• 113 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by TruthTellah (9484 posts) -

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/24/world/europe/norway-breivik-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Anders Breivik was found mentally sane and will face 21 years in prison in Norway for his mass murder of 77 people.

21 years, the maximum prison sentence in Norway. Unfortunately, that's just what he wanted. The prosecution tried to argue that he was insane, but Breivik wanted the world to know that he is sane and still blew up a building and shot dozens of children.

Oddly enough, it might have been best if he had been acquitted of all charges and found insane, as they would at least have him in a psychiatric hospital for the rest of his days. Now, he eventually gets out if he survives prison. But considering Norwegian precedent, few criminals ever serve their full sentence. So, one day, we might see him out on the street, probably writing a book about it all.

Just sickens me that this monster basically got what he wanted and might one day walk free despite all he has done. Simply awful.

#2 Posted by Funkydupe (3321 posts) -

The way this type of sentence works basically means that the justice system can extend it for as long as he remains a threat, which means: He will rot in prison for life and we'll forget he exists.

"He was convicted of terrorism and premeditated murder, and given the maximum sentence of 21 years' imprisonment.

However, that can be prolonged at a later date if he is deemed to remain a danger to society."

#3 Posted by Arbie (1437 posts) -

Yep, like said, they can extend his sentence and I believe they will try and succeed unless law gets in the way, which I'm unsure of how it will. But, this man seems pretty smart. And so if to get out in 21 years he just has to act as though he's seen the errors of his ways and is reformed and is suddenly pro-multiculturalism, he probably will. At the moment they have him as a threat to society and on the grounds of leaving prison he can no longer be that, in 21 years though it will be interesting to see how his character has changed. Wait, I'm saying 21, but he only has 20 years to serve I think. Since the year he's served already counts towards his sentence.

#4 Posted by Mageman (349 posts) -

Well there are many brown terrorists who are considered sane by the west and simply called ''terrorists'', I guess this guy fits with the rest of them.

Honestly though I think the strict laws some southern states of the US would be good for Europe sometimes....

#5 Posted by PolygonSlayer (432 posts) -

Most likely he will never be free again. As mentioned above; after 21 years if he is still considered a threat to society his sentence will get extended every 5 years. It's not as easy as him just pretending to be happy and pro-multiculturalism, it has to be proven that he actually isn't a threat to society, which I think will be pretty hard considering what he has done and said. And even then if he got out he will be watched closely by PST until the day he dies. Basically he will never be truly free again.

#6 Edited by Soap (3645 posts) -

21 years is a joke, an actual joke. He's going to prison for 99.6 days per person he killed.

EDIT: I was unaware that they could extend his sentence at a later date, however I still find it strange that 21 years is the maximum.

#7 Edited by TruthTellah (9484 posts) -

@Funkydupe: One can hope that they extend it, but in Norway's history, their judges have generally chosen not to do so. Instead, inmates more commonly get out early than serve such long sentences. Breivik is the kind of plotting monster that probably doesn't make a big fuss in prison; so, I imagine they may indeed let him out eventually. Hopefully his crimes are heinous enough that they'll take particular care in keeping him locked away forever.

Worth noting, the prosecution argued -for- insanity both for the safety of inmates from being with an insane individual and the fact that they believe he is more likely to be held indefinitely in a mental institution than to stay forever in a prison. Breivik can probably avoid being violent as long as he has his crazy ideology, but in a psychiatric hospital, he could never get out until he lets go of his insane delusions. Considering what a tight grip he has on them now, I imagine he won't ever let them go. He should be in a psychiatric hospital for the rest of his days, not living it up in a relatively nice prison where he may just get out some day.

Since he is going to prison, hopefully they will indeed keep him in until he dies, but I'm not confident that will be the case. That sounds like more of a reassurance from a Norwegian government official to avoid bad press than something that will really happen. Here's hoping that feeling is wrong and he really is kept away from other people for the rest of his days.

#8 Edited by PolygonSlayer (432 posts) -

@TruthTellah: It's true that a lot of people who have served long sentences before have been let out before their time, but we (I'm Norwegian btw) have also not had anyone done anything even remotely close to what Breivik did (excluding peacetime), so this is quite an unique case in Norway. Also the number of repeated crimes done by people who have been let out in those cases is very, very low.

#9 Posted by Benny (1955 posts) -

He should rot in prison for the rest of his sad existence. I hope 50 years of being a nobody will make him wish he was put to death.

#10 Posted by TaliciaDragonsong (8607 posts) -

I won't mind if this guy gets murdered in or outside prison, he deserves nothing less.
77 murders should be equal to being blown to bits.

#11 Posted by scalpel (314 posts) -

"Got what he wanted"? You mean they should've declared him insane, despite evidence or lack thereof, just to spite him?

#12 Posted by TruthTellah (9484 posts) -

@PolygonSlayer: I hope you can understand my skepticism though when no inmate has ever served a full 21 year sentence before, let alone gotten some kind of extension to their sentence. That kind of reassurance as far as keeping him in longer just sounds like something a government says to reduce public worry. Like Japan and TEPCO saying they have the Fukushima nuclear plant under control when they were actually placing lead sheets in their instruments so that they would display lower radiation levels to the public. Governments don't want the population angry at them or up in arms. If any government official in Norway today said that they thought this meant he would probably get out eventually, you'd see protests. Don't you think?

I'm really hoping you are correct, but I still agree with prosecutors that he should be in a psychiatric hospital instead. He's a danger to other inmates and he may just get out some day. It's awful to think about. May he really be locked away for as long as they have suggested he will be.

#13 Posted by Twinsun (495 posts) -

@scalpel said:

"Got what he wanted"? You mean they should've declared him insane, despite evidence or lack thereof, just to spite him?

It was still what he said he wanted.

#14 Posted by Devinant (25 posts) -

Don't worry. He will rot and eventually die in prison. However, IF he ever gets out, someone on the street will kill him, I'm sure. This terrorist (I refuse to say his name as he's no longer entitled to it) reminds me a lot of Thomas Quick, also a psychopath and dirtbag from Sweden. He constantly tries to get out but he never will.

#15 Posted by PolygonSlayer (432 posts) -

@TaliciaDragonsong: I don't see the benefit of blowing someone up, or killing someone for that matter? What do we learn from that? and what would that say about us as a society? No, I'm glad he got the strongest punishment we have (21+ years), that he will be watched and that hopefully we can learn from what has happened and how people like him thinks. Maybe one day he will see sense and regret what he has done, he might then contribute vital information in how he became the way he his, why he did what he did etc.

Death penalty solves nothing.

#16 Posted by scalpel (314 posts) -

@Twinsun said:

@scalpel said:

"Got what he wanted"? You mean they should've declared him insane, despite evidence or lack thereof, just to spite him?

It was still what he said he wanted.

It's a good thing, then, that the evidence prevailed. What he "wanted" shouldn't matter.

#17 Edited by Ghostiet (5343 posts) -
@Funkydupe said:

The way this type of sentence works basically means that the justice system can extend it for as long as he remains a threat, which means: He will rot in prison for life and we'll forget he exists.

He won't rot. He'll live like a king. This is his prison cell:

http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/kiosk/w-tym-luksusowym-wiezieniu-odbedzie-kare-breivik,5225232,0,fotoreportaz-maly.html#photo12635450 

The link is in Polish, but it doesn't matter, just browse the photos. It's not a prison. It looks like a fucking recreational lodge for artists with writer's block. It's constructed and decorated to improve creativity, there are no bars in the windows, they can invite families for evenings, every room has a "21 TV, there's a beautiful view. It's the worse kind of place for such a sociopath like Breivik.

I don't advocate the death penalty at all, even in this case, but this is a prison for people that actually can be rehabilitated - for victims of the system, of living in the streets, for people who committed fraud, for Kevin Mitnicks, not for a sociopath.

#18 Posted by TaliciaDragonsong (8607 posts) -
@PolygonSlayer: That is your opinion.
My opinion is that he doesn't deserve to live anymore, nor any of life's privileges.
#19 Posted by AlexanderSheen (5105 posts) -

@PolygonSlayer said:

@TaliciaDragonsong: I don't see the benefit of blowing someone up, or killing someone for that matter? What do we learn from that? and what would that say about us as a society? No, I'm glad he got the strongest punishment we have (21+ years), that he will be watched and that hopefully we can learn from what has happened and how people like him thinks. Maybe one day he will see sense and regret what he has done, he might then contribute vital information in how he became the way he his, why he did what he did etc.

Death penalty solves nothing.

Does it really matter if he regrets what he have done? Does it matter if we know more about him? Those 77 people still gonna be dead, and as long he lives, he poses a threat.

#20 Edited by geirr (2716 posts) -

This person needs to be alive so we can study him and his monstrous behavior and maybe figure out how to prevent anything like this ever again. I'm not sure how the personnel or his inmates will keep themselves from accidentally pushing him out a window, I know I'd be tempted.

Straight up killing him wouldn't solve anything nor would we learn anything, and as people have mentioned, the 21 years can be extended if needed. Personally I believe he'll never walk the streets again, not because he'd kill again, but because we - the people - would kill him on sight. Therefor not only for our protection, but also for his own, he'll be locked up in one way or another til his pathetic life runs out.

Now if we look at the tax payer side of things, keeping him locked up for one day will cost roughly $2000usd - now multiply that with 7665 days - not to mention all the treatment and study he'll be under, we're looking at a lot of money 'invested' in this horrible person. That's way over $15 million dollars.

I don't believe in murder, but I can certainly understand why some people would just want him dead.

#21 Posted by Demoskinos (15180 posts) -
@TaliciaDragonsong
I won't mind if this guy gets murdered in or outside prison, he deserves nothing less.
77 murders should be equal to being blown to bits.
Nah, that's too easy. Slow torture is where its at. A quick death would be way to merciful.
#22 Posted by TruthTellah (9484 posts) -

@scalpel said:

"Got what he wanted"? You mean they should've declared him insane, despite evidence or lack thereof, just to spite him?

Definitely not. I believe the evidence is on the side of him legitimately being insane. But he argued against that in the court and won. So, yes, he got what he wanted. The ruling shouldn't be to spite him for wanting it, but because it's what's right. He somehow pulled off showing that he wasn't insane, and how he's actually happy with the outcome. That's what I don't like. I not only believe the verdict should have been different based on the evidence presented; I, as a human being, also dislike that a madman got his way. It doesn't mean I'm in favor of an alternative verdict just to spite him, but I am expressing displeasure at him enjoying some twisted personal victory.

#23 Posted by Brodehouse (10138 posts) -

Well I think he's craaaaaaazay.

#24 Posted by Tim_the_Corsair (3065 posts) -
@PolygonSlayer

@TaliciaDragonsong: I don't see the benefit of blowing someone up, or killing someone for that matter? What do we learn from that? and what would that say about us as a society? No, I'm glad he got the strongest punishment we have (21+ years), that he will be watched and that hopefully we can learn from what has happened and how people like him thinks. Maybe one day he will see sense and regret what he has done, he might then contribute vital information in how he became the way he his, why he did what he did etc.

Death penalty solves nothing.

It removes someone irredeemable from the earth for their crimes.

I'd happily put him in the ground.

Anyway, if he ever is released from prison I doubt he will survive long
#25 Posted by TheHT (11831 posts) -

@Ghostiet said:

@Funkydupe said:

The way this type of sentence works basically means that the justice system can extend it for as long as he remains a threat, which means: He will rot in prison for life and we'll forget he exists.

He won't rot. He'll live like a king. This is his prison cell:

http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/kiosk/w-tym-luksusowym-wiezieniu-odbedzie-kare-breivik,5225232,0,fotoreportaz-maly.html#photo12635450

The link is in Polish, but it doesn't matter, just browse the photos. It's not a prison. It looks like a fucking recreational lodge for artists with writer's block.

I thought prison was supposed to deter people from doing bad things. That place looks cozy as fuck.

#26 Posted by Azteck (7449 posts) -

He's probably safer in prison than outside at this point. My guess is most Norwegian people want this guy hanged, and even as someone opposed to death penalty, I can't really blame them.

#27 Posted by PolygonSlayer (432 posts) -

@TaliciaDragonsong: It also happens to be the opinion of the majority of the Norwegian population in this case. An opinion that has been reached not by chance, but by reasoning and looking at how incredibly bad/evil and failing the use of death penalty is. There is a very good reason the use of the death penalty has been abolished by the majority of developed countries in the world.

#28 Posted by PolygonSlayer (432 posts) -
#29 Edited by BlackLagoon (1462 posts) -

@Twinsun said:

It was still what he said he wanted.

Uh, what he wanted was to be declared prime minister of Norway and reform the country as a patriarchal totalitarian regime, round up and expel all minorities, start race purity breeding camps, etc. At the trial he wanted either acquittal or to die as a martyr. He did most certainly not get what he wanted, and regardless his opinions should have no influence over his verdict or sentencing.

#30 Posted by TeflonBilly (4713 posts) -

The Norwegian penal system tries to focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment. Hence the lack of things like concurrent life sentences and death penalties as well as a general lack of pound me in the ass prison.

Anyhoo, he'll never get released and will have his sentence continuously extended no matter what. However it does irk me that he will still have the ability to be the focus of the media and spread more of his poison. The guy should be locked up and never heard from again.

#31 Posted by TaliciaDragonsong (8607 posts) -
@PolygonSlayer: And where, pray tell, did I go against that? All I said I wouldn't mind if he got offed somewhere, in or out of prison, since in my eyes he deserves nothing less.
Your reply is nice and all but...what am I supposed to do with it? This is my opinion on the matter and I care little for how it plays out further, I have no control over it anyway.
#32 Edited by Class_A_Ninja (55 posts) -

Can he buy a plane ticket when he is released in 20 years? If so, thanks Norway. Real swell of you.

Also, things aren't going so well when 20 years are the majority of your life. Heck, it's probably not the majority of the rest of his life.

#33 Posted by PolygonSlayer (432 posts) -

@TaliciaDragonsong: I'm not saying your not allowed your opinion, and I understand it, and I'm also not telling you that your should do something about it. I just replied to your comment, that is all.

#34 Posted by laserbolts (5371 posts) -

Dude was smiling when he was in court and threw up a white power salute when his sentence was given to him. What a nutjob.

#35 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

@PolygonSlayer: That is your opinion.

Very sneaky, sis.

Disconnect Four: The game of shutting out any conversation.

(Seriously, I hate when people use that phrase.)

#36 Posted by Brodehouse (10138 posts) -
@Demoskinos
@TaliciaDragonsong
I won't mind if this guy gets murdered in or outside prison, he deserves nothing less.
77 murders should be equal to being blown to bits.
Nah, that's too easy. Slow torture is where its at. A quick death would be way to merciful.
Torturing monsters only makes you a monster. Causing suffering does not alleviate suffering.
#37 Edited by TaliciaDragonsong (8607 posts) -
@PolygonSlayer: Ok, no harm done and stuff!
Just making sure we're cool, I wasn't lashing out at the justice system or anything!
Somewhere I'm just glad justice is being done in whatever way, I've seen situations where that wasn't the case.
 
@Video_Game_King: Well, wasn't it his opinion?
#38 Posted by GS_Dan (1397 posts) -

@TruthTellah said:

@scalpel said:

"Got what he wanted"? You mean they should've declared him insane, despite evidence or lack thereof, just to spite him?

Definitely not. I believe the evidence is on the side of him legitimately being insane.

The guy's a nutjob, but he's sane. Insanity is a law term, not a medical one.

#39 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

@Video_Game_King: Well, wasn't it his opinion?

Tell me, though: where exactly does the conversation go from there? Anywhere at all? (And as long as you're telling me things, is there any reason why I don't get messages in my inbox when you @reply me? Is it because you're editing in later responses?)

#40 Posted by TaliciaDragonsong (8607 posts) -
@Video_Game_King: You replied to me saying you hate the phrase, I respond to that with my reply and now you're seemingly confused?
(And I dunno, might be? Others seem to get it fine though, I edited a lot of @'s in my blog post replies often, I think!)
#41 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@TaliciaDragonsong:

I am not confused, at least in that regard. I am merely leading you to an answer.

#42 Posted by TaliciaDragonsong (8607 posts) -
@Video_Game_King: You lead on then, I'll bash some more zombies in Dead Island.
#43 Edited by NTM (7549 posts) -

@TheHT said:

@Ghostiet said:

@Funkydupe said:

The way this type of sentence works basically means that the justice system can extend it for as long as he remains a threat, which means: He will rot in prison for life and we'll forget he exists.

He won't rot. He'll live like a king. This is his prison cell:

http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/kiosk/w-tym-luksusowym-wiezieniu-odbedzie-kare-breivik,5225232,0,fotoreportaz-maly.html#photo12635450

The link is in Polish, but it doesn't matter, just browse the photos. It's not a prison. It looks like a fucking recreational lodge for artists with writer's block.

I thought prison was supposed to deter people from doing bad things. That place looks cozy as fuck.

It looks better than a college dorm room, or at least a very nice one.

#44 Posted by NTM (7549 posts) -

Also, no matter what, how can you not be considered insane if you do something like that? What is considered evidence than?

#45 Edited by kpaadet (413 posts) -

@NTM: You think you have to be insane to do evil and sick shit?

@Animasta said:

@NTM said:

Also, no matter what, how can you not be considered insane if you do something like that? What is considered evidence than?

I have to assume there's a difference between being insane and being legally insane. I mean, he's worried about multi culturism or whatever and that's pretty nuts but I dunno

Insanity is only used as a legal term.

#46 Posted by Animasta (14730 posts) -

@NTM said:

Also, no matter what, how can you not be considered insane if you do something like that? What is considered evidence than?

I have to assume there's a difference between being insane and being legally insane. I mean, he's worried about multi culturism or whatever and that's pretty nuts but I dunno

#47 Posted by NTM (7549 posts) -

@kpaadet: I guess my thinking process (as of right now) is that, if you're thinking about killing a whole bunch of people, you're most likely insane. I guess the definition of insane is a little different though, because no, it's possible that he didn't have a disorder, which isn't the case here, it's more about his beliefs and what have you. I guess my answer to your question is yes and no. You're obviously not sane if you plan on killing.

#48 Posted by NTM (7549 posts) -

@kpaadet: I guess I was getting the definition of insane wrong.

#49 Posted by A_Talking_Donkey (262 posts) -

@Animasta said:

@NTM said:

Also, no matter what, how can you not be considered insane if you do something like that? What is considered evidence than?

I have to assume there's a difference between being insane and being legally insane. I mean, he's worried about multi culturism or whatever and that's pretty nuts but I dunno

There's not because the only correct usage of the word is in a legal context. The term stopped being used for medical and scientific purposes when we started understanding how the brain works well enough to come up with proper diagnoses. I don't know about Norwegian law but in the US the legal definition of insane is something like "mentally incapable of recognition and execution of contractual obligation". Simply having the capacity to kill 77 people is not insanity, but not being able to recognize an obligation to not do so could be considered insanity. I hope that helps.

#50 Posted by Demoskinos (15180 posts) -
@Brodehouse
@Demoskinos
@TaliciaDragonsong
I won't mind if this guy gets murdered in or outside prison, he deserves nothing less.
77 murders should be equal to being blown to bits.
Nah, that's too easy. Slow torture is where its at. A quick death would be way to merciful.
Torturing monsters only makes you a monster. Causing suffering does not alleviate suffering.
Bah. I dont buy into that. The guy caused tons of suffering and he deserves to suffer. It not about alleviating the pain of the people he hurt its about making him absolutely miserable until hr takes his last breath.