Saint Maarten: Man serving life for murder and rape of child to be freed
There are mixed emotions in Sint Maarten as a man, Ashton Lake (now 59 years old), convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment 38 years ago for co-conspiracy in the kidnapping, rape and murder of 5-year-old Amy Velasquez, will be conditionally released on July 1, 2022.
He is to be deported to his country of origin, Anguilla.
In 1983, Lake, 21 years old, committed the brutal crime against little Amy, whose body was found in a lagoon. The incident happened a day before her sixth birthday.
Jennifer Velasquez, who was 14 at the time of her sister’s murder, started a petition on change.org two months ago for people to sign to stop Lake from being freed.
The petition, which had a goal of 5,000 signatures, garnered 4,229.
However, yesterday in a message under the petition, she wrote:
“They are releasing him to Anguilla on July 1. Our family wishes to thank everyone for their support, but unfortunately, the law allows his release. It is a sad day. Not sure what else to say.”
The Joint Court of Justice of Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten and of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba ruled that Lake will be conditionally released with the general condition that he will not be guilty of any criminal offence during the life probation period.
Article 1:30 of the Criminal Code states that a person sentenced to life imprisonment in Curaçao and Aruba may be conditionally released after 20 years of confinement and in Sint Maarten after 25 years of confinement if the Court thinks that further enforcement would no longer serve a useful purpose.
To decide on this matter, the Court takes the position of the relatives of the possible victim into consideration and the risk that the convicted person will re-offend. If the Court does not decide to release the offender, it assesses the situation again after five years and, if necessary, each time after five years.
In the Sint Maarten case, the relatives made it known that they would never accept the convict's release and have vigorously opposed it.
According to the Court, without wishing to detract from the seriousness of the acts committed at the time and the endless suffering that they caused, that aspect cannot now be a reason for the convicted person after such a lengthy detention period of almost 40 years with the aforementioned favourable prospect of a return to society and the low risk of recidivism not to be released on parole.
0 Comment