Posts Tagged ‘Norwegian blogosphere’
The Oslo District Court (Tingrett) announced yesterday that it has requested psychiatrists, Agnar Aspaas and Terje Tørrisen, to conduct a new psychiatric evaluation of Anders Behring Breivik. This is a highly unusual decision for the court to make since the Court Medical Commission, which is responsible for quality checking all court-requested psychiatric reports, approved the original report unanimously without any comments. However, the Oslo District Court considers that, following the substantial critique of the conclusion of the inititial report by many psychiatric professionals, and in light of the severity and special character of the case, further inquiry into the question regarding Brevik’s legal accountability is justified.
The new psychiatrists have a different mandate than those writing the initial report. Aspaas og Tørrisen have been asked by the court to investigate, among other things, alternative physical or psychological conditions that may explain Behring Breivik’s actions, and to consider the connection between his manifesto and his actions. These are the two elements lacking in the intial report that have received the most criticism over the last few weeks.
These should consider Breivik again
Agnar Aspaas and Terje Tørrisen are appointed by the Oslo District Court to conduct a new forensic psychiatric assessment of the terrorist accused Anders Behring Breivik.
The illuminated Judge Wenche Arntzen at a press conference in the District Court at 13.00.
“The court thinks the case very special nature means that expertise issue has to be examined further,” said Arntzen.
She and associate judge Arne Lyng has noted the criticism of the report is reproduced in the media, drawing specifically states that those who have studied Breivik in Ila prison believes he is not psychotic.
“These circumstances suggest to let independent experts conduct a new investigation of the accused’s sanity based on the total evidence,” according to their justification….
Original article: Disse skal vurdere Breivik på nytt
Breivik’s lawyer, Geir Lippestad, said to Aftenposten that Breivik is not disappointed about the question of his accountability being discussed, but that he does not wish to speak to the new pscyhiatrists.
Another one of his lawyers, Tord Jordet, says Behring Brevik believes the appointed psychiatrists lack understanding of the political analysis required to evaluate whether someone accused of an act of terror is suffering from delusions. Breivik has stated that he believes that 80% of the first report was based on lies and twisting of his words; therefore, he does not wish to speak to the newly appointed psychiatrists, Jordet says.
According to Aftenposten, Breivik has previously expressed that he does not have confidence in the court system. Behring Breivik has asked his lawyers to look into possible conflicts of interest of the two newly appointed psychiatrists, and the possibility of Breivik appealing the new court appointments is being considered by the defense team.
Breivik will not talk to the two new experts
Anders Behring Breivik believes the new psychiatric experts not qualified to evaluate him.
It informs his defenders Geir Lippe Location and Tord Jordet after Friday afternoon visited his client in Ila prison to discuss how to deal with the two newly appointed experts.
“He says he does not want to talk to them.” He believes that the psychiatric expert does not have the academic prerequisites for assessing an accused in a terror case, and that it requires knowledge of policy analysis to assess whether he has delusions,” says defender Tord Jordet to Aftenposten.no after the roughly hour-long meeting with Behring Breivik Friday afternoon.
“He noted that 80 percent of the initial report is based on lies and distortions, and he has no desire to talk with the new experts,” say Jordet….
Original article: Breivik vil ikke snakke med de to nye sakkyndige
The Norwegian newspaper, Verdens Gang (VG), has published the first psychiatric report produced by the court-appointed psychiatrists, who concluded that Breivik suffers from paranoid schizophrenia and psychosis, as well as another psychiatric report initiated by Ila prison which said that Breivik is not psychotic:
Les de psykiatriske rapportene om Breivik (in Norwegian)
From a recent commentary by Fjordman posted at Gates of Vienna:
[T]he police investigation has revealed that ABB [Anders Behring Breivik] used many different email accounts and nicknames and left comments on dozens of very different websites, in addition to being extremely active in online games such as World of Warcraft, where he lived in a virtual reality of heroic warfare. Interestingly enough, that apparently includes the online discussion forums of VG and Aftenposten, by far Norway’s two largest newspapers. For some reason, though, they have been suspiciously quiet about what he actually wrote there.
Aftenposten didn’t just temporarily shut down their online debates following the terror attacks, as many Norwegian papers did at that time, but after the identity of the terrorist became known took the drastic step of deleting their entire discussion forum and removing it from the Internet on a permanent basis. This is such a radical move that it resembles panic. It leaves an outside observer wondering: What exactly are they hiding?
VG didn’t remove their own debate forum, but they haven’t said a word about what Breivik wrote there, either. Perhaps they might as well have written that “While he was working on his gruesome terror plan, Anders Behring Breivik repeatedly posted angry comments on VGDebatt….”
[T]hese newspapers and the press in general are always the first to call for “full openness” from everybody else. What happened to practicing what you preach?
I hereby call on editor-in-chief Hilde Haugsgjerd of Aftenposten as well as editor-in-chief Torry Pedersen of VG to follow the example set by the website Document.no and publish all comments Anders Behring Breivik made in the online discussion forums of their own newspapers.
The public has a right to know. If these newspapers refuse to do this, they and the Schibsted media conglomerate, which owns both of them, should tell the public exactly why they refuse to demand from themselves what they demand from everybody else.
At Gates of Vienna, well-known Norwegian blogger, Fjordman, responds in an “open letter” to Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg’s New Year’s speech.
An Open Letter to Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg
January 02, 2012
Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg heads a three-party left-wing coalition government. In his prestigious New Year’s speech that was delivered on national TV over several channels on January 1, 2012, the prime minister said many fine things. He also stated the following:
“The Internet at its worst is when totalitarian seducers are allowed to remain unchallenged in dark corners of the Net. We have to face this with resolve. We shall drive them out with the light of knowledge. Voicing opposition to extremism is taking responsibility for the future….”
I am not sure if I understand what he refers to when he speaks of the supposed “dark corners of the Internet”. As Fjordman, before my name became publicly known, I used to say that I had a hidden identity, but not a hidden agenda. Anybody with access to a search engine, which means billions of people worldwide, can easily find out what I think about issues from German wheat beers to astrophysics and superstring theory to sharia law. My essays are brightly-lit, and they are spread across the Internet on different websites. They are not hidden away.
If people believe we have dark and dangerous opinions, then they are welcome to challenge these at Gates of Vienna or the other nasty “Islamophobic” websites where I publish on a regular basis.
At Document.no, political commentator Christian Skaug responds to Prime Minister and Labor Party leader Jens Stoltenberg’s New Year’s speech.
Jens Stoltenberg … did not come unexpectedly into the concept of freedom of responsibility in his New Year speech last night. Here he urged people to discuss extremist views on the web:
“Internet at its worst is when totalitarian deceivers will speak unchallenged in the dark corners of the net. We need to meet with resistance. We will drive them out with the light of knowledge. Taking out against extremism is to take responsibility for the future. I encourage everyone to become good digital neighbors. Not to censor opinions or stifle debate. We must accept the unpleasant. What irritate, provoke and even shock. But – we should catch up. We will respond. It is to show freedom’s responsibility to say, ‘No, you’re wrong.’ We do it during lunch at work. Now is the time to also do it online….”
It is not necessary to spend so much effort to find good arguments for why people should not lend an ear to the British National Party or the like. One should ask why a politically relevant number of people doing it despite the obvious good reasons not to. It is a far more difficult exercise, because it will expose how even fail. In order to fashion the appropriate use of neologisms, it shows how to not have to listen responsibility.
Original post: Statsministeren om ytringsansvar — hva med å lytte?