– I think that hindsight is a separate science, says Anders Snortheimsmoen to TV 2.
For many years he led the police’s foremost operational force, the Emergency Response Troop. The department’s job is to handle the most dangerous and demanding tasks the police face.
In 2011, the police received massive criticism for not getting to Utøya faster to stop the perpetrator.
Now the police are again exposed to critical questions after the killings in Kongsberg.
The first patrol confronted the perpetrator, Espen Andersen Bråthen (37), but then lost sight of him.
It had fatal consequences.
Critical minutes
At 18.12 on Wednesday night, the police received the first report that a person shot at people with a bow and arrow at or near Coop Extra in Kongsberg.
In this connection, the patrol was told to arm themselves. Five minutes later, at 18.17, the mission was defined as a PLIVO event.
PLIVO is responsible for ongoing, life-threatening violence and means that the police must get to the perpetrator as soon as possible, call his attention and get control of him with the means available, which may mean that they must fire shots.
Less than a minute after the police declared PLIVO, the patrol at Bråthen met inside Coop Extra. He is said to have fired two arrows at the armed policemen, who did not themselves feel that they were in a position to shoot back.
– SCENE: Inside this shop, the police met the perpetrator for the first time. Photo: Frode Sunde / TV 2
–
Then it is somewhat unclear what happened next, but at one point a third police officer wearing protective equipment came to the scene, something the first two did not have because they went into action immediately.
During this time, Bråthen managed to get out a back door before heading for Hyttegata and killing several people.
Think they acted right
Snortheimsmoen believes that the first patrol did everything right, as the course of events is described.
– They acted exactly according to what is correct, because they went straight in to confront the perpetrator, says the former police chief and continues:
– But every store is confusing, and you can easily imagine the challenges. I’m sure they would have fired a shot if they had had the opportunity. At the same time, there is always a danger in shooting at such a place because it can hit others.
He believes that the patrol inside the store awaited the situation to see if they had locked the perpetrator in a corner.
– It is not the case that PLIVO means that you have to push safety overboard. To plunge into a situation and be killed when you are a police officer is not doing its job.
– DO NOT WANT TO CRITICIZE: Anders Snortheimsmoen believes the criticism the police are now experiencing is reminiscent of the criticism after 22 July. Photo: Elias Engevik / TV 2
–
– But should one under any circumstances get rid of the perpetrator when there is life-threatening violence?
– You can say that you should not lose sight of the goal, but it is not always you who decides. If the person in question is quick, and he also has the surroundings on his side, you can get into hiding and cover, says Snortheimsmoen.
Reminiscent of the July 22 critique
He says that the criticism of the police is characterized by looking more at the incident and the tragic outcome than one does at the specific situation the patrol was in.
– Does this remind you of the criticism after July 22?
– Yes, it does, because it is the same mechanisms that are set in motion. We have a lot of focus on what may have been wrong instead of looking at the overall picture and the existing situation picture in an assignment.
Snortheimsmoen wonders what would have happened if the police shot and killed a man with a bow and arrow inside a grocery store.
– What had the headline been then? “The police shoot a man with a bow and arrow”, he answers his own question, and continues:
– You are in very difficult dilemmas, and almost no matter what you do, you can get criticism from one or the other. I stand up to show how demanding these situations are, says Snortheimsmoen.
Want general armament
He believes that Norwegian police should be permanently armed.
– As the development has been in society, with all the violent incidents we have seen, I think it is time.
He believes there is a lot of learning in having the weapon with you at all times.
– Take the events in Kongsberg as an example. There, the patrol probably drove quietly when they were told to arm themselves. Then it becomes a PLIVO. In other words, it is an escalating situation, which I think makes it more difficult for them to prepare than if they had had the weapon on them when the first message came, says Snortheimsmoen.
He generally calls for better follow-up of the mentally ill from the health service and society in general, so that serious incidents in the public space occur less frequently.
– How do you think the patrol that was involved in the mission at the Coop store, is it now?
– I think they find the situation demanding, but I believe and hope that the agency takes good care of them. They have been in an extreme event and made a good effort.
–
