-
The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Now, if I got this right, his trial will start in a few weeks: 16 April, so I intended to start a general thread that can be updated.
Some sides of the trial has made me think of things that I have not thought of before; such as the first topic I will bring up below. While I was not in Oslo when the bomb went off, I'll be here during the trial, so if anyone wants his autograph, then that...I keed, I keed. He should get a bullet, but he won't - another dilemma.
Most of the articles that are written on the topic for the time being, are in Norwegian; so you will just have to take my word for the translations.
First out is the draft of a law that can keep people locked up as long as long it is thought that they will be at immediate risk if released. Sounds kind of creepy (especially with the article title); no idea how other countries deal with such issues (and that would be interesting to hear).
New law shall keep Breivik locked up for the rest of his life
Quote:
The government are hastily introducing a new law that can keep Anders Behring Breivik locked up for the rest of his life, for his own safety.
In a text which TV2 [Norwegian TV channel] has gained access to, it is suggested that a pasient can be kept locked up in a high-security instiution of treatment as long as the police is of the opinon that there is a danger that someone will attack him in an act of revenge for what he has done.
Part of the suggestion reads:
"In very special cases, a patient might have commited grave and highly provocative acts, such as massmurder."
It goes on to say that the condition for the transfer to and confinement of the patient in this special security unit shall be "based on that there is a particularly high risk for attacks against the patient himself"
Then something for the circus.
Breivik wants [Mullah] Krekar as witness
Quote:
The defence lawyers of Breivik intend to use Islamists to convince the court that [Breivik] had reasons for believeng that Muslims want to take over Norway.
Mohyeldeen Mohammad, Mullah Krekar and Arfan Bhatti may have to witness in the trial against Anders Behring Breivik.
- This is now cleared with Breivik, and it is certain that we request the presence of Krekar, Geir Lippestad, lawyer of Breivik, tells VG Nett [online version of newspaper]
...
Defence lawyer of Breivik, Vibeke Hein Bæra, tells NRK that the witnesses are selected to show that Breivik was not necessarily controlled by paranoid delusions when he planned and executed the acts of terror; and that there instead exist more people in Norway that share his view of Europe being at war.
- We want to highlight the reason for Breivik fighting his battle. He has expressed that he is fighting because he is concerned that Norway will be taken over by Muslims. For this, we want to have witnesses that can tell us something about why he got this fear.
Those names are essentially Islamists currently residing in Norway. Should any of them show up, they'd probably say "yes, we would like Norway to be a nation of Islam", and some more gibberish.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
The three loonies are called in to make a case that Breivik is sane. They share the same world-view, and thus Breivik cannot be insane as they are sane, is the logic.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Viking
Hey, that's not fair. The law wasn't on the books when he committed the murders. Retroactive application of a law -- now that's screwed up.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rvg
Hey, that's not fair. The law wasn't on the books when he committed the murders. Retroactive application of a law -- now that's screwed up.
This isn't the type of law you are judged by in a courtroom, this is a law concerning how medical staff should handle pasients.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rvg
Hey, that's not fair. The law wasn't on the books when he committed the murders. Retroactive application of a law -- now that's screwed up.
procedural laws apply on ongoing cases, isn't that standard with these things?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
...Why would they need new legislation, isn't intentional mass murder enough to get him life without parole?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Yeah, don't let yourselves be talked into a Patriot Act-lite. Nearly every crime results in aggrieved victims that could conceivably want revenge.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greyblades
...Why would they need new legislation, isn't intentional mass murder enough to get him life without parole?
Which would mean he'd be released free and clear by 2030 (assuming his trial only takes a year). You see in Norway the maximum someone can be imprisoned for is 17 years. Not a second longer, no matter what crime you were convicted of.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lars573
Which would mean he'd be released free and clear by 2030 (assuming his trial only takes a year). You see in Norway the maximum someone can be imprisoned for is 17 years. Not a second longer, no matter what crime you were convicted of.
Try him concurrently?
~:smoking:
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Life in prison actually means just that here gladly, you will never get out if you get that verdict
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
just do like the americans do and give him 900 years in prison and 15 life sentences.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lars573
Which would mean he'd be released free and clear by 2030 (assuming his trial only takes a year). You see in Norway the maximum someone can be imprisoned for is 17 years. Not a second longer, no matter what crime you were convicted of.
Actually, it is 21 years - and that is the punishment. You can be kept in prison for the rest of your life if you are deemed a danger to society (re-evaluated every 5 years).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gelatinous Cube
Even worse.
*Don't get me wrong, this dude deserves to rot and/or hang, but just the fact that a peice of vague and creepy legislation that might violate all of your human rights came out of it means that he won, and Norway lost. Sorry dudes.
It depends on the politicians' intent. The title I translated was probably misleading. The idea is if they expect someone to be assassinated/attacked when his time as a patient is over (depending on what the upcoming new psychiatric assessment concludes, he is likely to be sentenced to forced treatment). One would think that, as a free citizen, one has a right to police protection. Otherwise, it becomes part of the punishment rather than protection (not that psychiatric treatment is supposed to be punishment in the first place).
A complaint has been filed to the civil ombudsman (from the part of the article that I did not translate).
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
GC has a point and that is how some will see it, but imho it's unfair. It should be obvious to anyone that this guy should never walk the streets again just because an atrocity like this was never considered when they made the laws. Was it really just a crime really, or is he just evil.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
GC has a point and that is how some will see it, but imho it's unfair. It should be obvious to anyone that this guy should never walk the streets again just because an atrocity like this was never considered when they made the laws. Was it really just a crime really, or is he just evil.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
That new law thing made it to the BBC now, and as far as I can see, they included some crucial details (bolded by me) that the article I linked to earlier somehow forgot to include (lulz). Excerpt:
Quote:
Norway is rushing through laws to ensure that Anders Behring Breivik is kept in a new, top security hospital if a court finds him criminally insane.
The law would allow patients to be locked up for as long as police found they were "in danger of being attacked by someone seeking revenge".
Patients would not be kept in the unit for more than six months at a time.
After that period, medical staff would need approval to extend the stay, or transfer the patient to another unit.
This mental health bill has been in the making since 2010.
But last year's 22 July attacks accelerated the process and resulted in an urgent review of the health care system with respect to violent and dangerous patients.
The legislation is designed to accommodate the care of Breivik in the event a verdict finds him criminally insane.
Ila high security prison in Norway, where Breivik is being held
The bill says the law would apply in special circumstances whereby "a patient may have committed grave, atrocious and offensive acts, such as mass murder".
[...]
Opponents of the bill have expressed concerns that Norway risks ending up with draconian laws that could compromise the human rights of mental health patients and transfer too much power to police.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
They caught some would be terrorist crossing into the USA from Canada with a bunch of bomb making materials.
He was sentenced to 22 years in prison - a sentence that was overturned for being too lenient.
There's a lot wrong with the US legal system, but I think one shouldn't cap sentences at 21 years for all crimes.
Quote:
They share the same world-view, and thus Breivik cannot be insane as they are sane, is the logic.
Would that help his case at all though?
CR
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
What I don't understand is why it's treated as one crime, casualties in Oslo died because of an explosion, a bomb is one crime. But the rampage on that island are 76 crimes, for each victim he pulled the trigger after all. It would make more sense. I kinda share GC's concerns you can't just change the rules midgame. I fully understand it as this guy should never be released, but it's a slippery slope. These level-headed vikings have a way to good society to let it slip, they can trust eachother there but one ruling always opens up the possibilities. From what I read I agree with Breivik a lot, am I also insane or do we just disagree. Saying something on the internet can also be a crime, am I criminaly insane? I trust Norway's left with it but I certainly don't trust the Dutch left with such a tool, especially after the Wilders trial, they tried to cheat. It blew up in their face, but they tried.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gelatinous Cube
I just worry that they'll follow the trend of other countries that have been the victims of terrorism: over-reaction that harms the citizenry more than protects them, potentially to the point of undermining your democratic and citizen-driven society.
Which is essentially to hand the terrorists a victory; who's winning the war again?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crazed Rabbit
They caught some would be terrorist crossing into the USA from Canada with a bunch of bomb making materials.
He was sentenced to 22 years in prison - a sentence that was overturned
for being too lenient.
There's a lot wrong with the US legal system, but I think one shouldn't cap sentences at 21 years for all crimes.
Would that help his case at all though?
CR
Compared to the rest of the western world the US penal codes are draconian and quite backward.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rvg
Hey, that's not fair. The law wasn't on the books when he committed the murders. Retroactive application of a law -- now that's screwed up.
Exactly. If anything deserves life imprisonment (or the death penalty, if you're so inclined) it's what Breivik has done. But ex post criminal laws are out of the question.
I get the impression however, that we're talking about a similar system that the Dutch have (called TBS for short). In essence, it's a psychiatric lockup, passed out alongside a jail sentence and applied (usually) after the jail sentence has been served out. When in TBS, the person gets treatment and isn't released until the institution and the judge are satisfied that the convict is unlikely to commit another (violent) crime. Which could be indefinitely.
However, even if it's not supposed to be a punitive measure on paper, it's widely regarded as de facto imprisonment that is potentially lifelong. I think retroactive application would be wrong in this case, also.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lars573
Compared to the rest of the western world the US penal codes are draconian and quite backward.
Meh. I quite agree with CR's statement. In fact, the Dutch legal system is one of the relatively few in western Europe where a life sentence actually is a life sentence. To top it, unlike most other systems, there's no way to get out earlier except by being pardoned or whatever.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
And in Canada a life sentence means your under state supervision (of some form) for the rest of your life. But the actual incarceration is 20 to 25 years.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Aye, it's rarely given but the worst of the worst get the worst of the worst. TBS is a chance you might one day wil be released, a life sentence is byebye. I believe we are the only European country doing this in fact
@Kraz
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
What I don't understand is why it's treated as one crime, casualties in Oslo died because of an explosion, a bomb is one crime. But the rampage on that island are 76 crimes, for each victim he pulled the trigger after all. It would make more sense.
I assume (without being a lawyer) that §62 in the penal code is in effect. Basically if someone commits several crimes that each on their own is a criminal offence you get one sentene for all the crimes, but it has to be higher than the minimum punishment would be if the person had done only one of the crimes. Not sure how this is applied when the crimes all qualify for 21 years imprisonment, but I assume you can't go higher than the maximum... So yeah, assuming my interpetation of the law is correct the police treat it as one crime, because that is how it will be judged. (Like I said I am not a lawyer so I don't know the reasoning behind the paragraph)
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dîn-Heru
I assume (without being a lawyer) that §62 in the penal code is in effect. Basically if someone commits several crimes that each on their own is a criminal offence you get one sentene for all the crimes, but it has to be higher than the minimum punishment would be if the person had done only one of the crimes. Not sure how this is applied when the crimes all qualify for 21 years imprisonment, but I assume you can't go higher than the maximum... So yeah, assuming my interpetation of the law is correct the police treat it as one crime, because that is how it will be judged. (Like I said I am not a lawyer so I don't know the reasoning behind the paragraph)
That's silly Francophone way of doing things. Much better for him to be charged seperately for all crimes, he would then be guilty of at least two seperate offences, possibly three if his manifesto were considered to breach some hate law. Then he could be given 42 years.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
They're treated as different crimes when it comes to compensqting the victims though.
As for the mental health bill, the BBC also got it wrong; our mental health bill started a many, many yeara ago, and it will probably never be finished. The debate on when and how to use force won't be ended in the foreseeable future. It's amended every single year. One year, those who want more force in mental hospitals ain the upper hand. The next year their opponents get the upper hand, and so it drags on forever and ever.
ABB is looking at many years in prison(seems most likely right now) or an institution. When the day comes that the mental bill matters to him, the odds that the rules are the same are astronomically small.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gelatinous Cube
Absolutely. Terrorism's goal is, obviously, to create terror. If you're so terrified you that you want to hand over your previously inviolable rights then certainly they win. After all, they don't generally care about their lives--they're out to create havoc and screw things up for idealogical reasons. The only victory a terrorist can have is a political one, why hand it to them?
Because people value their lives above most everything else. Politicians have "to do something". The incentives all line up. Maybe terrorism is the fundamental weakness to a liberal democracy. Our Charizard is trying to battle against Squirtle but this time Gary is much more determined than Ash.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
They're treated as different crimes when it comes to compensqting the victims though.
As for the mental health bill, the BBC also got it wrong; our mental health bill started a many, many yeara ago, and it will probably never be finished. The debate on when and how to use force won't be ended in the foreseeable future. It's amended every single year. One year, those who want more force in mental hospitals ain the upper hand. The next year their opponents get the upper hand, and so it drags on forever and ever.
ABB is looking at many years in prison(seems most likely right now) or an institution. When the day comes that the mental bill matters to him, the odds that the rules are the same are astronomically small.
Problem is that he isn't insane, what he did makes perfect sense it's an act of war, he whiped out the next generation of the enemy. It may be twisted but it's not insane. Should have killed him on the spot, now you will have to play by your own rules
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
Problem is that he isn't insane, what he did makes perfect sense it's an act of war, he whiped out the next generation of the enemy. It may be twisted but it's not insane. Should have killed him on the spot, now you will have to play by your own rules
I prefer psychiatrists to make that decision. But as things look now, I believe he will be found sane.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gelatinous Cube
Perhaps, perhaps. The only appropriate way to deal with terrorrism is high-mindedness and objectivity. Turning the other cheek, even. Any other response will make things worse as we've seen. Perhaps it is the fundamental weakness to a liberal democracy indeed.
Well said.
While I certainly don't approve of the reference to mass murder in the mental heath bill text, I don't consider themental health law as enough of a problem to riot just yet. Unlike real laws, the mental health law is mostly based on the doctors judgement, it just provides some absolute limits to what can be done(like: after x years, y must be done). I'll be grabbing my pitchfork if they start redoingthe penal code, however.
A Lex Behring Breivik, a term coined by a Dagbladet chronicle yesterday, is NOT something I would approve of.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
I prefer psychiatrists to make that decision. But as things look now, I believe he will be found sane.
why... sif they know more about it.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
But as things look now, I believe he will be found sane.
If the second psychatric assessment reaches the same conclusion as the first one, I don't really see that. And if it doesn't, then what.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Viking
If the second psychatric assessment reaches the same conclusion as the first one, I don't really see that. And if it doesn't, then what.
The prosecutor has opened up for asking for prison sentence regardless of what any report says. The defence is going to try its best to prove sanity. In other words, both defender and accuser wants prison sentence, and its far from given that an expert opinion will trump that.
For ABB to be found insane, the second report has to find him insane AND the court will have to go against both the defence and the prosecution. This means that the odds are he will be found sane and sent to prison, as the situation stands right now. Also, an insanity verdict will be appealed, but a prison sentence won't.
With a second report finding him insane, the odds will change of course. But even in that situation, I believe the odds are still slightly in favour of prison.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
A image supposed to be from the 1800s shows a familiar face. (check the upload date: 3 October 2008).
The image was originally thought to show a Norwegian master thief (Ole Høiland), but back in 2010, this was found out not to be the case. An article using the image back in 2009 can be found here. Amusing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
The prosecutor has opened up for asking for prison sentence regardless of what any report says. The defence is going to try its best to prove sanity. In other words, both defender and accuser wants prison sentence, and its far from given that an expert opinion will trump that.
For ABB to be found insane, the second report has to find him insane AND the court will have to go against both the defence and the prosecution. This means that the odds are he will be found sane and sent to prison, as the situation stands right now. Also, an insanity verdict will be appealed, but a prison sentence won't.
With a second report finding him insane, the odds will change of course. But even in that situation, I believe the odds are still slightly in favour of prison.
I was given the impression that it is unusal for verdicts to go against the psychiatric assessment; or something like that.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
It IS unusual for a court to go against an expert opinion(remember the debate on experts about a year ago), but it does happen from time to time, and this case in anything but usual.
Also, I wouldn't be surprised if this is the first time since Hamsun a defendant has gone against an expert stating insanity.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Viking
A image supposed to be from the 1800s shows a
familiar face. (check the upload date: 3 October 2008).
The image was originally thought to show a Norwegian master thief (Ole Høiland), but back in 2010, this was found out not to be the case. An article using the image back in 2009 can be found
here. Amusing.
Wait... what was all that about?!
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rhyfhylwyr
Wait... what was all that about?!
It is some (presumeably) random dude that looks a lot like Breivik, and the photo of him was incidentally earlier thought to be the photo of another high profile criminal Norwegian (who lived from 1797 to 1848). But it wasn't, the museum made a mistake when it got the photo in the early 1980s. No one knows who that random dude is, or why he was photographed.
It all should be clear as cucumber to you now.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gelatinous Cube
Absolutely. Terrorism's goal is, obviously, to create terror. If you're so terrified you that you want to hand over your previously inviolable rights then certainly they win. After all, they don't generally care about their lives--they're out to create havoc and screw things up for idealogical reasons. The only victory a terrorist can have is a political one, why hand it to them?
I'm curious why you think that's the goal of terrorism. You describe them as very rational.
Couldn't express what I was trying to say, so I went googling, check this out:
http://maxabrahms.com/pdfs/DC_250-1846.pdf
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sasaki Kojiro
I'm curious why you think that's the goal of terrorism. You describe them as very rational.
Couldn't express what I was trying to say, so I went googling, check this out:
http://maxabrahms.com/pdfs/DC_250-1846.pdf
Errr.. Help me out with this one. So if I'm reading this right, the paper is proposing that terrorists do what they do for the sake of... terrorism itself?
I'm having a bit of a hard time with this for a few reasons. First, I can't get a good idea of what they're defining as a "terrorist", but it seems to fit what I understand to be the generally accepted definition. They referenced the german marxist faction, the IRA, and a few middle eastern groups. Second, I can't help but think they're painting an overly broad picture of what terrorism's goals are. Some individuals and groups seem haphazard at best and not really unified under a cause, or really having clearly stated aims or goals. Other groups seem to be very cohesive, well run, and clearly stated aims and goals. I can't check his sources, and it'd take hours, but I'm curious what the actual sample base they use looked like for the data they drew their conclusions from. A half-dozen shoe bomber guys wouldn't really be a good working basis for something aiming to paint a broad picture, aye?
In short, I think the paper is maybe too broad, and each individual instance of a terrorist act, and the perpetrators should be evaluated individually and on a case by case basis. Thoughts?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Whacker
Errr.. Help me out with this one. So if I'm reading this right, the paper is proposing that terrorists do what they do for the sake of... terrorism itself?
No...
He says the organizations appeal to the socially alienated, the lonely, the dislocated, the unemployed, and target them for recruitment (rather than people who have proven commitment to the political cause)...that in interviews with members of terrorist groups they say that they didn't join for political reasons but for social reasons (social connections to people who were already members), that many of them don't understand the claimed political purpose of the group...the groups are naturally extremely close knit and rewarding to people who have felt alienated...
It's like a smaller more intense version of the standard psychology of people who join a mass movement, according to him.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sasaki Kojiro
No...
He says the organizations appeal to the socially alienated, the lonely, the dislocated, the unemployed, and target them for recruitment (rather than people who have proven commitment to the political cause)...that in interviews with members of terrorist groups they say that they didn't join for political reasons but for social reasons (social connections to people who were already members), that many of them don't understand the claimed political purpose of the group...the groups are naturally extremely close knit and rewarding to people who have felt alienated...
It's like a smaller more intense version of the standard psychology of people who join a mass movement, according to him.
OK, I read it a slightly different way, but I follow. Even if people don't join for political reasons at first, if they at some point subscribe in whole or majority to the group's ideaology, wouldn't that make the original reason for joining moot? Not saying that every member of a terrorist org is politically motivated, but it would seem to me that the majority of them would be. So that's what this paper is saying is not true then?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Saw an interesting interview with a woman yesterday, who in her early years first was a member of Blitz(anti-fascists), then the neo-nazi's.
Her reasoning for it was the thrill and the action(when with the nazis: looking down at other people made me feel good about myself), not the political views itself. I don't see that just applying to her, I think it applies to many militant/radical youths. But this is of course just an opinion, I have no real facts to back it up.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Whacker
OK, I read it a slightly different way, but I follow. Even if people don't join for political reasons at first, if they at some point subscribe in whole or majority to the group's ideaology, wouldn't that make the original reason for joining moot? Not saying that every member of a terrorist org is politically motivated, but it would seem to me that the majority of them would be. So that's what this paper is saying is not true then?
I would think they immediately claim to be in agreement with whatever the groups ideology is at the moment, even if they don't understand it. That doesn't mean they are ever motivated by it. I don't think politics is that strong a motivator, at best it is an excuse for the real motivation. Eric hoffer says a lot of good stuff about this. People get meaning in life, a powerful sense of purpose and worth, and strong social affirmation. Think they are going to care much about the specific policy points?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sasaki Kojiro
I would think they immediately claim to be in agreement with whatever the groups ideology is at the moment, even if they don't understand it. That doesn't mean they are ever motivated by it. I don't think politics is that strong a motivator, at best it is an excuse for the real motivation. Eric hoffer says a lot of good stuff about this. People get meaning in life, a powerful sense of purpose and worth, and strong social affirmation. Think they are going to care much about the specific policy points?
It would seem to me yes, if one is actively joining an organization that exists outside the law and performs illegal (and most likely immoral) actions, then the primary driver would be an ideological one. Having a good understanding of the ideological intricacies would therefore be important.
Dunno, I'm limited by my perceptions and experiences, but that's what makes the most sense to me. I can see a desire to social ties and bonds being a strong component, but if one is going to join and participate in an organization where one's livelihood and even life may be forfeit, it would not be a big leap to assume that it would take some strong consideration and require some actual belief in the group's raison d'etre.
Edit - So if I had to sum it up, it strikes me as a bit odd the paper suggests that most terrorist groups act the way they do. To me, the ones that we read about most frequently seem to be well organized, cohesive, politically motivated, and most often the risk vs. benefit factor is considered to a certain degree. The IRA for example. Perhaps that is just a result of the media and government(s) portraying them as such. Others, like Mr. Shoebomber, seem to be the outlying fringes that are unorganized, irrational, and foolish.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Whacker
Edit - So if I had to sum it up, it strikes me as a bit odd the paper suggests that most terrorist groups act the way they do. To me, the ones that we read about most frequently seem to be well organized, cohesive, politically motivated, and most often the risk vs. benefit factor is considered to a certain degree. The IRA for example. Perhaps that is just a result of the media and government(s) portraying them as such. Others, like Mr. Shoebomber, seem to be the outlying fringes that are unorganized, irrational, and foolish.
hmm well he does say
"In his study of the IRA, for example, Robert White found that nearly half of the terrorists he interviewed were unaware of the discrimination in northern ireland against catholics, despite the salience of this issue in IRA communiques"
Presumably there have to be at least a few people who come up with the ideological stuff though. But their motivations not be what we might think either.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sasaki Kojiro
hmm well he does say
"In his study of the IRA, for example, Robert White found that nearly half of the terrorists he interviewed were unaware of the discrimination in northern ireland against catholics, despite the salience of this issue in IRA communiques"
Presumably there have to be at least a few people who come up with the ideological stuff though. But their motivations not be what we might think either.
Couldnt one say that about any organisation of pretty much any size we care to mention, did American troops in WW2 really join to rid the world of Nazis or was it a paying gig that promised adventure.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gaelic cowboy
Couldnt one say that about any organisation of pretty much any size we care to mention, did American troops in WW2 really join to rid the world of Nazis or was it a paying gig that promised adventure.
We joined because Pearl Harbor got bombed to smithereens. That set us on warpath against Japan and her allies.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rvg
We joined because Pearl Harbor got bombed to smithereens. That set us on warpath against Japan and her allies.
Everyone in America that joined up had the same motivation???
No the answer is the government entered the war and the population at large had there own reasons for signing on.
We should be careful to assign a motivation to any person who joins an army the reasons can be multiple even for the same person.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
gaelic cowboy
Everyone in America that joined up had the same motivation???
No the answer is the government entered the war and the population at large had there own reasons for signing on.
We should be careful to assign a motivation to any person who joins an army the reasons can be multiple even for the same person.
People enlisted because the country was at war. Even though at that time conscription was still in force the majority of people enlisted voluntarily. As for the reasoning of every single individual, I cannot say. Most people though do not go out risking their lives for "adventure". Some do, most don't.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
More concerned about his glorification among people that are an enrichment to culture and who are from a society that has shame, personally. The world will burn and it starts in France.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gelatinous Cube
France is always burning. They're like, what, on the 5th Republic now?
The situation in France is grim enough to make both the reasonable left and the populist right really uncomfortable. Got me thinking on how we really have to talk this over. The social situation of the poor that's ok to the blind-right and the cultural naivity of the blind-left We are all wrong.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
The situation in France is grim enough to make both the reasonable left and the populist right really uncomfortable. Got me thinking on how we really have to talk this over. The social situation of the poor that's ok to the blind-right and the cultural naivity of the blind-left We are all wrong.
Looking at things now, France is lucky not to have kept Algeria.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
More concerned about his glorification among people that are an enrichment to culture and who are from a society that has shame, personally. The world will burn and it starts in France.
You're talking about Mohammad Merah and not Breivik here, right?
It's also baffling to see that you're consistently pointing at Algerians, Moroccans and other people of Middle-Eastern or Arabic descent, when the first people Merah killed were in fact Algerian Frenchmen serving in the French army. It's not only biased, it's despicable and frankly disgusting. These people put their lives on the line in the service of their country and you regard them as potential traitors. You should be ashamed.
What you fail to see is that whenever a Muslim does something wrong, it doesn't have to be in the name of or inspired by Islam. Merah was a very troubled figure with a lot of psychological and psychatric problems. He and Breivik apparently have a lot in common.
As for Algeria, the departure of the pieds-noirs and the later departure of the Jews was one of the greatest blows to cultural diversity in Algeria. If Algeria would have stayed French, would we have had the same situation? Who the hell knows. It's a stupid question.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hax
As for Algeria, the departure of the pieds-noirs and the later departure of the Jews was one of the greatest blows to cultural diversity in Algeria.
From what I understand they didn't have much of a choice.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
It depends, are you talking about the pieds-noirs or the Jews?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hax
It depends, are you talking about the pieds-noirs or the Jews?
Pieds
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
'It's also baffling to see that you're consistently pointing at Algerians, Moroccans and other people of Middle-Eastern or Arabic descent, when the first people Merah killed were in fact Algerian Frenchmen serving in the French army. It's not only biased, it's despicable and frankly disgusting. These people put their lives on the line in the service of their country and you regard them as potential traitors. You should be ashamed.'
Why don't you think this over, how would a radical muslim see these soldiers. No need for boohooohoooisms
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
You're just like some of the Muslims I discuss religion with; they're always telling me to "think it over" and "do more research".
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hax
You're just like some of the Muslims I discuss religion with; they're always telling me to "think it over" and "do more research".
And you are now just acting like the type of leftie I don't discuss anything with as it's as rewarding as pranking teh girlfriend, they just don't get it.
hellooooooo they are French soldiers, soldiers bad
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Exactly. They are French.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Hax
Exactly. They are French.
If that's an answer to something then what was the question?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Found sane. I really come to respect how Norway handles this, declaring him insane would have been understandable but wrong. Hats off. Of course you have a bit of a problem now, you will have to release over 18 years.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
It's not quite that simple
Quote:
However, the verdict of the case is far from given. With two conflicting reports, psychiatric issues are sure to become a dominant issue during the proceedings.
One lawyer who works for Norwegian police told the BBC that she was intrigued as to how the trial would pan out.
"The new report might not change much in the end," she said, "as courts are obliged to give the defendant the benefit of the doubt on the issue of sanity. The initial report created doubts, and the new report cannot undo that."
She said she therefore expected the court of first instance to deem Breivik insane although ultimately the High Court might reach a different conclusion.
[...]
What is particularly unusual about Breivik's trial is that his lawyer will be arguing that his client is sane. This, of course, is the opposite of what happens in most trials where there is a question of the perpetrator's sanity.
His defence team has even called the cleric who founded radical Islamic group Ansar al-Islam, Mullah Krekar, as a witness in an attempt to demonstrate how a person with extreme political views may be put on trial as sane. Krekar was recently sentenced to five years in prison by a Norwegian court for making death threats against officials.
and no, these assessments are supposed to be of a medical nature, not political. I doubt Breivik will ever be released from prison if given a prison term; he will probably be deemed too dangerous.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Viking
and no, these assessments are supposed to be of a medical nature, not political. I doubt Breivik will ever be released from prison if given a prison term; he will probably be deemed too dangerous.
The law making that possible hasn't passed yet, can't apply it on him. In 18 years you will have to let him walk. I am going to be watching this, maybe psychology has too big a role, two reports contradicting eachother, going to be fireworks
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Isn't it 21 years for the determinate penalty or thirty years for crimes against humanity
& 21 years plus rolling 5 years for the indeterminate life sentence in Norway?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Papewaio
Isn't it 21 years for the determinate penalty or thirty years for crimes against humanity
& 21 years plus rolling 5 years for the indeterminate life sentence in Norway?
As I understand it it's capped at 18 if suspect is found sane
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
The law making that possible hasn't passed yet, can't apply it on him. In 18 years you will have to let him walk. I am going to be watching this, maybe psychology has too big a role, two reports contradicting eachother, going to be fireworks
No, wrong.
Maximum sentence is life, meaning 21 years PLUS something called "forvaring"(I don't think an english term exists). It basically works likethis: once the 21 years are up, a hearing will take place. A court will decide if he is a danger to society or not. If he is, he will be given an automatic 5 years sentence. After those five years are up, the same heàring takes place. This goes on until the prisoner dies or is found not to be a treath. In ABB's case, it's safe to assume that he will spend his life in prison.
This law is quite new, I think it was made around 2000. No idea where you got 18 years from though.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
No, wrong.
Maximum sentence is life, meaning 21 years PLUS something called "forvaring"(I don't think an english term exists). It basically works likethis: once the 21 years are up, a hearing will take place. A court will decide if he is a danger to society or not. If he is, he will be given an automatic 5 years sentence. After those five years are up, the same heàring takes place. This goes on until the prisoner dies or is found not to be a treath. In ABB's case, it's safe to assume that he will spend his life in prison.
This law is quite new, I think it was made around 2000. No idea where you got 18 years from though.
Out of curiousity, how do they assess whether a criminal is a threat? What if they behaved well in prison, but bottled up his urges?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
spankythehippo
Out of curiousity, how do they assess whether a criminal is a threat? What if they behaved well in prison, but bottled up his urges?
I don't really know. I'll try digging around a little and see if I can find some info on that.
I assume it will be similar to how parole proceedings work.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Personally, I think for what he did he deserves the reinstation of the iron maiden, thumbscrews and the pear of anguish into european punishment system. But that's just me.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
No, wrong.
Maximum sentence is life, meaning 21 years PLUS something called "forvaring"(I don't think an english term exists). It basically works likethis: once the 21 years are up, a hearing will take place. A court will decide if he is a danger to society or not. If he is, he will be given an automatic 5 years sentence. After those five years are up, the same heàring takes place. This goes on until the prisoner dies or is found not to be a treath. In ABB's case, it's safe to assume that he will spend his life in prison.
This law is quite new, I think it was made around 2000. No idea where you got 18 years from though.
From what I gathered your system is pretty much what we call TBS, but TBS here is for people who are criminally insane. When sane it's just adieu, life is life without a chance of parol. But you only get that if you are sane here. If you are not sane and a danger to society you go to the 'longstay', which is basicly also a life-sentence. The 18 years I read somewhere I dindn't do any checks.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
From what I gathered your system is pretty much what we call TBS, but TBS here is for people who are criminally insane. When sane it's just adieu, life is life without a chance of parol. But you only get that if you are sane here. If you are not sane and a danger to society you go to the 'longstay', which is basicly also a life-sentence. The 18 years I read somewhere I dindn't do any checks.
That's simply wrong, frags.
Our criminal system works like I described above.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
This law is quite new, I think it was made around 2000.
2000? So before that, they would let dangerous people out if deemed sane?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Viking
2000? So before that, they would let dangerous people out if deemed sane?
2002 actually.
Forvaring was introduced as an improvement to the old system, sikring. I don't know how old that system is nor what, if any, system was in place before that.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
2002 actually.
Forvaring was introduced as an improvement to the old system, sikring. I don't know how old that system is nor what, if any, system was in place before that.
What this guy needs is a good old fashioned viking style blood eagle.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
That's simply wrong, frags.
Our criminal system works like I described above.
If that is so why bother with sane/ insane in the first place. It's pretty clear that this man should never be released. I get this icky feeling over this if you already have the means to lock him up for good. You just might kill freedom of thought if you do it like this
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
If that is so why bother with sane/ insane in the first place. It's pretty clear that this man should never be released. I get this icky feeling over this if you already have the means to lock him up for good. You just might kill freedom of thought if you do it like this
Finding him sane is a much more certain way to lock him up for good.
Since the viking age(earliest reference I know is Snorre), however, Norwegian law has had the principle that if you wre not aware of your actions, you cannot be sentenced(held accountable) for them. Thus, it was necessary to figure out if he could be sentenced at all, hence the psych report.
If he is found insane though, it's worth noting that he will NOT be sentenced because of his actions AT ALL. He will then be sentenced to psychiatric care because of his illness, not his action.
Blame the softhearted vikings, I guess....
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
Finding him sane is a much more certain way to lock him up for good.
Since the viking age(earliest reference I know is Snorre), however, Norwegian law has had the principle that if you wre not aware of your actions, you cannot be sentenced(held accountable) for them. Thus, it was necessary to figure out if he could be sentenced at all, hence the psych report.
If he is found insane though, it's worth noting that he will NOT be sentenced because of his actions AT ALL. He will then be sentenced to psychiatric care because of his illness, not his action.
Blame the softhearted vikings, I guess....
I really admiree the dignity of soft-headed vikings in dealing with this. But I also always consider what something could means to me, and having somewhat of an inpopular opinion about leftist self-percieved truths doesn't exactly sound like a worthwhile proposition for now to me to adhere to ight now.
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fragony
I really admiree the dignity of soft-headed vikings in dealing with this. But I also always consider what something could means to me, and having somewhat of an inpopular opinion about leftist self-percieved truths doesn't exactly sound like a worthwhile proposition for now to me to adhere to ight now.
Do you consider a law-tradition dating back to the viking age as "leftist"...?
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoreTore
Do you consider a law-tradition dating back to the viking age as "leftist"...?
What I call leftism is the stubborn habit to not recognise reality because reality doesn't always play nice, and that reality won't always comfirm that the world works that way. Leftism is a play in which we all have to act to please the director, a director who lives in a 100% white neighbourhood and puts his kids on a 100% white school
-
Re: The trial of Anders Behring Breivik
So Odin is the director?
=][=
It is not left or right thinking. It is not just found in humanitarian circles. Not guilty because of insanity or extra mercy because of inability to understand ones actions is found throughout societies.
The basis of adult vs child sentencing is based on that premise that children are not fully responsible for their actions.
End of the day a merciless justice system that skips due process is a far more terrifying thing than a terrorist.