Violent death of Sumanta Bansi: OM demands 15 years in prison | news

News feature | 07-06-2022 | 13:14

The public prosecutor in the Prosecution Authority Noord-Holland (OM) today demanded 15 years in prison against a now 42-year-old man from Hoorn. The prosecution finds it proven that on the night between 18 and 19 February 2018, he killed the 22-year-old pregnant Sumanta Bansi and disposed of her body. Despite many searches, the remains of Sumanta have not been found to this day.

Disappearance

The 22-year-old Sumanta Bansi leaves Suriname for the Netherlands in 2016 to study. In the Netherlands, Sumanta lives with a family in Hoorn, consisting of a 42-year-old man, his wife, their child and the man’s 65-year-old father. The later police case shows that there is a turbulent living environment with tensions between them and a sexual relationship between Sumanta and the 42-year-old resident. In August 2017, it led to a pregnancy that Sumanta ended up under pressure from the family. In February 2018, Sumanta was pregnant again. As Sumanta’s mother can no longer reach her daughter after February 18 and expresses her concern to the family where Sumanta is staying, father and son assure that Sumanta is safe and that nothing is wrong. The men themselves reported to the police at the end of February 2018 that Sumanta has not returned from a week’s holiday and that they want to have her deregistered at their address in Hoorn. Months go by without anyone hearing from Sumanta. In November 2018, more than nine months after her sudden disappearance, mother rang the bell at the police station. Only through this report did the police become aware that Sumanta had still been gone since February 2018. The case is considered a worrying case of missing persons and a detective team is being assembled.

violent crime

The police are conducting extensive and lengthy investigations. It shows that Sumanta had few social contacts and that she was mainly at home with the family in Hoorn. Her last sign of life was in that house on Sunday evening, February 18, 2018. Despite the many large-scale searches, Sumanta’s body was not found. But the extensive dossier shows to the prosecution that it is inevitable that Sumanta died as a result of a violent crime. Alternative scenarios – a fatal accident, suicide or a voluntary departure – have been investigated, but all turn out to be unlikely: no travel movements or cash withdrawals, no contact with family and friends, no use of social media, no suicide note, valuable personal belongings that has been left behind and a pregnancy that made Sumanta happy. The public prosecutor at the court hearing: “It can be stated beyond any doubt that Sumanta is no longer alive and that she died as a result of deliberate acts of violence by someone else. The perpetrator then disposed of her body to cover possible clues and to complicate the investigation. “

Research results

In November 2020, the two male residents of the house in Hoorn will be arrested. The suspects alternate in their statements, remain silent or declare themselves contradictory on significant points. Their first statements about their alibi are demonstrably false. Based on location data, it appears that at the time of Sumanta’s disappearance, the 42-year-old suspect was driving his car to Dwaalpark De Hulk south of Hoorn, getting out there and walking around in the twilight, and that around 3am. refueled. This contradicts his earlier statements that he was home that night and allows him to kill Sumanta and hide her body. It also appears that the day after, Monday 19 February 2018, he and his father drove over Afsluitdijk to the stop and turning point at Breezanddijk. It is also striking that both men switch their phones to airplane mode at some point on February 18 and 19, 2018. And three days after Sumanta disappeared, the suspects bought a new bed and mattress: they took Sumanta’s old mattress and bed to dustbin.

Overheard conversations

Based on interrogated conversations in the suspects’ car and home, it also appears that they are warning each other that they must be silent (‘you must not break’ and ‘keep it closed’) and that she must be careful ( ‘they wait until we make a mistake’). fald ‘). The 42-year-old suspect tells about throwing the murder weapon and about the decomposition process of a buried corpse. The suspects also influence the police investigation by preventing questioning of family members or by giving them instructions on what to say to the police. What the 42-year-old suspect says in the intercepted conversations is crucial. In it, he makes a crucial statement in two different moments about his own role: ‘I just killed her’ and ‘I have her with that thing … all the way through my heart … dead, done’. Confronted with these statements, the suspect indicated at the court hearing that there was bragging, that he was affected, or that he can no longer remember anything.

punishment

These statements indicate that the 42-year-old suspect killed Sumanta that night and disposed of her body. This is supported by the actual location data of the 42-year-old suspect at the time of Sumanta’s disappearance, the conflicting statements, the influence of the witnesses and the possibility that the suspect had the night between 18 and 19 February 2018. What exactly happened? happened, and where Sumanta’s body has gone, only the suspect knows. But he keeps his mouth shut all the time. It is indigestible to the relatives and the prosecution takes him hard for it. The prosecutor is demanding 15 years in prison for manslaughter on Sumanta and disposal of her body. The prosecution is asking for acquittal for the 65-year-old co-defendant. His role is questionable, he has made conflicting statements and he has frustrated the investigation. However, based on the findings of the investigation, the prosecution sees insufficient evidence against him for an active role in the manslaughter of Sumanta.

The court is expected to rule on July 5, 2022

Leave a Comment