- #1
- 10,123
- 137
Anders (not the monster) became only 18.
As he and two friends tried two hide from the shooter they heard, they tried to secure a place on a mountain ledge, but Anders slipped and fell 10 meters onto the stony shore.
He was killed by that accident.
Håkon became only 17.
Håkon was not a very good swimmer, and in addition, he was recovering from kissers' disease, i.e, mono-nucleosis. However, finding his situation desperate, he dared the jump into the lake, but drowned.
That Anders Breivik clearly is guilty of:
1) Murderous attempt on the boys' lives
2) Inciting fear into these boys so that their own actions lead them into fatal accidents
is judicially fairly clear.
But, is this sufficient grounds to nail pre-meditated homicide of these two boys onto Breivik?
Personally, I'm a bit unsure, but hope that the discussion (and not least the trial) WILL find him guilty of having murdered those two (along with an awful lot of others)
As he and two friends tried two hide from the shooter they heard, they tried to secure a place on a mountain ledge, but Anders slipped and fell 10 meters onto the stony shore.
He was killed by that accident.
Håkon became only 17.
Håkon was not a very good swimmer, and in addition, he was recovering from kissers' disease, i.e, mono-nucleosis. However, finding his situation desperate, he dared the jump into the lake, but drowned.
That Anders Breivik clearly is guilty of:
1) Murderous attempt on the boys' lives
2) Inciting fear into these boys so that their own actions lead them into fatal accidents
is judicially fairly clear.
But, is this sufficient grounds to nail pre-meditated homicide of these two boys onto Breivik?
Personally, I'm a bit unsure, but hope that the discussion (and not least the trial) WILL find him guilty of having murdered those two (along with an awful lot of others)