The trial of Anders Behring Breivik

[Fragony]

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.

[Viking]

It's not quite that simple

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.

[Fragony]

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

[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?

[Fragony]

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

[HoreTore]

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.

[spankythehippo]

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?

[HoreTore]

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.

[Greyblades]

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.

[Fragony]

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.

[HoreTore]

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.

[Viking]

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?

[HoreTore]

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.

[rvg]

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.

[Fragony]

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

[HoreTore]

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....

[Fragony]

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.

[HoreTore]

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"...?

[Fragony]

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

[Papewaio]

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.

[Fragony]

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.

The director is the suffocation of political correctness.

[Papewaio]

Considering these ideas predate PC. And that the 30 year sentence is a modern addition. I can't see where being merciful is a act of being PC particularly if the end result is a rolling 5 year life sentence.

It is in effect the same sentence Charles Manson is under right now.

[spankythehippo]

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.

Is Breivik actually insane? He planned it out. He knew what he was doing. Many might claim that he is insane for committing those murders, but he had his own reasons. Insane criminals don't need reasons. They just do it. Although Breivik's reason's for his actions may be for his own personal beliefs, they were still committed by a man who did it deliberately, and who probably shows no remorse. That is not insanity.

If there exists a justice system where there is a limit to the punishment, regardless of the severity of the crime, you will always have people that go over the top.

Just say, the punishment for Breivik would be 20 years of excruciating torture, both mental and physical (as a hypothetical situation). I'm not sure he would have killed so many people. But he did. Because he knew that he most likely will go to gaol. In Norway. Norwegian prisons are like 5 Star hotels compared to the prisons in the rest of the world.

If he isn't executed, Breivik wins.

[Fragony]

He would love to be executed. The only way to not lose, can't win, from the likes of him is dignity. A fair trial is the ultimate humiliation

[Papewaio]

Yeap same arguement for Bin Laden.

Hippo - Not sure where I said Anders is insane. Just that the Norwegian system has a form of unlimited sentence.

Personally I think let him rot in jail and he can watch as all those he attacked participate in a vibrant democracy, have lives and children of their own.

He can keep his five star prison, I'll take my 1 star+ freedom as a much better deal.

[Papewaio]

Yeap same arguement for Bin Laden.

Hippo - Not sure where I said Anders is insane. Just that the Norwegian system has a form of unlimited sentence.

Personally I think let him rot in jail and he can watch as all those he attacked participate in a vibrant democracy, have lives and children of their own.

He can keep his five star prison, I'll take my 1 star+ freedom as a much better deal.

[Fragony]

It was a morbidly fascinating thing to watch him live sitting there. The first word that comes to mind if I see him is pathetic. He is not getting the show he wanted, he will not get the recognision he craves for, he is not even a monster anymore he's just a loser with a gun. That has got to hurt.

[HoreTore]

His crying showed what a truly pathetic man he is.

His pathetic attempt to "make a stand" at the start would've been hilarious if not for the severity of the case.

Also, the press conference afterwards was interesting when they had to explain the peculiar aspects of the case to foreign journalists(one was chinese, I don't remember where the other was from). It seems we are quite an unusual nation...

Edit: and a special prize must of course go to the ignorant racist blogosphere, this time represented by Gates of Vienna, who labeled our justice system as "stalinist" because witnesses have a legal obligation to testify if summoned by the court. Yes, how dreadful it is indeed that every defendant has the right to present his case as acurately as he can....

[Viking]

He is really enjoying himself. Getting broad media coverage, even internationally. It must be exactly what he wanted.

[HoreTore]

He is really enjoying himself. Getting broad media coverage, even internationally. It must be exactly what he wanted.

I've come to loathe the "this is exactly what he hoped for"-comment in all its variants every other article about the case seems to include.

Why should we care even in the slightest what his wishes, aims and goals are?