. Humans are deeply flawed. I need not conveniently bash this talented man to feel good about myself. I chose the more difficult and quite unpopular position of forgiveness.

You're seemingly the only person who understood. You're true to your username. I liked how you didn't assign him responsibility for the perceived failure of the justice system. I think it was the critical thing that needed said when saying that he did more than what was mandated. Thank you for speaking up.

Reason wins because propaganda has a much shorter half life.

this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2024
874 points (98.3% liked)

World News

39129 readers
798 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS