On Monday, his appeal against his sentence began, with the defendant begging the court to 'give him a second chance'. The events refer back to September 2018, which is when the defendant broke into the politician's home.
The defendant and an accomplice broke open a terrace door at the back of the house at night, and stole a credit card and a car. He also withdrew around €1,000 with the credit card. The defendant told the court he had learned the error of his ways in the meantime.
The president of the court dismissed this statement, reminding the defendant he had a prior record of break-ins in 2014 and 2017. She told the man he seemed to have already had his second chance and that the facts are not in his favour.
In response, he told the court that he had not assaulted anyone, but had focused on getting money as swiftly as possible. Admitting he had participated of his own free will, he stressed that he had become involved in something more nefarious than he had thought. The defendant traced his involvement back to a discussion with the accomplice in a bar, in which he was told he would receive financial help if he were to keep watch during a burglary.
The man told the court he then rang the doorbell of the home three to four times, without anybody answering. The accomplice then broke in and returned in 15 to 20 minutes. When he came back out, he said there were two safes and the defendant should help him open them. The defendant told the court he had wanted to leave at this point, as the accomplice said two people were in the house.
According to the man's account, the accomplice pulled a weapon on him, leaving him too scared to not do as the other man said. When Goerens and his wife woke up, the accomplice told them he wanted money. The safe was empty, so he took credit cards. The defendant was told to drive to Colmar-Berg and withdraw €1,000. Upon his return, and the accomplice left with the money in the victim's car, which he then left under a bridge in Schieren.
The man's new defence lawyer told the court he had been pulled into the burglary. The lawyer reiterated that his client had not used violence, arguing that the exaggerated sentence should be reduced. The prosecutor, on the contrary, said the man could have pushed back against the accomplice and recommended confirming the sentence.
The verdict will be pronounced on 1 April.
