|
Keep your off topic discussions out of this thread and show some damn respect! |
On April 16 2012 17:44 marttorn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 17:40 iMAniaC wrote:
Short background notice about Breivik's strategy, that's been in Norwegian media:
Breivik doesn't recognize the court and is going to ask to be acquitted (not guilty). His lawyers are legally bound to co-operate with his wishes, so that's what they're going to ask for. Moreover, (don't know when this is going to happen, but) Breivik's lawyers will have the opportunity to call in various witnesses, including politicians and whatnot (there are going to be dozens). One of them is a man called mullah Krekar, who is a convicted terrorist and fanatical islamist, and Breivik hopes that he will confirm Breivik's world view of the West in constant war with Islam. Mullah Krekar, really? How is he reliable in any way. What on earth, wasn't he just put in jail for threatening Norwegian politicians with death for the second time? Meh, I guess I don't understand all this legal nonsense. edit: Oh god, they're starting with World of Warcraft now. I get the feeling i'm about to be absolutely pissed off. As if there hasn't been enough nonsense about blaming WoW for Breivik's actions since it occurred.
I looked it up a little more thoroughly now and found this article:
Nettavisen writes
Bevistema 13 - Bevisførsel fra forsvarer og bistandsadvokater: Fra 7. til 15. juni vil forsvaret til Anders Behring Breivik belyse drapsmannens ideologiske ståsted for å bevise at han er tilregnelig. Blant vitnene er Peder Are Nøstvold Jensen alias bloggeren «Fjordman». Blant vitnene er en rekke kjente personer som Mulla Krekar, professor Frank Aarebrot, demonstranten Stein Lillevolden, AP-politiker Thorbjørn Berntsen og Vigrid-leder Tore Tvedt.
Source
Shortly summarized in English (with a couple of my comments in square brackets):
"7-15 of June, Breivik's defence will shed light on the killer's ideology to prove that he's sane/accountable. Among the witnesses are the blogger «Fjordman» [quoted in the manifest], Mulla Krekar, professor Frank Aarebrot, the demonstrant Stein Lillevolden, politician Thorbjørn Berntsen, and leader of Vigrid [a nazi organization] Tore Tvedt."
The article is published today, so assume it's up-to-date, although I don't know if Krekar will be able to testify if he's in jail. I agree, by any sensible standard, Krekar isn't reliable in any way, but it seems that part of Breivik's defence is rounding up as many nutcases as possible to prove that the world in his head (i.e. where there is an ongoing war with Islam) is not his individual delusion, but a view shared by many others. He's also using "celebrity witnesses" for maximum attention from the media. I'd guess his #1 goal now is convincing as many others as he can about his own view of the world and making people xenophobic by portraying extremists as "reliable" witnesses.
|
On April 17 2012 00:05 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 18:13 Neeh wrote:
Awh this is hillarious! Never thought I'd hear a rundown of what WoW is in a norwegian courtroom. They even refer to his 'Justicar' title.
I wonder if they would reflect on it if it was Dragonslayer instead..grasping for straws and reading too much into things, really. Well, that Justicar title proves that he's really into PvP. You have to grind thousands of BGs to get that title. Seems like real life too.
Yeah Justicar is pretty hardcore, or used to be at least. Requires hundreds of hours of grinding.
I've actually shown my Justicar title every day since the day I got it I was that proud of myself, feels a little odd showing it now.
Not sure WoW has any relevance at all in this trial though tbh.
|
Those who let in millions of asylum seekers, non-integrated immigrants... of a diametrically opposed culture, who commit rape and murder at a 5-10 time higher rate than the locals also have blood on their hands.
Of course it's done in the name of human rights, just like were the colonization, the wars in the Middle-East etc... so this makes it ok for some people.
I'm not defending the right to murder unarmed teenagers and young adults nor justifying ABB atrocious actions, but I find it strange that in some case they explain the motive of the killer through personal bad experiences, the current state of the society...
and in some others, it's just or almost pure evil.
Or like in this case, they combine the natural evilness with non-pertinent and easy targets such as video games as well...
It's important to understand that Norway is nothing like USA, UK, France.
It didn't colonize anyone, and it was a relatively homogeneous and prosper nations before immigration.
The demographical substitution which took place in some areas, along with the considerable increase in delinquencies and crimes, is a huge chock for a considerable portion of the population.
|
It's important to understand that Norway is nothing like USA, UK, France.
It didn't colonize anyone,
Well, there was that whole Viking thing...
|
Lay judge Thomas Indreb has been deemed legally incompetent. Court's now adjourned because the judge wrote on Facebook last year that he deserved the death penalty. (according to twitter)
|
On April 17 2012 03:49 Ryka wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 00:05 paralleluniverse wrote:On April 16 2012 18:13 Neeh wrote:
Awh this is hillarious! Never thought I'd hear a rundown of what WoW is in a norwegian courtroom. They even refer to his 'Justicar' title.
I wonder if they would reflect on it if it was Dragonslayer instead..grasping for straws and reading too much into things, really. Well, that Justicar title proves that he's really into PvP. You have to grind thousands of BGs to get that title. Seems like real life too. Yeah Justicar is pretty hardcore, or used to be at least. Requires hundreds of hours of grinding. I've actually shown my Justicar title every day since the day I got it I was that proud of myself, feels a little odd showing it now. Not sure WoW has any relevance at all in this trial though tbh.
They find that particular title relevant because Breivik has given himself the same title in real life.
|
Man, sometime modern society is just so complex that it makes dealing with matter at hand quite a difficult job. They should just drag him out somewhere and put a bullet to his head and get it over with.
This man disgust me, 77 souls lost because of this monster and now we are trying to get him a fair trial. I wonder if he have each of his victim a fair trial before shoot them to death.
If I have so magical power, I would kill this man in a heatbeat.
|
On April 17 2012 18:06 Caphe wrote:
Man, sometime modern society is just so complex that it makes dealing with matter at hand quite a difficult job. They should just drag him out somewhere and put a bullet to his head and get it over with.
This man disgust me, 77 souls lost because of this monster and now we are trying to get him a fair trial. I wonder if he have each of his victim a fair trial before shoot them to death.
If I have so magical power, I would kill this man in a heatbeat.
And that's exactly why professional and (as) neutral (as it gets) parties handle justice and convictions.
|
On April 17 2012 18:06 Caphe wrote:
Man, sometime modern society is just so complex that it makes dealing with matter at hand quite a difficult job. They should just drag him out somewhere and put a bullet to his head and get it over with.
This man disgust me, 77 souls lost because of this monster and now we are trying to get him a fair trial. I wonder if he have each of his victim a fair trial before shoot them to death.
If I have so magical power, I would kill this man in a heatbeat.
A fair trial is what makes it justice... it's not you, me or anyone who is judging that guy, but the all collectiv Norway.
What disgust me is that they are saying he was psychotic. It's like a disrespect toward true psychotic, who sometimes happen to kill people for no reason but can't function in society. He, on the other side, prepared a plan for months and months with the sole purpose was to kill more than 50 men.
|
On April 17 2012 16:28 Phenny wrote:
Lay judge Thomas Indreb has been deemed legally incompetent. Court's now adjourned because the judge wrote on Facebook last year that he deserved the death penalty. (according to twitter)
Incomptent is not the right word here, since it is only the fact that his interests in the case makes him unable to form a reasonably objective statement. The norwegian word used is "inhabil" and it has nothing to do with beeing incompotent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incompetent
It's a common misunderstanding i think.
|
On April 17 2012 18:13 Teoman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 16:28 Phenny wrote:
Lay judge Thomas Indreb has been deemed legally incompetent. Court's now adjourned because the judge wrote on Facebook last year that he deserved the death penalty. (according to twitter) Incomptent is not the right word here, since it is only the fact that his interests in the case makes him unable to form a reasonably objective statement. The norwegian word used is "inhabil" and it has nothing to do with beeing incompotent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interesthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IncompetentIt's a common misunderstanding i think.
legally incompetent isn't the same is plainly incompetent.
someone is legally incompetent when they are not legally capable of doing/agreeing to something.
for example if you have a legal marriage you cannot marry someone else, until you divorce that first someone. You are legally incompetent in this case.
so it may be the case that statements of bias a priori make you legally incompetent in norwegian law.
|
Deemed unfit would properly be a better term
|
|
|
On April 17 2012 18:36 Weson wrote:
So they think he's sane?
The first evaluation came back with a ruling for psychosis. The second deemed him legally sane. Both judgements will obviously be viewed in court eventually, but I'd imagine nonpsychotic is what he'll be judged as being.
|
On April 17 2012 18:28 Etherone wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2012 18:13 Teoman wrote:On April 17 2012 16:28 Phenny wrote:
Lay judge Thomas Indreb has been deemed legally incompetent. Court's now adjourned because the judge wrote on Facebook last year that he deserved the death penalty. (according to twitter) Incomptent is not the right word here, since it is only the fact that his interests in the case makes him unable to form a reasonably objective statement. The norwegian word used is "inhabil" and it has nothing to do with beeing incompotent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interesthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IncompetentIt's a common misunderstanding i think. legally incompetent isn't the same is plainly incompetent. someone is legally incompetent when they are not legally capable of doing/agreeing to something. for example if you have a legal marriage you cannot marry someone else, until you divorce that first someone. You are legally incompetent in this case. so it may be the case that statements of bias a priori make you legally incompetent in norwegian law.
So it may be a double, language misunderstanding then :D
I agree fully, but i think i just misunderstood the first guy.
The point i meant was that "inhabil" has no negative implications at all. It's just based on that judges must have a neutral background to be able to decide in a particullar case
The reason i reacted was that "inhabil" is often times misunderstood as to mean something negative even by most norwegians.
that is all i wanted to clear up, as i read something into the first guy's post.
|
I find it ridiculous there's even a trial for someone who killed 50+ relatively young people who did not commit crimes,rapes and other things. It's not that he killed them, he confessed and he's proud of it and it was not a state of war nor did they do any harm to him . He should be tortured for a week then given lethal injection with no trial whatsoever so other scumbags like him don't dare to think they could get away with it and get publicity and write books.
I mean, unless it's proven that those people he killed were part of a satanic cult and they sacrifice newborns every full moon or something, he should not get a trial , he doesn't deserve justice because there is no justice to be done to him. The whole "trial, lawyers, defense strategy, interviews" is just ridiculous and makes me think if the judges and authorities are not more psychotic than him.
Also the fact that wether he recognize the trial or not has a weight in all this. It's like i break into a store ,steal whatever i want then the alarm goes on and I complain to the police that the store should not have alarms because they scared me and i could have had a heartache because of my heart condition. What the...?
|
On April 17 2012 19:11 terranu1 wrote:
I find it ridiculous there's even a trial for someone who killed 50+ relatively young people who did not commit crimes,rapes and other things. It's not that he killed them, he confessed and he's proud of it and it was not a state of war nor did they do any harm to him . He should be tortured for a week then given lethal injection with no trial whatsoever so other scumbags like him don't dare to think they could get away with it and get publicity and write books.
I mean, unless it's proven that those people he killed were part of a satanic cult and they sacrifice newborns every full moon or something, he should not get a trial , he doesn't deserve justice because there is no justice to be done to him. The whole "trial, lawyers, defense strategy, interviews" is just ridiculous and makes me think if the judges and authorities are not more psychotic than him.
Also the fact that wether he recognize the trial or not has a weight in all this. It's like i break into a store ,steal whatever i want then the alarm goes on and I complain to the police that the store should not have alarms because they scared me and i could have had a heartache because of my heart condition. What the...?
So you mean to break the law in certain cases is okay? Who decides where the boundry between when it is okay to break the law and when it is not? The law applies to everyone.
|
common sense should decide for all of us. It is clear he is guilty and insane and did it for his own pleasure and it's not right for us citizens.?
Ever lost a close person or relative in the hands of a merciless rapist, killer and then saw him at trial with all those fancy lawers to decide wether he is sane or no and what penalty he should get or maybe he should not get at all and go into asylum while he clearly enjoys the trial and it's what he wanted, attention ? and the trial is delayed like forever because all that media and publicity he gains like he is some kind of celebrity.
|
I wish that this trial would be more closed off from the media. Breivik is using all the media attention to promote his story, which is bad. Keep the trial behind closed doors, have a press conference when it's done and the sentence has been determined. Don't give this guy any more attention, because that would be playing into his hand.
|
On April 17 2012 19:40 terranu1 wrote:
common sense should decide for all of us. It is clear he is guilty and insane and did it for his own pleasure and it's not right for us citizens.?
Ever lost a close person or relative in the hands of a merciless rapist, killer and then saw him at trial with all those fancy lawers to decide wether he is sane or no and what penalty he should get or maybe he should not get at all and go into asylum while he clearly enjoys the trial and it's what he wanted, attention ? and the trial is delayed like forever because all that media and publicity he gains like he is some kind of celebrity.
You still didn't address the question the poster above you. Common sense is too vague to draw a boundary, as everyone version of common sense is different, and it can fail in timed.
What you're thinking isn't justice but is vengeance, you're not better if you think that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
