HAUGESUND (Dagbladet): Friends, police officers and people who were in and around Koper a few hours before Birgitte Tengs was killed on the night of May 6, 1995.
They all took the witness stand during the first seven days of the trial in which Johny Vassbakk (52) stands accused of the 27-year-old’s murder. All of them were also given more or less the same question:
Could they have been in contact with the defendant? Have they been in physical contact with Birgitte?
The objective was clear on the part of the defendants: to try to find possible links that could have led to defendant Vassbakk’s Y chromosome ending up on the pantyhose of 17-year-old Birgitte Tengs before or after she was killed.
– I still think it’s the cousin
– Never had contact
None of the friends who have testified thus far remember ever meeting the defendant. On Wednesday, one of them categorically denied having met Vassbakk, despite the fact that he himself claimed that they met in Haugesund in 1995 and that he gave her underwear as a gift.
– We never had contact. I’ve never been to the center of Haugesund when I was in school, and I’ve never been to school. I never received any underwear from him, the witness said.
Vassbakk himself later explained that he did not recognize the woman in court and met someone else who said her name was the same as the witness’s.
– It doesn’t change the matter
Defense attorney Stian Bråstein denies that the session in which the witness believes Vassbakk lied, and thus removed a possible connection between him and Birgitte Tengs, does not affect their arguments.
– That doesn’t change things for us. You can say remove a potential link to Birgitte that way, but there can still be a potential link as long as you don’t know who she was, says Bråstein.
The cult of abuse: reveals heartbreaking experiences
He points out, however, that neither he nor defense attorney Stian Kristensen say they will be able to reveal the touching they believe led to the transfer of Vassbakk’s Y chromosome into Teng’s pantyhose during the trial. They will only point to a number of possibilities that could have led to this.
– The most probable thing, given that he’s innocent, is that it’s not possible to find out how his Y chromosome ended up there. We heard of four here today who were probably in the same bowling alley as him. Could they have touched? It’s impossible to answer yes or no 27 years later, but can it be ruled out? Bråstein asks.
CRITICAL: Attorney Stian Bråstein (TV) and Attorney Stian Kristensen are defending defendant Johny Vassbakk. They think there’s a good chance his DNA ended up on the hosiery of murdered Birgitte Tengs. Photo: Bjørn Langsem / Dagbladet
sea View
Two police officers who were the first at the scene where Tengs was found dead also took the witness stand in Courtroom 14 on Wednesday. There they told of the show that met them at Gamle Sundvegen in Karmøy on May Day 27 Years ago.
They also explained how efforts were made to secure the crime scene and surrounding area. Both claimed they never touched the deceased.
Looking for answers to the hitchhiker mystery
One question – many possible answers
Lawyer Bråstein tells Dagbladet that he takes note of the officials’ explanation. However, none of the defenders want to delve into the details.
– It’s been 27 years since this happened, and we’ve already accepted that there are things here that you can’t get to the bottom of, even though they might think that you came up with certain answers during the investigation, says Bråstein, and at the same time indicates another potential answer to how Vassbakk’s Y chromosome might have ended up on the pantyhose.
– In March 1995, just over a month before the murder, one of the officers was at the home of the defendant and his family. There he confiscated the defendant’s brother’s shoes in connection with another case. We know these shoes were with Kripos in the summer of 1995. No one can tell how long the shoes were there. Birgitte’s clothes were also stored in Kripos, the lawyer says, and continues:
– We know Kripos had stockings in May 1995, and we know they had them in August 1996, but we don’t know what happened in the meantime. Can we rule out that the shoes led to the contamination? The solution may lie in the brother’s shoes, but we will never be able to answer one hundred percent yes or no. This is just one of many examples.
LOCATION: Police are investigating after Birgitte Tengs was found murdered in 1995. Defenders believe a lack of protective equipment may have led to Vassbakk’s DNA ending up on the murder victim’s tights. Photo: Bjørn Langsem / Dagbladet
sea View
At the heart of the main question
A thorough examination was made in court on Wednesday of who from the police and Kripos had been present at the scene in the aftermath of the murder. Prosecutor Thale Thomseth tells Dagbladet the main purpose of this is to clarify to the court who was where at what time and what they did there.
– So it’s easier when everyone comes to testify later – then you have a timeline that you can use. And then there’s a particular attention to what happened: who was there before Birgitte was eliminated. It’s really to assess what opportunities there may have been for contamination or contamination, says Thomseth.
– We can imagine that the defense might want to use the same mapping in their favor. What is your comment on this?
– I think we can all agree that crime scene discipline then was different from now – we don’t disagree on that. The question is how to emphasize it, says Thomseth.
