Anders Behring Breivik Trial – Wednesday June 13 (Day 36)

9:02 Commander Breivik is brought into the courtroom.

Today we’ll have one witness.

9:05 Karl Heinrik Melle takes the witness stand, he’s head of the psychiatric group RMK.

The RMK reviews written psychiatric statements submitted to the court. Melle mentions that Husby had been the superior of two of the members, and that Sørheim was the head of the RMK group at one point in time.

This seems like a conflict of interest, but we weren’t expecting a fair trial anyways. The first psychiatric report was approved by the group, and the second psychiatric report was rejected. The second report should be re-submitted at one point, but if it’s rejected again the judges might use this as justification to  only consider the first report and declare Breivik insane.

Melle is hard to follow and rarely says anything interesting or insightful during the four hours he’s in the witness stand.

Melle clarifies his committee found fault with the manner in which Breivik was diagnosed with a personality disorder in the second report. He continues to argue that the first report confirms a psychosis, and that three weeks of observation where Breivik showed no symptoms does not technically disprove anything.

Melle confirms that the entire RMK team considered Breivik psychotic after reading the first report. Breivik probably regrets not having asked Sørheim for writing tips after hearing that. 

14:39 Commander Breivik addresses the court.

Just a short one .. I will not comment on Husby and Sørheim’s report, I have done so before. But a note to Melle. According to him, they claimed I only planned for a couple of years, after losing touch with reality. It is not true that I started planning in 2009, as in the original report. So it does not add up.

When it comes to statistics or general information that the forensic commission should have access to, it shows that internationally there are no Islamic militants who are sentenced to compulsory psychiatric treatment. What is clear is that the DRC lacks expertise in the assessment of politically motivated violent men.

And when the DRC lacks expertise in the so-called terrorist mentality it’s their duty to obtain information about it. Since they have no reports about it, it is natural to obtain English-language information about militant Islamic violence, the militant nationalist’s psyche is very similar. The DRC chose not to make themselves familiar with this, it was a mistake. This should be recognized by the DRC. They lack expertise in the area. They must recognize that they lack expertise in the reports of the political-militant psyche. They should also recognize that they are still disqualified.

Sørheim has had a close relationship with 6 of 7 commission members, Husby had a close relationship with 2 of 7. And is it really so dangerous to acknowledge this and that they are disqualified? “If there is dissent, it will be chaos.” That’s a quote from the meeting DRC had. Is not that kind of rhetoric, a way to push for consensus? My question is, it Melle who have come to this? But he has gone now.

14:42 The court is adjourned.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: