The terrorist trial in Norway

Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
edited April 2012 in Off Topic Chat
The trial against the terrorist Anders Behring Breivik has been on for a week now. I know many people around the world follow it, and here in Norway the media coverage is wall-to-wall. I thought it would be good to have a thread where people can post about this, I certainly feel the need.
I have to admit I feel proud of how the trial is run. Many Norwegians feel this is a chance to show the world what we are. It makes me proud that survivors of Utøya island and the families of those who were killed behave with such quiet restraint and dignity while attending the court case. They sit just a few metres from the terrorist and listen to him coldly speak of how he murdered their friends and children. The families and survivors sit quietly, sometimes crying. No-one screams at him or try to attack him. In interviews they are calm and thoughtfull, often expressing support that the trial is solid and well run. "It is important that Breivik is given a fair and solid trial", is a statement I have heared several times. Given that many of the survivors are still teenagers I must say it's humbling.
Some foreign media has critisized the judge for letting ABB talk about his ideology from a self-penned script. There is a danger the case becomes a rostrum for him and his fanatism, but I feel it is neccesery. The motives of a criminal is central in a criminal case, and without studying those the trail is not complete and solid. If we alowed ourselves to cut corners when it comes to the law would be horrible. If we thought "His crimes are so horrible the laws of Norway does not apply to him", we would in a sense let him win. When the use of torture against terrorists was debated in the US after 9/11, some politicians said it was OK because they were terrorists. John McCain (who suffered under torture himself in Vietnam) answered:"It's not about who they are, it's about who WE are." I agree. It is also worth noticing that the far right in Norway has not been strengthened by ABB, his acts of terrorism or the trial - quite the opposite. I think that's the case in other countries too. Tragically, the police botched the response to the terrorist attacks on 22/7. They were far to late to Utøya and let ABB kill kids for over an hour, his victims trapped defenseless on that island for over an hour. It is heart-breaking. The late response was mostly due to lack of funding (i.e. police helicoptres) and bad planning, not the acts of the police officers involved.
I know the short and mild prison sentences in this country has baffled many abroad. The maximum sentence is 21 years, with years off for good behavior. This is too mild, I agree. Parliament is changing this to 30 years, but that won't apply to Breivik since it is not turned into law yet. But this does not mean he will be released after 17-18 years! Prisons can keep prisoners locked up as long as they are deemed dangerous by a board. It is pretty much a given that ABB will die in prison, as he should.

That was some of my thoughts. If anyone else feel like writing their opinions, questions or just thoughts, feel free. That's what the topic is for.
«134

Comments

  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,486MI6 Agent
    The press over here don't quite know how to handle it.

    Only yesterday the Sunday Times, not a red top tabloid by any means, had the headline 'Loser who Lived With Him Mother'. Like, yeah, that's the reason we hate him, not that he killed 69 teenagers. 8-)

    It's like they're trying to goad him, hurt his feelings, like he gives a damn or reads the Sunday Times anyway. And like we, the readers, are in some kind of relationship with him. It's like playground taunts.

    The i newspaper, again quite respectable, referred to his 'bovine' looks. I feel sorry for any guy who inadvertently happens to look like him, bet it works against their chances at interview stage. Poor blokes of a certain age living at home with their mums, to be lumped in wth him.

    Only the Telegraph had done it good, with few photos of the bloke and those that do show him not gloating or smirking or anything. Others seem to want to show those to wind us up.

    Controversial columnist Frankie Boyle for The Sun.... bet there are complaints. He picks holes in the logic of a white racist campaigning against multiculturalism and immigration by gunning down white guys... Okay, I see his point, but no one else is making that because it implies it would have made more sense to shoot blacks, etc. Like that would be okay, logical. He then made a joke unrepeatable here, not merely bad taste but really odd.

    Otherwise I think it's wrong to get in some sort of bind about what to sentence the guy to, which seems to be, anything, so long as it's what he doesn't want.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • Barry NelsonBarry Nelson ChicagoPosts: 1,508MI6 Agent
    Nice post Number 24 and some good thoughts. Watching from afar, I admit to being surprised the defendant gets so much time to spew his hate, not sure that is a good thing. Somewhere there is a twisted mind that is taking this all in and identifying with it.

    Didn't know your country had sentence limits, I guess the legislators believe criminals can be rehabilitated, in my opinion some can and some can’t. I believe some individuals are just “bad seeds” and should remain locked up.

    My condolences to your country, it was a terrible tragedy.
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    Not ony are the sentences short - the prison cells are luxurious compared to what you get in most other countries. The authorities believe strongly in rehabiltation, among other things prisoners are moved to more relaxed prisons and get more visits to the outside world when the timeof release comes nearer.They must be doing something right, because only twenty per cent of inmates are repeat offenders. I believe the number in The US is at least double of that.
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    Can't rehabilitate someone like that. One murder maybe, but sixty odd? The sentences are far too short. It's an almost naive, though positive society to put so much faith in rehabilitation. It's a shame. I trained in Norway and loved it, and the people. Morally, the security forces did the right thing in taking him alive, but I bet many wish they hadn't.
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    edited May 2012
    I wrote this earlier in the trial:

    I don't think they plan to rehabilitate Breivik. The big question in the this trial is really if Breivik will spend the rest of his days in jail or in a high security mental institution. There are two official expert reports on Breivik's mental health. The first one concluded that he was too psycotic at the time of the crime to be sentenced to jail. Breivik was horrified by this conclution, but he wasn't alone in questioning the accuracy of the report. Some of the things they wrote were rather ... odd.
    Breivik checked his house for bugging devices while he was making the bomb ment to flatten the national government high rise building. The psychologists felt this is proof that Breivik lacked contact with reality :s . They also claimed he invented a new word (I think it was "cultural marxist"), but a quick google search shows this is incorrect. They also made a point of the fact that there are other sources of much of what is written in his manifesto. Sure, and he mentions his sources like any student writing his paper would. Worst off all: The psychologists concluded Breivik was a psycotic level 2. A level two is so mentally ill he can't even tie his own shoes. So Breivik made a complicated bomb, wrote a long and complex manifesto and ran a scam to finance it all - but was too ill to tie his shoelaces??? :# :s

    A second report was requested from two other psychologists by the court. This concluded Breivik was mentally healthy enough for prison. Some pointed out that Breivik had read the first report before the second pair of psychologists observed him, and could have modified his behavior accordingly. But here is the catch 22: If he is as mentally ill as the first report claims he would have been unable to modify his behavior! The issue will be decided by the judge based on the reports and Breivik's behavior in the court.


    Now the Commision for Court/Legal Medicine has gone public and said the first report is "stronger" than the second.

    Don`t ask me why - I don` get it. Breivik can still end up in prison, but it`s less likely now.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent
    I don't believe in rehabilitation of many prisoners as the expression goes.

    " A wolf is still a wolf, even if he isn't eating your sheep "

    And as for the courts, A life sentence is now 15 years with 50% remission and time taken
    off for being on remand they can end up out again in 7 years.
    once murder meant you would also die now it's down to seven years, What kind of message
    is that sending out. Except that as far as the Courts are concerned, Human life is cheap.

    Rant over. :#
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    edited April 2012
    I belive a real life sentence is the right reaction to the worst type of crimes. I disagree that criminals can't reform. Actually, the Norwegian statistics prove you wrong: only 20% are arrested again. Of cource there are people who can't reform, and those should be locked up as long as posible.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent
    There was a case recently Of a shopkeeper who took on a robber, The shopkeeper had several shots fired at him
    all he had to defend himself was the pole for opening the shops shuttering. He poked the robber with it to try and
    get him out of his shop. When asked by a reporter why he hadn't hit the robber over the head with the pole the shopkeeper answered that HE didn't want to end up charger with Assaulting the robber.
    That's how screwed the law now is, even home owners are affraid of defending themselves as THEY could be charged
    with assault.
    I honestly don't care about prisoner rehabilitation, we are all given a set of rules to live by those who choose to break them should be punished, Crime is a choice.

    Personaly I blame all these Attorneys :007) ( little joke for BL )
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    History shows us that some criminals an reform, others can`t. Perhaps we should agree to disagree.
  • ThunderpussyThunderpussy Behind you !Posts: 63,792MI6 Agent
    No Problem Number 24, In many ways I quite a Lliberal, But sadly on Law and Order, ..................... :#
    "I've been informed that there ARE a couple of QAnon supporters who are fairly regular posters in AJB."
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,486MI6 Agent
    Hey Number24, it's spelt trial not trail, that implies something else, like there are loads of similar terrorists in Norway!
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    Thanks, Napoleon Plural
  • Napoleon PluralNapoleon Plural LondonPosts: 10,486MI6 Agent
    No worries.

    Criminals can reform, but then the question is, does that mean they have to be let out anyway?

    I mean, if the crime is that bad, do they really deserve to enjoy freedom and the good life when they've put paid to others' enjoyment of it. I would say no, but if it's a crime of a lesser type, like persistant robbery, etc, then okay. Serial killer crimes or torture stuff, then nope, not in my book.
    "This is where we leave you Mr Bond."

    Roger Moore 1927-2017
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    No worries.

    Criminals can reform, but then the question is, does that mean they have to be let out anyway?

    I mean, if the crime is that bad, do they really deserve to enjoy freedom and the good life when they've put paid to others' enjoyment of it. I would say no, but if it's a crime of a lesser type, like persistant robbery, etc, then okay. Serial killer crimes or torture stuff, then nope, not in my book.

    If Breivik collapsed in tears in court tomorrow and asked everyone for forgiveness and promised to never hurt a fly again, I doubt it would influence the verdict. It might result in him being released from custody as an old man, but after the verdict of 21 years. As I mentioned before he can be held in prison beyond 21 years, something that might be translated into "safe keeping" or "secure holding", as long as he is considered a danger to society. A show of remose would probably ensure a prison sentence instead of a mental institution for him, I think, since it would be read as a sign of sanity.
    In short, I agree. If you murder 77 inocent people in a day, remorse and good behavior should not really change things.
  • toutbruntoutbrun Washington, USAPosts: 1,501MI6 Agent
    Number24 wrote:
    Not ony are the sentences short - the prison cells are luxurious compared to what you get in most other countries. The authorities believe strongly in rehabiltation, among other things prisoners are moved to more relaxed prisons and get more visits to the outside world when the timeof release comes nearer.They must be doing something right, because only twenty per cent of inmates are repeat offenders. I believe the number in The US is at least double of that.

    The US prison system is probably the worst in the world. It is well documented that it actually makes things worse.

    http://youtu.be/EFw9stIeWjQ
    If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what's the world come to?
  • Mr BeechMr Beech Florida, USAPosts: 1,749MI6 Agent
    toutbrun wrote:
    Number24 wrote:
    Not ony are the sentences short - the prison cells are luxurious compared to what you get in most other countries. The authorities believe strongly in rehabiltation, among other things prisoners are moved to more relaxed prisons and get more visits to the outside world when the timeof release comes nearer.They must be doing something right, because only twenty per cent of inmates are repeat offenders. I believe the number in The US is at least double of that.

    The US prison system is probably the worst in the world. It is well documented that it actually makes things worse.

    http://youtu.be/EFw9stIeWjQ

    This is pretty widely believed, indeed.
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    Mr Beech wrote:
    toutbrun wrote:
    Number24 wrote:
    Not ony are the sentences short - the prison cells are luxurious compared to what you get in most other countries. The authorities believe strongly in rehabiltation, among other things prisoners are moved to more relaxed prisons and get more visits to the outside world when the timeof release comes nearer.They must be doing something right, because only twenty per cent of inmates are repeat offenders. I believe the number in The US is at least double of that.

    The US prison system is probably the worst in the world. It is well documented that it actually makes things worse.

    http://youtu.be/EFw9stIeWjQ

    If so, could the reason be the privatisation of the prisons? The owners are motivated to run safe and cheap prisons, but not to prepare the inmates for normal life outside after the sentence is finished?

    This is pretty widely believed, indeed.
  • toutbruntoutbrun Washington, USAPosts: 1,501MI6 Agent
    The privatization is certainly a reason, but the US government also just hasn't any interest in helping the convicts and ex-cons. Once they are out, ex-cons are excluded from a lot of things and benefits. It's almost impossible to return to a normal life after. They do that on purpose.

    And in excluding them, they force them into crime again.
    If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what's the world come to?
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    I don't really believe in reform. Maybe you can change your ways if you nick a bit from the shops, or spray graffiti or something. But when you cross the line like rape, peadophilia or murder then you deserve to spend the rest of your days behind bars. You make the choice, and should be punished accordingly. Breivik should die in jail. I don't believe in the death sentence, but I do believe in hard arrest. If you have a gun on you and have shot people then you should have about 0.3 seconds to drop it or get nailed! I don't know whether the arresting officer was brilliant or stupid. If I suspected him of having another bomb (having just set one off) and saw wires coming out of his clothing as he walked towards me then he wouldn't have taken another step.
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    There are many questions I ask myself about this tragedy. Here are some:
    - Norwegians reacted with calm and tolerance after the attacks. But how would we have reacted if the terrorists were foreign, even supported by another government? Not to mention if the terrorist had been from the muslim imigrant population here in Norway?
    -Will this make it more difficult to publicly question the sizable imigration we experience today?
    -It took the police more than an hour to get to Utoya. What would have happened if the attack wasn`t at Utoya, being fairly close to Oslo, but far away from our helicopter-less SWAT police?
    -What would have happened if there had been more than one terrorist and several more targets, as Breivik claimed when he was arrested?

    I worry, and I`m not alone.
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    Number 24 what are civilian gun laws like in Norway? Can a person own automatic rifles and pistols? Can this happen easily again? Do the police carry weapons personally, or do you rely on armed response/SWAT teams?
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    edited June 2012
    To buy a handgun you have to be an active member of a gun club for six months, have a clean police record and a strongbox to keep it in before you get a permit from the police. Then you can buy the gun. The number and type of guns you can own is decided based of how active you are in the pistol club and what type of shoting events you partisipate in. Carry permits are virtually unheared of.
    The rules for shotguns and rifles are pretty simular. Shotguns can only be loaded with two shells. Semiautomatic rifles (Breivik used one with illegal high capasity magazine) can be obtained for small game hunters. Hunting is very common in Norway, and not just a upper class activity. During the cold war nearly all men did their military service and officers, NCO`s and members of the National Guard kept their weapons at home. My neighbour kept a G3 battle rifle in the attic.

    The police are not normally armed. Some keep weapons in a strong box in the car, most have to go back to the polics station to get their weapons when they need them. They normally need an OK from the police station before they can arm themselves. Standard weapons are HK p30 pistols and MP5 SMG`s. SWAT train half the time and serve as standard police the rest of the time. They find that patrol duty is usefull and they claim there is no danger of not training enough.
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    edited April 2012
    A couple of days ago Breivik said that Norwegians are brainwashed by songs such as "Barn av regnbuen" (A Norwegian translation of Pete Seeger`s "My rainbow race"). A Facebook campaign started and today, as the trial ended for the day, 40 000 people stood in Youngstorget square and sang "Barn av regnbuen". Youngstorget is the square where the HQ of The Labour Party is. They wanted to hold the rally outside the courthouse, but there wasn`t room for all the people. 40 000 is 5% of the population of Oslo. After singing the crowd placed red roses outside the courthouse. A red rose is the symbol of the Labour Party. Many saw the rally as a support of the trial and the victims, and perhaps a timely one-fingered salute to Breivik.
  • Ammo08Ammo08 Missouri, USAPosts: 387MI6 Agent
    While I have seen more than a few criminals reformed, I've seen many that haven't and I've seen many who were just plain evil. My state has the death penalty and uses it. I'm not sure that it makes wouild be criminals think before they do something, but I guarantee you they will not kill again.

    i do not see anything wrong with punishment, yes, in some cases effort needs to be made for education etc to help them when coming out. As to them losing rights, our attitude is simple in this state. A group of criminals will always vote for a lenient judge, prosecutor or sheriff. So let's take them out of the equation. If you commit a felony in our state you lose your 2nd amendment right to own firearms I have no problem with that either.

    Although i don't personally care for the death penalty, I'm not going to be joining any marches against it.

    The Norwegians would have been better served if the police had killed him like a dog. He's no better than the Nazis.

    I need to add that we are 50 separate states and our laws vary from state to state. California may seem "progressive" to you, but the most dangerous square mile in the USA is the Watts neighborhood in Los Angeles County. Memphis, TN, my home town, statistically sounds terrible, but if you stay out of the bad areas it is unlikely you will ever be a victim.
    "I don't know if the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or imbeciles who mean it."-Mark Twain
    'Just because nobody complains doesn't mean all parachutes are perfect.'- Benny Hill (1924-1992)
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    Ammo08 wrote:

    The Norwegians would have been better served if the police had killed him like a dog. He's no better than the Nazis.

    What should have happened is this: Norwegian police actually has ONE helicopter, based in Oslo. It is buildt for surveilance and not transport, and has state of-the-art surveilance equipement. Allas, this helicoptre was grounded last summer for financial reasons. When the bomb in Oslo exploded, the pilots showed up at the heliport volentarily and on their own accord. Sadly the organizers of the response to the attack were never informed. If they had known, they could have sent a SWAT sniper with the helicoptre. There is room for one passenger and SWAT and the helicoptre crew has trained for this in the past. The helicoptre would have discovered Breivik in good time before reaching the island and the sniper would have killed Breivik. Many young lives would have been spared.
    Since this didn't happen, I think it was for the best that Breivik is alive, able to be questioned and sentenced in a court of law.

    Actually there was one policeman on Utøya. He was off duty and had volountered to be responsible for security on the island during the Labour party youth camp. Crime was pretty much unheared of and no-one thought there would be an outside treath, so he was unarmed and brought his nine year old son. The police officer saw that something was "off" with Breivik, who was dressed as a policeman, so he was the first one to be shot. Breivik tried to spare the youngest-looking kids on the island, judging them not yet brainwashed. So the boy survived, but without a father and with memories for a lifetime of bad dreams.
  • toutbruntoutbrun Washington, USAPosts: 1,501MI6 Agent
    Ammo08 wrote:
    The Norwegians would have been better served if the police had killed him like a dog. He's no better than the Nazis.

    Definitely not. This is why Americans have a bad reputation and a broken country. Due Process is important for what is says about you.
    If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what's the world come to?
  • Barry NelsonBarry Nelson ChicagoPosts: 1,508MI6 Agent
    toutbrun wrote:
    Ammo08 wrote:
    The Norwegians would have been better served if the police had killed him like a dog. He's no better than the Nazis.

    Definitely not. This is why Americans have a bad reputation and a broken country. Due Process is important for what is says about you.

    toutbrun always working in an American slam.
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    Well, I won`t comment on the US this time. In general I can say that due process and a functioning system of law is a prerequisite for fredom and demcracy. The Judge Dred/Punisher fantacy is appealing, but look at the countries where that is how it is actually done. Countries like Afghanistan are failed states in every way and justice is not served. Instead the law belongs to the man with the biggest gun and the deepest pockets. The justice system in Norway isn`t perfect, but in the long run it is better than the dream of revenge and privat and personal justice.

    If the police saw a chance to stop Breivik earlier by killing him, they would and should have. But when that didn`t happen it`s a good thing they got him alive.
  • thesecretagentthesecretagent CornwallPosts: 2,151MI6 Agent
    Number24 wrote:
    Ammo08 wrote:

    The Norwegians would have been better served if the police had killed him like a dog. He's no better than the Nazis.

    What should have happened is this: Norwegian police actually has ONE helicopter, based in Oslo. It is buildt for surveilance and not transport, and has state of-the-art surveilance equipement. Allas, this helicoptre was grounded last summer for financial reasons. When the bomb in Oslo exploded, the pilots showed up at the heliport volentarily and on their own accord. Sadly the organizers of the response to the attack were never informed. If they had known, they could have sent a SWAT sniper with the helicoptre. There is room for one passenger and SWAT and the helicoptre crew has trained for this in the past. The helicoptre would have discovered Breivik in good time before reaching the island and the sniper would have killed Breivik. Many young lives would have been spared.
    Since this didn't happen, I think it was for the best that Breivik is alive, able to be questioned and sentenced in a court of law.

    Actually there was one policeman on Utøya. He was off duty and had volountered to be responsible for security on the island during the Labour party youth camp. Crime was pretty much unheared of and no-one thought there would be an outside treath, so he was unarmed and brought his nine year old son. The police officer saw that something was "off" with Breivik, who was dressed as a policeman, so he was the first one to be shot. Breivik tried to spare the youngest-looking kids on the island, judging them not yet brainwashed. So the boy survived, but without a father and with memories for a lifetime of bad dreams.

    Every incident similar to this always has a should've/could've response. In reality, you can only do that with hindsight. Nothing is that simple. I've taken part in operations and it all goes to pieces once the first shots are fired, and then it's plan B and plan C.
    The chopper probably wouldn't have found him, and they probably wouldn't have known his next intentions. Let's face it, it was a fairly remote island, even SWAT need intel and eyes on before heading into gunfire, regardless of bravado in the films no unit simply throws themselves into trouble. They need someone to give the the "go" and they need to know most of the threat. This would have given him time to kill many people even if the police had been on the shore when he started shooting. Also, automatic assault weapons are devastating. Most people will be familiar with them in films, but in reality when you are hit be a 5.56mm round, usually one is enough and they will also cut through almost anything you care to hide behind. They have a long range and are pretty easy to be fairly proficient with. Even the rate of fire on semi-auto is two or three rounds per second. To be up against one unarmed would be as terrifing as anything I can imagine.
    Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:

    http://apbateman.com
  • Number24Number24 NorwayPosts: 22,433MI6 Agent
    edited April 2012
    You bring up several good points and hindsight is 20/20, I know. But the helicoptre is one of the most advanced surveilance helicoptres in production today and the crew claimed they would have been able to find Breivik several minutes before they reached Utoya. It would be dangerous and difficult, but I belive this would have been the quickest realistic way to stop the shooting on the island.

    You asked about the gun laws in Norway. The laws were actually revised in December. The revision was not a response to the events on 22/7, but planned in advance. A ban on semiautomatic rifles was considered, but rejected because a fast follow-up shot can be usefull if a hunter maims an animal. Doctors and other medical professionals are now obliged to alert the police if they find a known gun owner to be unfit to own a weapon, but that was the only change in the law. I`m glad the authorities didn`t overreact
    after the massacre like they did after gun massacres in Finland and the UK. I actually find the Norwegian gun laws to be good and sensible.
Sign In or Register to comment.