19-year-old Ayden Lanoy was fatally shot by police on the night of February 9, 2025.
ORANJESTAD--Two Aruba police officers, Righer Dirksz (30) and Maurice Violenes (38), have been convicted and sentenced to prison for the February 2025 shooting death of 19-year-old Ayden Lanoy. Both officers were sentenced to three years in prison, with one year of the sentence suspended, effectively meaning they will serve two years behind bars.
In addition, Dirksz and Violenes are jointly responsible for compensating Lanoy’s family for material and shock damages resulting from the incident.
The tragic events unfolded on the night of February 9, 2025, when Lanoy failed to stop his Toyota Vitz after being signaled by the two officers. Violenes later testified that the pursuit began because the vehicle’s rear lights were not functioning properly. He added that both the police car and Toyota were traveling at speeds consistent with the local traffic flow, and that the driving was not inherently dangerous.
On Sasakiweg, the officers attempted to signal the Toyota to stop using sirens, flashing lights, and a speaker phone. The Toyota ignored these signals and continued driving. Near the Super Food roundabout, the vehicle briefly slowed, appearing as if it might comply, but then turned left across the roundabout toward Bubali. Dirksz reported this maneuver to the police dispatch, and the officers initiated a chase that continued along several locations toward Madiki.
According to Violenes, the goal was to stop the Toyota due to its malfunctioning lights, unusual driving behavior, and failure to comply with police commands. When the vehicle reached a dead-end at Madiki Kavel 136, it became trapped.
At 05:16:01am, both officers exited the police vehicle, immediately drew their firearms, and confronted the Toyota. Violenes fired three shots at the front of the car, while Dirksz simultaneously fired seventeen rounds at the side and rear of the Toyota.
Video evidence confirmed that at the time of the shooting, the Toyota was moving backward and did not pose an immediate threat to the officers. The Court concluded that the officers’ actions were disproportionate and unnecessary, and that they acted with at least conditional intent to kill.
Deliberate collaboration
The Court also found that both men acted in close coordination, demonstrating deliberate collaboration in discharging their firearms.
Forensic analysis revealed that both officers carried Glock 17 pistols. Twenty shell casings were recovered from the scene, and ballistic testing confirmed that the fatal bullet that struck Lanoy came from Dirksz’s position on the left side of the Toyota.
The Court carefully assessed whether the officers’ use of deadly force complied with Aruban law, which permits police to use firearms only when absolutely necessary, proportionate, and after evaluating risks to others. Officers must give warnings where possible and may only fire if a suspect poses an immediate danger or has committed a serious crime. European human rights standards were also considered, emphasizing that lethal force must be a last resort.
The Court found no evidence that Lanoy carried a weapon or had committed a serious crime. His driving was classified as flight rather than aggression, and the Toyota was moving away from the officers. Despite this, both officers opened fire almost immediately, without warning. The Court determined that their belief that deadly force was required was not objectively justified.
Excessive deadly force
Both Dirksz and Violenes had claimed self-defense, excessive self-defense, and putative self-defense. The Court rejected all these defenses, emphasizing that police officers, due to their training and position, are expected to exercise greater caution and judgment than ordinary citizens, particularly in situations involving potential use of deadly force. Given their training and experience, both men should have accurately assessed the threat and exercised caution before resorting to firearms.
The Court emphasized that the officers’ use of firearms violated the principles of proportionality and necessity. Although they were on duty, their response escalated the situation unnecessarily to a deadly outcome.
The ruling acknowledged the trauma suffered by Lanoy’s parents who had to identify their son’s body immediately after the shooting. A psychologist confirmed that the victim’s mother experienced psychological reactions consistent with traumatic bereavement. The Court awarded material damages for funeral costs, memorial services, and therapy, as well as shock compensation of Cg 25,000 to the mother. Emotional damage claims for the father were deferred to civil court.
The Court considered the context of the officers’ duties. Dirksz, a first-time offender, and Violenes, a senior officer, had worked a demanding night shift, but professional training requires accurate threat assessment and self-restraint. Nothing in the incident justified the immediate use of deadly force, the Court ruled.
Police officers Dirksz and Violenes jointly fired 20 bullets at the car of Ayden Lanoy
