The six people arrested for vandalism at Radboud University in December will not face criminal charges. This was announced by the Public Prosecution Service today. Evidence is lacking for five of them; one person was found to have an alibi. The cases have been dismissed.

On 16 December, the police detained six people after an attempted occupation on Radboud University campus. Harry Pettit, Assistant Professor, was one of those detained overnight.

The case against Pettit and the other suspects has been dismissed, a press release from the Public Prosecution Service revealed today. “One person was wrongly identified as a suspect: he had an alibi,” writes the Public Prosecution Service. Earlier, Pettit told VOX that he was on the train when the vandalism took place.

An investigation found that there was insufficient evidence for the involvement of the remaining five people in the vandalism. As part of the enquiry, the Public Prosecutor watched CCTV footage and spoke to witnesses and suspects.

Bus

On Monday 16 December, the six people, including Pettit, were detained on a bus near Nijmegen railway station. They were suspected of vandalism in Theatre Hall C, in the Elinor Ostrom building.

The damage was estimated at around 30,000 euros, according to the university. This included damage to fire doors, window frames and a TV screen. ‘Security guards approached the group to ask what they were doing there, after which the slogan “Free, free Palestine” was shouted,’ a university spokesperson told Vox earlier. ‘They then fled through an emergency exit.’

The group were dressed in black with face coverings, with some also wearing black and white keffiyehs. “Based on witness identification, six people were arrested later in the day on suspicion of criminal damage to the hall,” the prosecution said. Videos of the arrest have attracted thousands of views online. According to the Nijmegen Encampment, which held a protest at the police station the day after the arrests, the six were wrongly singled out because they were wearing keffiyehs.

Internal evaluation

The university spokesperson called it regrettable that someone had been wrongly identified as a suspect, ‘because this has an impact on the person themselves and those around them’. This was also evident from the reactions from concerned colleagues and students we received earlier.’

The university previously announced that it would ‘conduct an internal evaluation into the course of events surrounding the failed occupation’. That evaluation has not yet been completed, according to the spokesperson. It is therefore not possible to answer any further questions.