PCC: Press Comp. Comm: Accuracy Complaint: New Statesman: Grotesque Manipulations of Anders Breivik
[1] Inacuraccy of Mr. Breivik as ‘the man who is truly guilty’ (violation of presumption of innocence); [II] Mr. Breivik’s StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Circus was not a Fair Trial
Andrea Muhrrteyn | Norway v. Breivik | 23 August 2012
Complaint submitted to Press Complaints Commission (PCC) against New Statesman: Åsne Seierstad: Article: The grotesque manipulations of Anders Breivik; Violation of Editors Code: 1. Accuracy.
This complaint relates to the following statements made by Ms. Seierstad in her article: The grotesque manipulations of Anders Breivik:
--------
So, how do we handle the man who is truly guilty? Are we prepared to punish the culprit in keeping with the standards of his crime?
[..]
In the letters, Breivik explained how he plans to keep fighting against the values of Norwegian society. Those same values that gave him a fair trial, lax treatment in prison and even the right to keep spreading his message.
--------
If truth be told, there is something Mr. Breivik fears way more than an insanity verdict; that an EcoFeminist’s efforts on behalf of his right to a free and fair trial, will eventually be successful.
PCC: Press Comp. Comm: Accuracy Complaint: New Statesman: Grotesque Manipulations of Anders Breivik
[1] Inacuraccy of Mr. Breivik as ‘the man who is truly guilty’ (violation of presumption of innocence); [II] Mr. Breivik’s StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Circus was not a Fair Trial
Complaint submitted to Press Complaints Commission (PCC) against New Statesman: Åsne Seierstad: Article: The grotesque manipulations of Anders Breivik; Violation of Editors Code: 1. Accuracy.
This complaint relates to the following statements made by Ms. Seierstad in her article: The grotesque manipulations of Anders Breivik:
--------
So, how do we handle the man who is truly guilty? Are we prepared to punish the culprit in keeping with the standards of his crime?
[..]
In the letters, Breivik explained how he plans to keep fighting against the values of Norwegian society. Those same values that gave him a fair trial, lax treatment in prison and even the right to keep spreading his message.
--------
Overview of Complaint:
[1] Inacuraccy of Mr. Breivik as ‘the man who is truly guilty’
Only persons who are (A) totally ignorant of objectively applying the principles of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ in accordance to rules of evidence and due process; and/or (B) endorse the denial of the principles of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ in accordance to rules of evidence and due process to Mr. Breivik; could imply that Breivik is truly guilty, when he has not been found guilty in a court of law.
* Oslo Court: Breivik Defence of Necessity:
* The Necessity Defence
* Prosecutor Engh and Holden ‘Refuse to touch Breivik’s Principle of Necessity’:
* Onus of Proof: Norwegian State or Breivik to Prove Necessity?
* Common Law Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing:
* Civil Disobedience Political Necessity Defence Cases Resulting in Innocence Verdicts or Severe Mitigation of Sentencing:
* Request to Lippestad Attorneys: Request for Clarification regarding Defence Counsel’s focus on ‘sane/safety’ issue, while seemingly ignoring the ‘innocence/guilt’ issue, thereby denying Breivik’s right to Impartial trial to enquire into the evidence for and against his Necessity Defence.
[II] Mr. Breivik’s StaliNorsk Political Psychiatry Circus was not a Fair Trial
* Prosecutor Engh and Holden ‘Refuse to touch Breivik’s Principle of Necessity’
* Massive Censorship of Corruption in Norway v. Breivik Trial: (A) Bar Association Complaints, (B) Secretariat for the Supervisory Committee for Judges Complaints, (C) Environmental Appeals Board: Media Censorship Complaints.
* Norway Media's Censorship of PFU 'Breivik Guilty Complaint' Against News in English: Nina Berglund.
Please find full details of complaint in attached PDF.
PS: Note to New Statesman:
Ms. Seierstad also writes:
"There is one thing that Breivik fears: that he will be judged insane. This would take away his aura of being an ideologue, a political prisoner. He would then just be a nobody again. Most of the surviving victims see the harshest punishment for him as isolation. They hope that someone will take away his computer, restrict his letter-writing and leave him alone in his cell with his thoughts and his guilt."
If truth be told, there is something Mr. Breivik fears way more than an insanity verdict; that an EcoFeminist’s efforts on behalf of his right to a free and fair trial, will eventually be successful.
A verdict of insanity will only reinforce his argument about the corrupt Norwegian state, which will enable his Political Psychiatry martyrdom. A retrial, focussed on the objective and subjective evidence for his alleged act of ‘necessity’; that occurs as a result of the activist efforts of an Honourable Rule of Law EcoFeminist, utterly destroys his argument that all Feminist’s endorse (i) right wing censorship, (ii) the feminization of men, and (iii) that women have no honour, etc. The last thing Mr. Breivik wants is an HONOURABLE ENEMY ECOFEMINIST fighting for his right to a free and fair trial. It is his worst nightmare.
» » » » [PCC - New Statesman Complaint (PDF)]
No comments:
Post a Comment