Appeal case begins over death of Lena Maria Aase in negligent vehicular manslaughter

BERGEN (Dagbladet): It was 21 August 2021 that 18-year-old Lena Maria Aase died in connection with a drive on Osterøy outside Bergen. The friend, who drove the car, was sentenced in Hordaland district court to a 30-day suspended prison sentence.

The 19-year-old was convicted of driving negligently at too high a speed when she lost control of the car at at least 104 km/h in a 60-zone. Aase was in the passenger seat and died shortly after the accident.

The friend was acquitted of negligent homicide. The prosecution does not agree with this acquittal. On Thursday, the appeal case begins in the Gulating Court of Appeal.

– The case will be about which threshold, which level, applies to negligent vehicular manslaughter. This is an application of the law appeal, explains state attorney Magne Kvamme Sylta.

The prosecution must not bring witnesses, but refer to documentary evidence and investigations.

– Terrible

Assistance lawyer Cecilie Wallevik states that they have appealed the civil claim and that some evidence must be provided about the conditions at the site. This is to prove that it is a matter of “gross negligence” – which is the threshold for fulfilling the civil claim.

Wallevik explains that it is very burdensome and difficult for those left behind to go through this again.

– It’s terrible. It cannot be described, she says.

For those left behind, it is important that the case has consequences in order to prevent similar accidents in the future.

– For them, it is not important to blame her, but that driving at least 104 km/h on such a road should have some form of consequence. They are concerned that it is an important signal for prevention. They want to prevent such accidents from happening again and for young people to understand the consequences, she says.

The friend convicted after the accident

– Tragic thing

The woman’s defender, Kjetil Ottesen, states that she will appear in court.

– This is a tragic case for all involved. I think it is hard for all parties not to be able to put it behind them, both for the accused and the survivors. She is extremely sorry that the tragic accident happened, and even though she takes responsibility for her role, we believe that it is not correct in terms of criminal law that she be sentenced for negligent homicide, says the defender.

He adds that in any case it will be a relief for her to hopefully finish the legal process.

It was daylight, good visibility and a dry road on the fateful autumn day. The car’s speed was thus a central theme during the trial in the district court. Several testified that they reacted to the car’s speed.

Killed Sunniva (23): – Will take the punishment

Two of the three judges in the district court believed that the woman was driving at least 104 km/h. The third judge believed that she had driven over the speed limit, but that there was doubt about the actual speed.

– Come an animal

The woman told the court that an animal came into the road, which caused her to swerve and lose control of the car.

“The court will note that the defendant stated at a very early stage that an animal got in the way, and that she has stuck to this in her later explanations. This constitutes timely evidence in the case,” says the district court judgement, which continues:

“After an overall assessment, and under strong doubt, the majority finds that this was a factor that must lead to the defendant not acting negligently in relation to Section 281 of the Penal Code, even though she kept a markedly too high speed towards the bend, and skidded in high speed in the turn”.

The prosecution does not dispute the sequence of events that was presented in the district court, but believes that there is nevertheless a basis for convicting of negligent vehicular manslaughter.