Skip to comments.Court finds Norwegian mass killer Breivik sane
Posted on 08/24/2012 1:51:54 AM PDT by marthemaria
A Norwegian court found Anders Behring Breivik sane on Friday and gave him a maximum jail term for murdering 77 people in a shooting and bombing last year, offering closure to a Nordic nation devastated by its worst attack since World War Two.
Breivik, who has admitted blowing up the Oslo government headquarters with a fertilizer bomb, killing eight, before gunning down 69 at the ruling party's summer youth camp, was sentenced to 21 years in prison, the maximum penalty in Norway.
But officials can prevent his release indefinitely and are expected to do so if the anti-Muslim right-winger still poses a threat. Breivik had rejected prosecutors' arguments that he was mad, and had said he would appeal if he were ruled insane.
"In a unanimous decision ... the court sentences the defendant to 21 years of preventive detention," said judge Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, dismissing the prosecutor's call for a verdict that would have labeled Breivik insane and have confined him indefinitely to psychiatric care.
Breivik, 33, will be kept in isolation inside Ila Prison on the outskirts of Oslo inside relatively spacious quarters that include a separate exercise room, a computer and a television.
Criminal guilt was never an issue as Breivik acknowledged and described in horrific detail his murders.
Breivik has described an insane verdict as "a fate worse than death". Were he to have been found insane and decided to appeal, the entire trial would have had to be repeated.
Breivik justified his killing spree arguing that the center-left Labour party is deliberately destroying the nation by encouraging Muslim immigration.
Although his victims were mostly teenagers, with some as young as 14, he rejected being called a child murderer, arguing that his victims were brainwashed "cultural Marxists" whose political activism would adulterate pure Norwegian blood.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Plus a bed, three squares a day, healthcare, no bills to pay....hmmm.
Better than a not insane verdict though. If he were deemed insane every 3 year there would be a hearing were psychiatrists would be able to say if he was sane enough to be released.Our criminal justice system is just so naive.
I meant sane verdict is better than and insane one.
Wow, murder 77, be treated like a king. Awesome.
Just how weird the whole world has become: to give a title to this mass killer: “...an anti-moslim right winger....”
For the press to give out titles like this does not make it so!
Even the Bible says: “Thou hast a name that liveth, but thou art dead.” (Revelation 3:1c)
He writes letters to his “followers” .He got fans of course. The socialists have always wanted this humane criminal system and now they are meeting them self's in the door. Lots of people are outraged over his cushy lifestyle.
No question he was sane, sane but evil.
Another take on this from a conservative website that even
Breivik posted on.:
The court found Anders Behring Breivik sane, and sentenced him to custody for 21 years. In a way they tried to square the circle.
There was public clamor for him to be found sane and accountable for his actions, while at the same time he showed erratic behavior in court that lent credence to the first psychiatric report, that found him insane.
Confinement for 21 years was the prison-version of compulsory psychiatric treatment: it is also the only way that he can be kept behind bars for the rest of his life, within the present law.
But in order to reach such a verdict the court has accepted a set of premises that are both judicially and politically contentious.
The court rationalizes Breiviks ideology, whilst the first psychiatrists found them to be expressions of his extreme fantasies of violence: this explains how Breivik could walk around calmly and murder young people, and he repeated in court that he was sorry he didnt kill more.
The other factor the court had to disregard was the fact that the investigation has found no trace of Knights Templar, the new order that Breivik alleged was European in scale.
The verdict accepts Breiviks ideology as rational, and then goes on to say that he is part of an antimuslim reaction in the West, and mentions explicitly 9/11 and the cartoon-crisis in Denmark as eliciting such a reaction. A part of this reaction has spawned conspiracy theories, and one of them is the Eurabia-theory, the belief that European elites are working on a secret plan to islamize Europe. Thus the court links Bat Ye0r to Anders Behring Breivik. It is a dubious logic.
The verdict mentions that several witnesses have testified to the existence of such a milieu. The courts chairwoman, Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, mentioned Lars Gule, Øyvind Strømmen, Matthias Gardell, Brynjar Lia, and other witnesses who have testified about the growth and existence of such milieus. It is also a dubious premise.
The court disregards what is an obvious fact: Gule, Strømmen and Gardell har hardline activists who regard the right in general as political adversaries. 22/7 was for them a pretext to smear all political opponents with the accusation of complicity. It is astonishing and worrying that the court has swallowed this bait without reservation.
Whilst much of Norwegian media are triumphant that the court found Breivik accountable, and calls it a victory for a common sense of justice, there is reason for concern: the verdict might not be the closure one hopes for, but a source of continuous political strife. The verdict might be a political instrument to clobber the right, but as long as one does not draw a distinction between legitimate dissent and terrorism, broad swathes of the population might feel under suspicion. That is a worrisome conclusion of Norways historic trial.
Any civilized society would be putting this dude on a guerney or over a cliff!
Socialism isn’t civilized.
“In a unanimous decision ... the court sentences the defendant to 21 years of preventive detention,”
Unbelievable sentence! This guy was a mass murderer and gets a slap on the wrist. Norwegian prisons are country clubs.
This mass murderer of 77 teenagers can actually get out after 10 years, if he behaves nicely in prison. Unbelievable.
And the Europeans lecture Texans about out justice system! Apparently, they don’t even have one.
Yes, it's hard to get women in prison but I'm sure the PC crowd is working on that too. He won't have a shortage of crazy female groupies coming for conjugal visits. There is a good chance he will marry a rich one and live like a king when he gets out.
Some people live under the system and others make it work for them...
The real focus should be a determination if the people who put together and support the Norwegian legal system are sane.
The more I read of the legal proceedings and consequences, the more I’m convinced most of the country that goes along with this charade is as loony as he is - just in a different way.
Which part of the description do you consider inaccurate?
Legal experts agree he’s never leaving prison. And no, he doesn’t have internet access.
Which is more insane?
Allowing the Leftist Norwegian politicians to lead five million its own people to its death, submission, slavery, torture, and second class status via Islam or what Brevik did?
What’s next, The Comfy Chair and Soft Pillows?
He is not anti-Muslim, Nazis and Muslims are natural allies.
I read an interesting (fictional) analogy to this:
During the administration of president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the leaders of the Democrat party decided that their party needed a “youth league”, for the same reason that the Nazi party in Germany created its Hitler Jugend, and five years later, the socialist/communist leagues of other countries in Europe created their own youth leagues, such as the Workers’ Youth League in Norway.
This purpose being to raise an ideologically pure next generation of leaders, to continue to push their nation in the direction of the party, be it the philosophy of fascism, or the the philosophy of socialist/communism.
In the case of FDR’s Democrat party, they wanted to push America in the direction of a blend of socialism and national socialism, so their youth league became expert in indoctrinating its members to become the ideologically pure next generation of American leaders.
The Democrat party, in its semi-alliance with the Socialist International, a group of liberal and left wing political parties around the world, shared many of their ideological axioms and goals, such as:
1) Nations have no real reason to exist, and should eventually become just districts of multinational economic blocs, under a unified world government.
2) Heterogeneous cultures, ethnic groups, languages and national history stand in the way of this, so should be undermined until they cease to exist.
3) Political parties and philosophies in opposition to these ideas must either be changed to agree with the ideas of the Socialist International, or must be marginalized.
4) There is tremendous resistance to these ideas by the masses, so gradualism must be used to overcome this resistance, starting with control of education and the indoctrination of children.
In any event, continuing with this *fictional* account, the Democrat party of the United States decided that multiculturalism should replace national pride, ethnic and cultural and religious heterogeneity, to the point where America was no longer substantially different from other nations.
A way to do this was to permit open immigration, legal and illegal, to anyone who wanted it, the more alien to America, its people, culture and religion, the better. And such immigrants would be told that their immigration was only allowed if they were to support the Democrat party.
And so it was done. Countless millions of immigrants from central and South America, Africa, Asia and elsewhere were encouraged to flood into America. And it was coldly calculated that at a particular point, European descended Americans would become a minority, and with the support of the immigrants, America would in effect become a one-party state.
This being the Democrat party, whose youth league would insure that it retained its ideological purity in the face of any setbacks or appeals to reason.
But one man, let us call him “John Brown”, after the great anti-slavery fighter, decided he would no longer allow his country to be destroyed. So he decided to hit the Democrat party in its weak spot, its youth league, its next generation of ideologically pure fanatics that sought to destroy his country, his people, and his religious faith.
He could not stop the Democrats, but he could inhibit them, giving his nation to heal and recover from the continual destructive onslaughts of people who wished to destroy it.
(A fictional account.)
Somehow, I still don't care.
I got this plan if my retirement money runs out...............
"Yeah, but they all wanted to kill you. Should he have let them slaughter you? Gain enough power that by the time people wake up, it's too late. That is their end game. You are either subservient to them, or you die."
Some folks are really damn myopic about what is going on in every Western Nation... Right now. Even our own.
"Violence never solves anything..."
Tell that to King George, Adolf Hitler, and Saddam Hussein. Not a single one of which were "voted out of office" or had a "magic lawsuit" role back their evil.
This is not justice.
77 murdered = 21 years in prison, maybe 10 served and he’s free to go?
He may be sane. The Norwegian courts are insane.
That is a very good question.
Breivik is 33, so by my calculation his sentence will conclude when he is 54 and rusty.
Yes, I know how that sounds in light of my other posts above...
Just because fire fought fire doesn't mean that you shouldn't still put the fire out...
It seems to me he was pro, not anti......
Nope. In his screed, he calls out militant Islam as an enemy, but that he would considerin working with terrorist cells to achieve his own ends.
“Enemy of my enemy” type stuff.
Short sighted as it never works out well in the end. Parable of riding a tiger comes to mind... It may get you where you are going and the ride may be without compare, but you can never dismount or it will eat you.
Don’t think so.
Here’s a rundown of his views.
Anti-EU and UN
Anti- US attacks on Serbia
Anti-Muslim, wants them all deported
Strongly “cultural Christian,” though not particularly religious
None of his reported political opinions, as opposed to actions, are a bit out of place here on FR, adjusting as needed for US/Norway. Which is not an attempt to smear FR, just a reporting of the fact.
Old John Brown was an abolitionist. He took his abolitionism to its logical conclusion of a violent (though ineffectual) attack on the slave power.
Scott Philip Roeder was anti-abortion. He took his opposition to its logical conclusion of shooting an abortion doctor. If you really believe that abortion is murder, is not the killing of an abortionist not justifiable homicide?
Most people who hold strong anti-slavery, anti-abortion or anti-Muslim views do not carry them to this extreme. But I used the “logical conclusion” structure above to make a point.
If you run around loudly denouncing slavery, or abortion or Islam as being ultimate evils (which IMO at least two of the three are), then you are, IMO, morally obligated to also point out why violence against these practices or institutions is not justified, if you indeed believe it is not.
IOW, you need to logically point out why a violent response is NOT the “logical conclusion” of your rhetoric.