A civilian police patrol would routinely check a car at Holmlia in Oslo this summer.
When the police officers looked up the registration number, it emerged that the owner of the car did not have a driving license in the police systems. Therefore, a traffic control was carried out.
Before the police could turn on their sirens, the car stopped at Bunnpris in Holmlia. What started as a calm and normal police check turned into a riot and arrests.
– The main tracks tricked the police
Rough harassment
And now a legal aftermath for three 17-year-old boys who were passengers in the car. When they got out of the car and were on their way into a shop, the noise started.
The boys were charged with violence and threats. They were accused of, among other things, having said to the two police officers:
“I’m going to beat you.” “I’ll kill you”. “Don’t touch me, I’m going to kneel to you.” “If any of you touch me, you’re finished.” “Shut up”. “I’m going to fuck your mother”. “Mother’s dicks”. “Pussy”. “Pussy muzzle”. “I’m going to spank your mother.”
The three were also accused of pushing or pulling one of the police officers.
New life after the sentence: – Naive
Acquitted
Despite the fact that one of the three boys admitted to having said “pussy”, “pussy nose” and “I’m going to spank your mother” to one of the police officers, both he and the other two were acquitted of all charges.
The Oslo district court concluded that there was no authority for the police to have arrested the three, and that the police’s use of force was excessive.
After the evidence was given, the court assumed that it was the police’s use of physical force that led to the escalation of the situation.
In the court book it says:
“In extension of this, it is noted that the police depend on trust, and that unnecessary and unjustifiable use of force towards young people is apt to reduce this trust. The court believes that the boys were scared, frustrated and felt unsafe after this use of force. This is substantiated by the boys’ own explanations, audio recordings and videos of them”.
Didn’t believe the police
The district court did not find it proven that the police officers’ explanations were correct when it came to violence and threats. And that the police officers’ explanations were not supported by the video evidence from the crime scene.
VIDEO EVIDENCE: – Our clients were believed because of the surveillance video. You cannot simply rely on the police’s explanations, says lawyer Heidi Reisvang says lawyer Heidi Reisvang. Photo: Kristin Svorte / Dagbladet Show more
– We are satisfied that the court followed our argument. The police had a wrong understanding of the situation which ended in an escalated use of force that went beyond what was necessary and justifiable. The court assumed that the police had no grounds to suspect them of having done anything wrong. Our clients are relieved, but are still affected by the situation, say lawyer Heidi Reisvang and associate attorney Armin Khoshnewiszadeh at Advokatfirmaet Elden.
The Orderud Investigator: The New Tracks
Video evidence
Alongside the police officers’ explanations, and what the three accused boys told the court, a surveillance video was presented as evidence.
– Had there not been a video of the situation, this case would probably have ended differently. The case illustrates well that one cannot simply rely on the police’s explanations, says lawyer Heidi Reisvang to Dagbladet.
Police prosecutor Hilde Søraas, who prosecuted the case against the three young boys, has not been available to comment on the case.
It is unclear whether the prosecution will attempt to appeal the verdict to a higher court.
2023-11-13 22:27:39
#Acquitted #violence #police
