ABB moved to tears at first day of trial

arildno

For his victims? Nope. He remained calm, impassive during the 30 minutes bare recount of the horrific damage he made (seeming rather proud of himself when he saw pictures of himself right after planting the bomb, and right after his arrest at Utøya).

but, when his 12 minutes long propaganda film was played off, where he regards HIMSELF as a victim, he was seen wiping tears from his eyes...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17724535

In Norwegian mythology, the draugr was just about the nastiest creature around, a rotting corpse sailing in a leaky boat, portending yet another death of fishermen.

now, ABB ups the ante..

lisab

Disgusting. It's too easy to just say he's crazy. Evil is so hard to fathom.

I'm hoping some deeper insight will come of this whole ordeal.

Ryan_m_b

Reading through today's BBC report is full of what you would expect. He pleads not guilty as he doesn't think what he did was a crime, he doesn't recognise the authority of the courts because they abide by multi-cultural policies, he claims self-defence as a justification for what he has done...

It would be a hard task being his defence team and having to legally defend such a person.

arildno

His main attorney, Geir Lippestad, is himself involved in his local political faction of the Labour Party (in the sub-urbia of Oslo known as Nordstrand).
Most likely, he personally knew some of the victims, but he has handled this case very professionally (for example, by NOT revealing whether he personally knew some of the victims or not, that would be out of line relative to his task as defence councel).

I was also impressed by public prosecutor Inga Bejer Engh, who had the thankless job to read up the bare facts of ABBS manifold crimes, knowing within herself that each victim represents an immeasurable tragedy.
She managed to keep the correct, professional attitude we expect in a prosecutor, and that alone is no small feat in a case like this.

lisab

According to this article in The Economist:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsb.../breivik-court
Interesting idea...there are frequently stories on news sites that I wish I could "opt out" of.

lmoh

This man is obviously delusional, and from my impression of him, a very narcissistic individual. I bet he sees himself as some lone revolutionary fighting for his beliefs, who is unmoved by any remorse for his actions and always sticks to what is "right", so in no way am I suprised that he chooses to act this way. He cares deeply about his image, probably imagining that in time he will eventually be seen as being some martyr, a leader of some future revolution, or a hero later on in history, probably even years after he is gone.

Its suprising that he is even given a case at all in my opinion, and being treated the way he is in court. But that speaks more to the Court itself though.

turbo

Reports in US media quote the monster as saying that he "would do it again". No remorse.

Ryan_m_b

Looks like he wants to be made a martyr http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17752189

Letting him rot in jail as the years go by would be far better than giving him the satisfaction of a quick ending and a final point in history. By the last point I mean that if he was to live on for years and years then his story will be diluted by his punishment and anything that happens in future rather than a quick thing.

turbo

From your bbc link: "If Breivik is judged sane and found guilty of murder, he faces a maximum of 21 years in jail, although that can be extended if he is deemed a threat to the public."

After Breivik claimed that he would do it all over again, isn't that ample evidence to warrant extending his sentence? If not, perhaps the judges' panel can declare him insane and institutionalize him indefinitely. Serving one concurrent 21-year sentence for all those murders is a pathetic "punishment" IMO. I can see Norway's desire to limit lengthy sentences, but perhaps there should be an option for consecutive sentences...

arildno

If he should be judged to involuntary confinement (due to perceived present danger to society) that confinement status is not something that can be imposed at the beginning of the confinement term, but will, after the first 10 year stint, be reevaluated every 5 years or so. Thus, it is judicially irrelevant that he may be deemed a danger NOW; 20 years from now, one might have to, sadly, conclude differently
.
If his "psychosis" is proved to have evaporated, he must be set free, or, by an unused paragraph, get involuntary confinement if his psychosis is abated, but he is still regarded as a danger to society.

Breivik himself said in court today that 21 years is a pathetic punishment, and he would have more respect for the imposition of death penalty.
In that, I fully agree with Mr. Breivik.

Evo

Sick person.

http://news.yahoo.com/court-shock-no...--finance.html

turbo

Terrifying and sick. My youngest grand-nephew is named Anders, a traditional name handed from generation to generation in his father's family. I wonder if he will continue to bear that name? ABB might do to "Anders" as Hitler did to "Adolph".

TheMadMonk

I know he has admitted it all in full but remember he hasn't even been convicted yet.

I also think judges declaring people insane to achieve the desired sentence is a dangerous thing to advocate, everything should be done by the book so there is no chance of him being able to appeal.

From what I understand (my knowledge of the Norwegian legal system is limited) he could end up serving far longer than twenty one years.

arildno

As for "Anders", it is a fairly common name (around 20.000 Norweeds by last count).

In contrast to the name "Vidkun" that was never common, and inextricably, linked to Mr. Quisling, has only 14 name sakes today.

It will be tougher in other countries than Scandinavia, though, since there "Anders" will be rare.
I hope your grand nephew will keep a good name (prominent in my own family as well, actually).

Evo

It was also reported that he said he had wanted to kill more people.

Hobin

Why would it be better? We're not barbarians.

lmoh

Sure it may be cruel in a sense, but whats so barbaric about it? In fact, its quite the other way around.