5mo ago

Dutch beach volleyball player convicted of rape is booed again, louder, in second match of Olympics

apnews.com Dutch beach volleyball player convicted of rape is booed again, louder, in second match of Olympics

The Dutch beach volleyball player who served time in prison after he was convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl in England has won his second match at the Paris Olympics.

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're viewing a single thread.

219 comments

“I was disappointed with the crowd, for sure,” Immers said. “I cannot do anything about his past anymore. I’m here to play with him. … So, yeah, I’m disappointed with it. But I think mentally we’re really strong, and I’m really strong to get through this, together. And we’re going to do that.”
Then:
Immers was asked about the reception and said the two spoke on the court and recognized they would need to be extra supportive of each other. Asked if he understood why they received that reception, he said, “I don’t want to talk about that, if it’s OK.”
So they can removed that people bboed, but he won't acknowledge the reason is he raped a literal child?
Fuck that guy, I hope the whole stadium booes anytime he shows his face.
If he was going to pull the "I'm here for volleyball" then he should shut the fuck up 24/7. Not try to play the victim then refuse to admit why they're booing.
- So they can removed that people booed, but he won’t acknowledge the reason is he raped a literal child?
  Mathew Immers is not the guy who raped the child. That is Steven van de Velde.
  Immers is van de Velde's beach volleyball partner.
  
  He is complaining that the crowd booed his partner. The partner he chose to play with. But he won't recognize that the reason the pair is being booed is that one of the partners is a child rapist. I think it's fair to think that that is bad.
  
  They're all Emmanuel Goldstein during the two minute hate.
  
  Yes, Immers is the same as Emmanual Goldstein, an unseen character in the novel 1984 who did not even exist but was famous for having refused to discuss a controversy where his teammate repeatedly raped a child.
  
  What was the sentence for his crime?
  Do all nations have the same focus on rehabilitation as the US prison system?
  Is it possible for an individual to commit such an act and reform themselves, perhaps even earn the trust of society again?
  
  He served one year in the UK for raping a 12-year-old multiple times. Then, through a treaty, he was extradited to the Netherlands and served no more time at all. He called the whole thing nonsense when the press asked him about it.
  Please do tell us how that is a fair punishment for raping a 12 year old multiple times.
  
  The US does not have a rehabilitation prison system. We don't really have a justice system, we have a vengeance system and a torture prison system. I don't think prison should be torture or a slave plantation for any convict in any case. Although our property crime sentencing is overly harsh and violent crimes against a person are far to lenient. I think rapists need to be removed from society more than anything else, it should be up there with murder one. Also I think most non violent convicts could be on house arrest, work, pay taxes, and not be vengefully tortured.
  
  I'm only intolerant of intolerance. That means I'll forgive murderers and rapists once they've completed their punishment and rehabilitation. But, I also understand that my perspective on forgiveness isn't common.
  
  Except you're not forgiving them once they've had their punishment and Rehabilitation. As pointed out this child rapist is unremorsful. He was neither punished nor rehabilitated. He's an unrepentant child rapist. That's who you're defending.
  
  A year for multiple rapes if a 12 year old is barely a sentence, no matter what justice system you’re in. And he’s clearly not even sorry.
  
  A year for multiple rapes if a 12 year old is barely a sentence, no matter what justice system you’re in.
  I agree. He voluntarily did more, though.
  And he’s clearly not even sorry.
  When? Before he voluntarily did more, or afterwards?
  Rape isn't alcoholism. For some it's maybe like heroin. But, I've not had a drink in more than a decade and know a heroin addict with more time under his belt. People can change.
  After he screwed up someone's life then did more than his sentence, he seems OK to everyone he's engaging with now. So, I wonder if I'd forgive him if I met him IRL. It's easier to judge him without nuance hypothetically, when there's no consequences for doing so. If I met him I'd hopefully be strong enough give him a chance.
  
  And his victim, who has self harmed after he hurt her, gets to watch him live his best life at the olympics.
  No. That’s not ok.
  
  If you'll never forgive, why not just kill proactively?
  No. That's not ok.
  
  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.
  
  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.
  
  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.
  
  True remorse would involve an apology to the victim. At least I think most people would think so.
  
  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.
  
  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.
  
  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?
  
  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.
- I think it is important to distinguish the innocent partner here. Beach volleyball is incredibly demanding, and at the elite level, a very low population sport. It takes athletes their whole careers to just to make the world tour hoping to one day reach the olympics. For Immers he has busted his ass for years and at some point his national body probably paired him up with the other guy. It’s possible he may not have even known about it until they were partners and had established their dynamic and working relationship. Finding and building a team with a partner you click with on the court is hard-earned. I can imagine that Immers is absolutely distraught at the situation he’s been put in. He has a crappy choice here no matter what. Abandon what he’s spent his whole career building up to, now that he’s made it - because of something he had nothing to do with, knowing he may never get this chance again, even if he were to find another available partner… it takes years to learn how to play as a team; or he sucks it up, focuses on his own journey, cops the reflected criticism and hostility and tries to keep his emotions out of it…
  It’s shitty either way. He abandons his dream because of someone else’s actions; or he chases them and becomes collateral damage.
  Don’t get me started on the poor kid whose life was never the same again, having all this trauma dredged up and shoved back in her face. There’s nothing about this that doesn’t suck.
  
  I think it is important to distinguish the innocent partner here
  Then he can stop removed that people are booing his partner who raped a fucking 12 year old.
  Pick a lane, "no comment" or acknowledge what he did and ask for forgiveness.
  This is literally the Dutch team complaining that people are booing, and refusing to acknowledge an incredibly valid reason why it's happening.
  Fuck em both.
  Like you said, it's a small population of players. Even if this guy was #1 in the Netherlands, if #2 thru 25 said they won't play with a child rapist, the child rapist wouldn't be on the team.
  Don’t get me started on the poor kid whose life was never the same again, having all this trauma dredged up and shoved back in her face. There’s nothing about this that doesn’t suck.
  You think she forgot till now?
  You think she doesn't know his name?
  Why is the issue talking about how he's a child rapist and not that the child rapist is in the goddamn Olympics?
  Quick edit:
  It’s shitty either way. He abandons his dream because of someone else’s actions; or he chases them and becomes collateral damage.
  We don't call people heroes for doing the right thing because it's easy and sacrifice free.
  But we do call people shit bags for doing the wrong thing for personal gain/glory.
  Which is what we're doing here.
  Except you, you're out here complaining people booed a guy who raped a 12 year old.
  Why?
  
  Wow man, that’s a hot take. I’m not complaining at all. The crowd is upset that the Dutch team have chosen to select a man convicted of a heinous act. I absolutely abhor what that criminal did and in my mind there is absolutely no excusing or trivialising or equivocating on that. It’s unthinkable. I am not putting judgment on the crowd at all. I completely understand why they are doing it.
  I don’t believe he was complaining in the interview. A journo asked him the world’s most obvious question and he has nowhere to go. He can’t defend his partner (not should he, not that he wanted to). He can only speak for himself and say it’s hard to get booed when personally you didn’t do the thing and you’ve worked so hard to get here.
  I don’t know why you think I have anything but sincere empathy for the poor victim. I’m recognising that having a truly horrific life experience become fodder for the media, years after you last had that chapter of your life made public and the subject of speculation and judgment, must be a terrible ordeal - she will never forget his name or what happened, but there’s a difference between that and having this asshole on the front page of every news outlet for a month. It must be a genuinely traumatic experience to have it be made acute again.
  You’re passionate and assertive in your feelings about this. I respect that and I don’t disagree with your sentiments. I don’t think your read meshes with what I was trying to say. I actually think we’re morally pretty well aligned. In the context of your comment, I don’t know many genuine heroes, they do what most people can’t - that’s why they’re so revered. We all know the way, only few actually walk it.
  
  I don’t think that guy’s really complaining about the booing, I think he’s trying to separate the rapist from the other competitors.
  I don’t know the case, and I’m very surprised the Netherlands let this guy compete for them, but he is and apparently served prison time (not as much as he probably should’ve). If he’s already served a prison sentence, then the Netherlands government probably believes he has been punished for the crime and is “rehabilited”. If he’s served time, double jeopardy applies to any punishment he would receive after the fact (IIRC).
  I don’t know the rapist and I don’t care about him, I’d hope he’s incredibly remorseful and I’m not defending what he did, but like the OP was driving at; why are the actions of the rapist POS who served prison time tainting the other athletes competing for their own interests / country that legally posits the guy has been punished for his actions? Imagine being proud of your work and being booed because of the previous unrelated actions of a coworker you may or may not like.
  If murderers are able to serve their prison sentence and be freed after their crime and feel remorse for their actions etc., at what point in time does someone stop being punished for their previous actions? I’m bringing up the rhetorical question in response to the common vitriol in comments surrounding sex crimes that bleeds onto anyone involved.
  Unless you believe in the death penalty and that the rapist deserved to die for his actions by the hands of his government, what does it take for everyone to move forward? I ask because you’re positing the other Netherland’s athlete is essentially guilty because he didn’t risk his Olympic ambitions and refuse to play with the rapist who legally served his sentence.
  How long he should’ve been in prison is another debate.
  
  That's not how double Double Jeopardy works (Netherlands also has a different name for it). It prevents you from being tried twice for a crime for which you've been acquitted/convicted. It does not prevent a country from refusing to have you represent them on the world stage.
  
  It is actually how it works in terms of official punishments(in the US at least):
  Amdt5.2.1.2.4 Imposition of Multiple Punishments for the Same Offense
  Fifth Amendment:
  No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
  The Double Jeopardy Clause protects against imposition of multiple punishment for the same offense.1 The application of the principle leads, however, to a number of complexities. In a simple case, it was held that where a court inadvertently imposed both a fine and imprisonment for a crime for which the law authorized one or the other but not both, it could not, after the fine had been paid and the defendant had entered his short term of confinement, recall the defendant and change its judgment by sentencing him to imprisonment only.2 But the Court has held that the imposition of a sentence does not from the moment of imposition have the finality that a judgment of acquittal has. Thus, it has long been recognized that in the same term of court and before the defendant has begun serving the sentence the court may recall him and increase his sentence.
  Obviously not being picked for an olympic team isnt an official punishment, but the principle of not punishing someone for the same crime after they complete their given sentence is true.
  
  https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/double_jeopardy#:~:text=The%20Double%20Jeopardy%20Clause%20in,for%20substantially%20the%20same%20crime.
  From the US, but the philosophical reasoning still applies.
  You misunderstand the point. The Netherlands did not stop him from competing for them, presumably because he’s served his time for the crime by their standards.
  That’s your problem with the Netherland’s Olympic committee then, not the other athletes - the whole point of the post.
  
  What point am I misunderstanding? You claimed double jeopardy applies. It does not. Not representing your country in the Olympics does not count as an official punishment for the same act.
  
  The point is he was punished and likely contributed to him not being barred from Olympic participation. Ignore the double jeopardy statement then, engage with the actual discussion about the non rapist.
  
  If you think the 19 year old having sex repeadly with a 13 year old is a "non rapist" then that says a lot about you and none of it good.
  
  You clearly cannot read lmao
  
  If his buddy has broken his leg before the Olympics they would have found a replacement.
  
  I guess that’s my point - no he wouldn’t. If his partner was out, that’s it. Min 4+ years gone. The nature of the sport and what it takes to qualify - no he wouldn’t.
  If he has known for years and continued playing in the partnership then he’s made his bed and it’s time to lie in it. In the absence of info saying just that, I'm leaving room for the possibility that he’s found this out at the same time the news reading public has.
  I’m not endorsing his choice. I’m saying he was faced with a shitty one. There may be a moral black and white here, I’m not trying to argue the right thing to do. I’m suggesting that likely through no fault of his own he had (and has) a choice to make. Obviously he’s made it. I think it’s reductive to declare it is a simple decision when you’ve dedicated years of your life, made daily sacrifice, put off having a family, a career, bank savings, preparing for the future to chase the chance of something fleeting. When it is all culminating in a moment- it takes a unique person to have given up so much for that dream to then willingly let it go at the last hurdle. He may for the rest of his life wish that he did.
  Again, I’m not arguing the morals of the situation, I’m recognising the complexity of it.
  It’s been said that all it takes in this world for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. I sincerely want to be the kind of person who would abandon my whole life’s drive and focus to do what I believe is right. There is a hell of a lot of evil in this world - perhaps that’s because it’s a lot harder to do when facing it in the moment.
  
  Beach volleyball is incredibly demanding, and at the elite level, a very low population sport. It takes athletes their whole careers
  busted his ass for years
  spent his whole career
  for whatever reason someone might want to dedicate their entire life to earning the "best volleyball player" title for a few years, those were all 100% his decisions. if someone chooses to compete in a system that will even allow rapists to compete, then...sucks to suck? and it seems incredibly douchey to decide to play with a rapist and then try to act like the victim when the crowd boos
  would YOU play on team rapist? if you would, then fuck you too.
  if you wouldn't, then why spill so much ink over trying to justify playing on team rapist?
  to the larger conversation, this is one reason i say fuck the olympics altogether, it does more harm than good
  
  The level of hostility toward the partner here caught me off guard... Yeesh...
  Not even agreeing or disagreeing, just seems like a lot of misplaced anger.
  
  Then when the press asks him about getting booed he can say “i disagree with my partner’s life choices and understand the boos, but I am here to properly represent my country.” Instead of defending a convicted, unrepentant, child rapist.
  
  I agree, this situation is twisted on both sides. Additionally this situation seems like non-statutory rape which makes the 1 year sentence quite lenient.
  
  Denmark are making the choice to shove him in everybody's faces they made the choice to put him on the national team.
  
  It’s Netherlands, but yes - he was selected by the national team.
- I question what kind of person is willing to play doubles with a convicted child rapist.
  And then openly defend them to the media.
  This whole thing is gross.
- They asked him a question and he answered. If you're going to be mad at him for saying that then you should be mad at the people who asked the question.
  
  He pulled the "no comment" card tho.
  If he won't talk about why they're booing, he shouldn't talk about the booing
  But again, he shouldn't be enabling a child rapist in the first place.

219 comments