129 terror victims require new Breivik assessment...
But Anders Behring Breivik refuses to be examined again
Eric Brekstad Utheim , Jorunn Stølan , Eva-Therese Grøttum , Dennis Ravndal and Fridtjof Nygaard | VG | Published 05.01.12 - 16:51, edited 06.01.12 - 16:20 (AP)
(AP) They were even hit by terror. Now requires the new psychiatric examination of terrorist Anders Behring Breivik.
Friday is the deadline to petition for appointment of new legal psychiatrists in the terror case.
AP knows that the requirement to obtain a new assessment of the terrorist is massively from the many involved in the case.
35 legal aid lawyers have been delivered or will deliver petitions on behalf of at least 129 clients who were affected 22 July - either because they were Utøya or government building, or that their loved ones died.
When defenders visited the mass murderer in jail Thursday afternoon, he was clearly on that he will not talk to the right psychiatrists if appointed new experts. There is a gap in the law that he can force minds are added to the day of observation if the new experts believe it is necessary.
Requires two types of investigations
Terror victims require two different reports. More wishes to be appointed new legal psychiatrists, who is conducting a new forensic psychiatric assessment, while others believe Breivik rather should be entered for the-clock observation.
29. last November was the conclusion of the current report. It was made by psychiatrists Synne Sørheim and Torgeir Husby, and stated that Breivik is a paranoid schizophrenic, psychotic, and can not be punished for the terror he performed 22 July.
A conclusion of the 129 survivors believe there is any doubt about - and therefore they will have new reviews.
Fears national trauma
- I think it is important also for the future that we get such a thorough assessment of this as possible. We run the risk that this case is a national trauma that will hang with us at least 50 years away, says AUF does Eivind Rindal to VG.
He was even on Utøya on 22 July, and is among the more than 100 terrorist concerned that through her counsel has requested the implementation of a new forensic psychiatric evaluation of the Behring Anders Breivik.
- I have read the report, and for me there are several things that are distorted. For example, that his fear of being watched is considered a sign of paranoid delusions. He was planning a terrorist attack, so for me it sounds logical that he feared, he says to VG Nett.
Rindal also react to his political ideology is not taken into account.
- If his political affiliations are a sign of such a diagnosis, there are many more than him out there who have that diagnosis. But it is also that the health personnel at the prison do not feel that he has the diagnosis is made by law psychiatrists, he said.
Rindal want it to be seen beyond the traditional academic environment in Norway.
- I think it would be advantageous to bring in someone from abroad, but also to look at expertise from the academic environment, which can provide a better understanding of the political and ideological aspects of the case, he says.
AUF-shoulder fear that the psychiatric community in Norway is closely linked, and that there is an obstacle for the implementation of an independent assessment of how strong the present report.
- For the forensic Commission would of course been a sort of admission of failure on the under-known report of such an important issue, he said.
- Will eliminate the uncertainty
- I represent two parents whose son was killed on Utøya. My clients are committed to eliminate the doubt and uncertainty that is built around the current report, says lawyer Kjetil H. Nilsen from Alta, who was among the first to deliver a petition.
- If a new assessment of the same as the current report, that he is insane, so it will be to put the ball dead. As it is now, there is uncertainty, and it is difficult to relate to for those who have lost their son.
Lists several reasons
Law Firm chart has nine legal aid lawyers in the case. They have, on behalf of a total of 56 of its more than 60 clients in the case, submitted a joint petition for the nominated new experts.
In his letter to the court, written by Mette Yvonne Larsen, lists, tables, lawyers several reasons why their clients want a second opinion.
* External experts have expressed skepticism about Sørheim and Husby conclusion. They show that the psychiatric team that has followed up on Ila Breivik not considering him as psychotic, and that he is not subject to the medication even though he is known psychotic.
* More Utøya-young people who met Breivik 22 July, saw him as a rational, and finds it inconsistent that he was psychotic.
* Additional relevant experience that Breivik's political ideology is mistaken for psychosis.
* Several victims stated that they do not trust that Husby and Sørheim have acted independently, as they should. It appears that Sørheim professionally has been subordinated to Husby for many years.
Proposes specific name
Law Firm chart proposes a list of new, alternative names they believe are likely to be experts, whether to develop a "second opinion".
They mention five names: Psychiatry Agnar Aspaas, Terje Dry Ice and Asbjorn Restan and psychologists Anne-Kari Torgalsbøen and Jim Aage Nøttestad.
Hour Continuous observation
Table-lawyers also calls for a new observation on-the-clock basis, and not only through specific conversations with Breivik - as the current report is made.
Criminal Procedure Act section 167 allows for this, and the very first application that came-from lawyer John Arild Aasen - spoke in favor of this. He wrote the petition on behalf of three clients.
Several of the other aid lawyers provide in their petitions supporting Aasen's initiative.
These deliver a petition:
Table-lawyers who have submitted a request that it appoint new experts are Mette Yvonne Larsen, Olav Black, Helen melted, Anne Elisabeth Grondahl, Morten Engesbak, Bendik Falch-Koslung, Change Refsdal, Maria Bergram-Aas and attorney Martin Eiebakke. They have thus made it on behalf of 56 clients.
The other lawyers who have formally submitted a request that it appoint new experts are:
* Law firm Lund, who represents two clients who were hit by the bomb in the government quarter.
* Sigurd Klomsæt, which represents one Utyøya-survivors. Klomsæt also wish that it be seen abroad when it might be found new legal psychiatrists. He believes the Norwegian environment is too narrow.
* Bergen-law Einar Drægebø has submitted a request that it appoint new experts on behalf of all 17 victims and 6 survivors.
* Ragni Løkholm Ramberg representing ten survivors, who all want new experts.
* Lawyer Nicolai Bjønness will have a new forensic psychiatric statement, and allows for a new expert is NOK. Oslo lawyer deliver the petition on behalf of four clients.
* Lawyer Brynjar Meling warned early on that he would deliver a petition on behalf of one of their clients.
* Meling partner colleague Arvid Sjødin require a new appointment on behalf of three clients, one survivor and two families who lost loved the Utøya.
* Meling and Sjödin associate Kari Nessa Nordtun represent two survivors, and crave the new appointment.
* Attorney Svein Kjetil Svendsen also work Sjødin and Meling. He represents one survivor, and has submitted the request.
* Lawyer Carl Drilling deliver a petition on behalf of two who was at work in the government quarter, when the bomb went off.
* Attorney Noble H. Olsen, representing the two surviving families in Finnmark, and ask for a new forensic psychiatric examination on their behalf.
* Lawyer Bjorn Stefanussen stands behind a petition on behalf of two Utøya-survivors.
* Thor-Erik Andersen has delivered on behalf of one left.
* Vestfold attorney Christopher Arno has submitted a petition on behalf of one left and two survivors.
* Thomas Benestad has submitted a request for a single client.
* Terje Korneliussen want new appointment, and has submitted a petition on behalf of a client.
* Day Stein Feldt has requested a new appointment on behalf of two bereaved families.
* Tone Linn Thing Violence represents a surviving family, who want new psychiatric assessment.
* Tom Schjeldrup Mathiesen has one client who wants new experts.
* Tore Høyer have two clients who want new psychiatric assessment.
* Thor Harald Eike has one that supports Aasen's proposal to day observation. Do not worry, he'll have another round of experts.
* Counsel Linda Solberg Børsand and Kristin Mørch also supports Aasen's proposal that Breivik must be observed over a longer time window than in the current report. They align themselves with Aasen's proposal on behalf of two clients.
* The same counsel Siw Pale Vassli. VG does not know on behalf of how many clients.
* In addition, in other words Kjetil H. Nilsen submitted a petition on behalf of Finnmark family he represents, who lost his son in Utøya 22 July.
Defense and prosecutors want to keep the report
Defender Geir Lippestad has in turn written to the court and said that he did not want a new forensic psychiatric statement, and that it already exists is good NOK.
Prosecutors Inga Bejer-Engh and Svein Holden is also asked to comment. Also they reported that they do not want to appoint new experts , and that they believe the report that is delivered is a good NOK.
That view is shared also by many aid lawyers.
Among other things, the Christian Lundin, representing 67 clients in the terror case, warned against creating further uncertainty about the current report.
- There is a very thorough statement of 243 pages, prepared by experienced, skilled and competent psychiatrists, he writes in a statement to the Oslo District Court.
The forensic commission went through the current psychiatric report just before Christmas, had "no significant comments."
» » » » [Google Translate: VG]