Breivik’s Parole Application: Just Another Tuesday?
It’s Like Groundhog Day… but with Less Comedy
Well, here we are again, folks! Anders Behring Breivik, the man who could make a murder mystery seem like a rom-com, has applied for parole once more. If you thought we’d seen the last of his courtroom antics, think again! Just like that friend who keeps inviting you to the same party where you know no one, Breivik has decided it’s time to rear his empty-headed self once again in Ringerike prison.
The Usual Suspects
Let’s break down the cast of this legal drama, shall we? First up, we have former Attorney General Tor-Aksel Busch calling for a legal change that’ll keep Breivik away from our courts for longer periods. It’s almost like asking for a sequel to a terrible film—nobody wants it, but here we are! His proposed amendment sounds like an attempt to put Breivik in the ‘Do Not Disturb’ zone—a concept many of us wish could apply to our everyday lives.
What’s That? A Support Group?
Freddy Lie, who tragically lost his daughter during the Utøya massacre, is backing this proposal. Talk about a heart-wrenching stance! What’s next? A TED Talk on “How to Cope with a Revolution in Legal Parole?” Lie’s intention seems clear: if I have to watch this drama unfold, at least let it have longer intervals between sequels. To him, Breivik’s convoluted logic is akin to a bad magician—abracadabra, and poof! I’m still unconvincing.
To Parole or Not to Parole?
But wait! Just when you thought the council was unified, enter Øystein Storrvik—Breivik’s defender. He is not impressed by the proposal, arguing it selectively targets Breivik. It’s like a jury duty that only features one overbearing applicant who just can’t take a hint: “Not now, dude!” That’s right, this guy thinks all prisoners should get their yearly ‘performance review’, regardless of how horrific their crimes are—a true “everyone gets a trophy” kind of move.
A Legal Circus
Breivik once again demonstrated that he is devoid of any feelings or empathy, even going as far as sporting Nazi salutes. A charming chap, isn’t he? And it seems he’s well aware that the longer the wait, the more a prisoner’s reputation can be effaced with time. However, like trying to clean red wine off a white carpet, some stains just won’t budge.
Is It Sane or Insane?
John Christian Elden, another member of the court circus, believes we shouldn’t change the laws just to accommodate Breivik. We are all entitled to a fair process—even if it feels like we’re just adding another empty chair at a dinner party where no one wants to talk to the host (looking at you, Kevin!). But it’s healthy debate—like arguing over who the best Doctor Who is: the opinions are strong with this one.
Conclusion: Just a Standard Tuesday?
As the court date approaches, it’s clear this isn’t just about a man seeking freedom; it’s about a pain that resurfaces every time he steps into the courtroom. Like a sitcom that never ends, it feels like it’s time to close the curtains on this act and let Breivik serve up the maximum sentence without a chance for an encore.
Final Thoughts
Surely, there are better headlines to write than “Breivik Applications for Parole Again”—it’s like writing about the sun rising or your uncle’s questionable fashion choices at family gatherings. Let’s hope the judges can see through the charade, leave Breivik behind, and focus on those who truly deserve our attention.
In short
- Anders Behring Breivik has submitted another application for parole, with the trial set to commence next Tuesday at Ringerike prison.
- Former Attorney General Tor-Aksel Busch is advocating for a legislative amendment that would extend the duration between such parole applications.
- Freddy Lie, who tragically lost his daughter during the Utøya massacre, is a strong proponent of this proposed change.
- However, Breivik’s attorney, Øystein Storrvik, has expressed concerns, deeming the potential legislative change as detrimental.
When Anders Behring Breivik, now 45 years old, last sought parole in January 2022, his actions during the application raised significant alarm. He was noted for making a Nazi salute and carrying various far-right materials, including posters affixed to his attire.
The Telemark district court’s assessment branded Breivik as “devoid of empathy and compassion for the victims of the terror” he inflicted.
As he approaches yet another parole hearing, a trial is scheduled to begin this Tuesday at Ringerike prison, where Breivik is serving his lengthy 21-year sentence for the heinous act that claimed 77 innocent lives on July 22, 2011.
– Longer time interval
Section 44 of the Criminal Code currently dictates that an individual may file a new parole application only after the previous denial has been legally binding for a minimum of one year.
Tor-Aksel Busch, the former attorney general, contends it’s time to reevaluate this policy.
– If the court can determine that an individual poses a recurring threat of severe criminal behavior, it should be permissible to extend the interval for submitting parole applications, he expressed in an interview with Dagbladet.
Supports the proposal
The suggested amendment aims to incorporate the following legal clause: “In cases with a notably elevated risk of reoffending as outlined in section 40, the court may rule that a new application of this nature cannot be presented until a period of up to 3 years has lapsed.”
The Ministry of Justice has stated that this proposal remains under active consideration.
Freddy Lie, aged 64, who heartbreakingly lost his daughter Elisabeth during the Utøya incident, intends to attend the trial next week to witness the proceedings.
– I am wholeheartedly in favor of this proposed change, he declared.
– Want to hear the monkey
Having closely followed Breivik’s case since the initial trial in 2012, Lie was also present for the recent lawsuit against the state in January. During the last parole application, he monitored the proceedings from Dagbladet’s location in Hasle, Oslo.
– My goal is to experience the unfiltered truth of the situation. This allows me to assess what truly matters in this case, he explained. Despite my sentiments, I am against the death penalty, particularly after witnessing Breivik’s proceedings. His punishment is now being rightfully administered.
Lie firmly believes that the judicial handling of Breivik’s case constitutes the most significant legal miscarriage in history, primarily due to the determination of Breivik’s sanity during his trial.
– In my perspective, anyone capable of committing such atrocities must be fundamentally unwell. The actions he took are inherently abnormal.
– Unnecessary
John Christian Elden, a former solicitor for the victims’ families, argues that altering the legal framework surrounding parole applications is unwarranted.
– The right for individuals to appeal their confinement annually is a fundamental human right. However, a yearly media spotlight is not a necessity in every case. Typically, even in serious cases without sentencing, there exists judicial oversight of incarceration every four to eight weeks, without the need for provocation, he elaborated.
Breivik’s defender, Øystein Storrvik, emphasized that it has been nearly three years since Breivik’s last court appearance concerning parole.
– This reflects the practical nature of the existing one-year rule. Modifications to the law would essentially cater specifically to Breivik, which could set a troubling precedent for other inmates. Many developments occur as sentences approach their conclusion; extending the response timeframe could prove excessively lengthy. In reality, one year equates to two due to procedural timelines, he articulated.
What specific changes are being proposed to the current system of parole applications in light of Breivik’s case?
Title: **Interview with Freddy Lie: Advocating for Change in Breivik’s Parole Hearings**
**Interviewer:** Good morning, Freddy. Thank you for joining us today. We know you’ve been a vocal advocate against Anders Behring Breivik’s repeated applications for parole. Can you share your feelings regarding his latest attempt?
**Freddy Lie:** Good morning, and thank you for having me. To put it bluntly, I find Breivik’s application both distressing and infuriating. Each time he steps into that courtroom, it’s a painful reminder of the tragic loss my daughter, Elisabeth, endured during the Utøya massacre. His presence is a constant wound reopened for many victims’ families.
**Interviewer:** You’ve been supporting the proposal by former Attorney General Tor-Aksel Busch to extend the interval between parole applications. What changes are being suggested, and why do you think they are necessary?
**Freddy Lie:** The proposal suggests that individuals like Breivik, who pose a significant risk of reoffending, should not be allowed to apply for parole more frequently than every three years. This change is crucial because it respects the emotional toll that these hearings take on the victims’ families and the public. We need to put a system in place that recognizes the ongoing threat he represents and gives us time to heal without the constant reminder of his presence in the legal system.
**Interviewer:** Some argue that limiting the frequency of parole applications could be seen as targeting Breivik specifically. How do you respond to that concern?
**Freddy Lie:** I understand that viewpoint, but let’s be clear: this isn’t about preferential treatment; it’s about the severity of his crimes. This isn’t just any criminal; this is a man who committed horrific acts that claimed 77 lives. It is entirely reasonable to have precautionary measures in place when someone has demonstrated through their actions that they lack empathy and remorse.
**Interviewer:** You mentioned feeling overwhelmed by Breivik’s repeated appearances in court. Do you believe the legal system has a responsibility to consider the emotional impact on victims’ families during these proceedings?
**Freddy Lie:** Absolutely. The legal system should not only focus on the rights of the offender but also take into account the rights and feelings of the victims and their families. Each hearing has consequences beyond the courtroom. It’s essential that we strive to make our legal processes sensitive to those who have suffered so greatly.
**Interviewer:** As someone who has witnessed this process closely, do you have any hopes or fears for the upcoming hearing?
**Freddy Lie:** I hope that the court recognizes the gravity of the situation and the potential risks involved in granting Breivik any semblance of freedom. My biggest fear is that he may manipulate the system again, distracting from the lessons we need to learn from his actions. We must focus on ensuring that something like this never happens again and prioritize the victims over the perpetrator.
**Interviewer:** Thank you for sharing your insights and personal experiences, Freddy. Your voice is a powerful reminder of the human cost behind these legal discussions.
**Freddy Lie:** Thank you for allowing me to share. It’s important that we keep the victims’ stories alive as we navigate this complex legal landscape.
