2012-02-06 (TV2): Breivik: 2nd Incarceration Hearing

2012-02-06 (TV2): Breivik: 2nd Incarceration Hearing

Oslo District Court: #: 11-188627 MED-05 | 06 February 2012 | Breivik Report/TV2.NO

Breivik: The attacks against the government quarter and the Labour Party was preventive attack against traitors who commit, or plan to commit, cultural destruction, of which deconstruction of the Norwegian ethnic group and deconstruction of Norwegian culture. Systematic deconstruction of the Norwegian ethnic group is the same as ethnic cleansing. Traitors in the Labor uses the institution of asylum, family reunification scheme, stay on humanitarian grounds and refugee quota as a tool for the Islamic colonization of Norway.

As a result of this policy, Norway's indigenous people, ethnic Norwegians, being a minority in Oslo in the course of ten years. This is not an allegation, it is a fact.

I am a militant nationalist, a cell commander of the Knights Templar Norway and Europe. I represent the Norwegian resistance movement and the Norwegian Indigenous Peoples and my ancestors have lived in this country for 12,000 years. We in the Norwegian resistance movement is not going to sit still and see that we are made to a minority in their own capital. We are not going to sit and see that we are made to a minority in their own country. We do not accept it, it is unacceptable.

We will fight, we're going to fight the traitors of the Labour Party, and against political activists working for other organizations that support multiculturalism and Islamisation.

Judge Wenche Fliflet Gjelsten: This would all be in place, and when is the right set. This applies to the court handling the request of detention extension of Anders Breivik Behring. It's you?

Breivik: Yes.

Gjelsten: We present here, from the prosecution prosecutor Christian Hatlo and investigator Kenneth Wilberg and defenders, lawyers Geir Lippestad, lawyer Vibeke Hein Bæra, lawyer Isolated Ground and associate Odd Greenland. And we are coordinating aid lawyers. The lawyer Mette Yvonne Larsen, lawyer Siv Hallgren and attorney Frode Elgesem.
And my name is thus Wenche Fliflet Gjelsten, and I will manage the hearing and make a decision. I do not know the circumstances that would warrant disqualification. Are there any remarks?

Breivik: I have a remark to your impartiality. You have been given the mandate of your organization that promotes multiculturalism, so I did not recognize your impartiality.

Gjelsten: Okay.

Gjelsten: What happened in the introduction here, before you were brought in, it was that it was stated that you were exempt from the ban on photographing you. And so when you came in here, it was reported on. It was also announced that during the meeting of detention is illegal to make shooting and recording. So there is one thing, and it is minutes ban, which was submitted for the players before last week because it had been a request for revocation of the minutes of the ban. The court has not received any objections to it repealed, and the minutes of the ban is lifted. Just so you know it.

Then we have your name, that Behring Anders Breivik. The court is aware of your personal information from the past. My question is whether you are familiar with the indictment of 22 July 2011?

Breivik: I am familiar with the charges.

Gjelsten: And then the question is how you set yourself to it, whether you acknowledge guilt or not?

Breivik: I acknowledge the actions, but I do not recognize guilt, and in this connection I wish to explain why I did not acknowledge guilt. So if I can get a minute so I would put very appreciative of it.

Gjelsten: Ok.

Breivik: Is it okay?

Gjelsten: Yes, we hear ... if it is relevant to the detention meeting, so be so good.

Breivik: It is absolutely relevant. It is the explanation. (Cough)

Breivik: The attacks against the government quarter and the Labour Party was preventive attack against traitors who commit, or plan to commit, cultural destruction, of which deconstruction of the Norwegian ethnic group and deconstruction of Norwegian culture. Systematic deconstruction of the Norwegian ethnic group is the same as ethnic cleansing. Traitors in the Labor uses the institution of asylum, family reunification scheme, stay on humanitarian grounds and refugee quota as a tool for the Islamic colonization of Norway.

As a result of this policy, Norway's indigenous people, ethnic Norwegians, being a minority in Oslo in the course of ten years. This is not an allegation, it is a fact.

I am a militant nationalist, a cell commander of the Knights Templar Norway and Europe. I represent the Norwegian resistance movement and the Norwegian Indigenous Peoples and my ancestors have lived in this country for 12,000 years. We in the Norwegian resistance movement is not going to sit still and see that we are made to a minority in their own capital. We are not going to sit and see that we are made to a minority in their own country. We do not accept it, it is unacceptable.

We will fight, we're going to fight the traitors of the Labour Party, and against political activists working for other organizations that support multiculturalism and Islamisation.

(The judge clears his throat).

Breivik: Yes, now it comes. Now comes the conclusion. The attacks on 22 7 was preventive attack, in defense of Norway's indigenous people, ethnic Norwegians. I like a militant nationalist, a cell commander of Knights Templar and the representative of the Norwegian resistance movement, can not admit guilt for the 22 7 because I acted in self-defense on behalf of my people, my culture, my religion, my city and my country. I therefore demand that you release me immediately and hereby wish to propose that the Norwegian Armed Forces nominate me for the War Cross with three swords.

(Gasps and laughter in the audience)

The universal human rights and international law allows for the indigenous peoples ..

Gjelsten: You claim you ...

Breivik: .. that are threatened. Hmm?

Gjelsten: You claiming self-defense? I think it keeps it, huh?

Breivik: I'm done. The court allows the indigenous peoples who are threatened by ethnic and cultural deconstruction, of which ethnic cleansing and cultural Genocide has the right to defend itself militarily.

Gjelsten: That's it?

Breivik: It was.

Gjelsten: This is so that you basically do not have a duty to explain to you, either the police or the courts. Now you have the explanation given here. Are there any questions from the prosecutor to the accused? Are there any questions from defense counsel to accused?

(The prosecutor and the bailee shaking his head)

Police have requested continued detention by you until trial, which is scheduled for 16 April 2012, based on recurrence risk. My question is what you have to say it, if you accept detention or if you oppose you?

Breivik: I do not accept imprisonment, and I demand to be released immediately.

Gjelsten: When I got it to court records. When I give the word to the prosecutor, the justification of the request.

Police Attorney Christian Hatlo: Honourable Court. Basis for the police request for detention this time, the Criminal Procedure Act section 171, subsection cf. the second paragraph. Reasonable grounds for suspicion. There are no changes there. See the review. We refer to his statement to the police, referred to his knowledge. The facts in court today and earlier rulings which I believe is sufficient to justify reasonable grounds for suspicion.

Furthermore, there is recurrence risk for those offenses. Basically, as required strong likelihood of recurrence. That, I believe it is available. One must look to the event is committed. His compendium, called manifest, if unfamiliar with it, so I can show to the doc. and page number. Doc 030 601, page 1071. Where reference is made to, and that he wrote the sooner the actions that he if he gets the opportunity to implement a so-called bonus action for a number of traitors should be liquidated. This he repeated in interviews with the police. 080801, page 12, first paragraph, and 081 601 page 16 fourth paragraph. I do not speak, he talks about the bonus attack escape.And finally, not least important, so please refer to the forensic psychiatric report where the two experts concluded that there is a very high risk for future violence, page 242 In addition, the report submitted to the forensic commission, the extended such, which had significant objections to it. So that's what you can relate to.

Incarceration of the first paragraph, as required in principle that all criminal conditions are met. It is not alleged here. We must assume the report and the Commission's conclusion on mental incapacity. The exception is made for the second paragraph.Then you can captivate if it is likely that there will be raised cause for transfer to forced mental health care, criminal law cf. paragraph 39 It is in this case. Director of Public Prosecutions has informed both the District Attorney and the prosecuting authority of the police that such action will be instituted. Conditions are met. The basic terms of a serious violent crime as well as recurrence risk. So this issue will be raised, and when the condition to the place under the second paragraph.

For the record, as it is mentioned that the alternative, in the event that the court does not find probable that the accused is sane, the alleged detention by the main rule in 171

It is requested detention to trial, ten weeks. Pursuant to Penal Code 185, first paragraph, as is believed to re-examination after four weeks will be irrelevant in this case. Police have completed their recommendations. It will be handed over to the district attorney today, so that the progress observed, and the case will start on schedule 16 april 2012. There is nothing in the case to suggest that imprisonment as requested would be disproportionate. Thank you.

Gjelsten:  And the indictment, when it can be expected?

Hatlo: If you had to stick to this plan, so it is expected to begin late February / early March. There are so closely I can be.

Gjelsten: When is the word to defend.

Attorney Geir Lippestad: Thank you. Revered right honorable counterpart. I would initially like to point out that the request for continued detention shows to 171, first paragraph, third, and that only now in court today ...

Gjelsten: Excuse me. Attorney Lippestad, it is simply 171 number three. It is not specified which part.

Lippestad: Yes, but number three is the first paragraph. There is no number three in the second paragraph. So there is no doubt that it is number three in the first paragraph referred to. And the second paragraph refers to the first day. And it says we are not good prosecution practice.

It is so in that first paragraph is invoked is subsidized, then I will spend some time on it. It is true that there is no doubt that the question of mental incapacity - and it is of course quite clear in this case - it is not possible to people held under the first paragraph. I refer to as Law Gazette 2004 page 8887 and also a fresh decision by the Supreme Court, handed down as late as 27 January 2012, where it clearly states that the uncertainty about the soundness of mind, one can not imprison. Then the other part that is relevant authority. I see now that the prosecution claimed the second paragraph.

In the second paragraph, I have not much more to note than what prosecutors have said. It is true that there is an expert statement. We know that the court has decided that it should issue a new expert declaration. The decision is not final yet and that's where things stand.

Accused has even declared themselves freed, and as his defense counsel, I have not any other task than to covet his release. Thank you.

Gjelsten: Thanks for that. When the court has received what is necessary to pull back and pass judgment later. There will be about half past two. The charges will be communicated to you in prison. And then it will be sent by e-mail to the lawyers, and it will be read out to the press later today. And then the accused is returned.

Breivik: Can I say something?

Gjelsten: It depends on what.

Breivik: I want to comment on the expert report. Will I be allowed to do that?

Gjelsten: Yes.

Breivik: You know, I'm working on an article regarding the expert report, which is completely ridiculous. There are few people who believe ...

Gjelsten: very short ...

Breivik: Yes, but I come back to it.

Gjelsten: Yes, but when we say it that way. Then the accused is returned to prison.

Then the court adjourned.


» » » » [Breivik Report]