The policeman, the trainer and the former top athlete that TV 2 has focused on in recent days have been reported to the police four times in total. All times for sexual assault or sexual harassment.
None of the reports were forwarded to the Bureau of Police Affairs, which is the body that is supposed to investigate cases when police employees are reported for having broken the law while on duty.
– As reported circumstances occurred in the person concerned’s free time, the case was not forwarded to the Bureau, writes one of the police districts that received a report, to TV 2.
– It is clear that the accused assaults must have taken place in their free time, and not as a public employee, writes another district.
The police districts have been anonymised to prevent indirect identification of the accused police officer.
The man has denied all the accusations, show documents from the sport’s sentencing committee and police interrogations. He does not wish to comment on the case to TV 2. All reports against him were dismissed
– The role of a police officer is not something you just go in and out of
According to what TV 2 learns, the Bureau was not connected to any of the reports against the policeman.
That causes TV 2 commentator Aslak Eriksrud to react.
– The sports girls’ stories are shocking reading. Here, the role as a trusted police officer may have had an impact on the coach repeatedly being trusted by sports managers. The role of police is not something you just go in and out of, especially not with people you have a trusted relationship with, like a coach has for his athletes, he says, and adds:
– With that background, it would not be completely unnatural if the special unit went into the case, even if the alleged conditions must have happened in the policeman’s free time. I would like to think that it is completely in line with people’s sense of justice.
The Bureau informs TV 2 that the reports against the police officer initially fall outside their mandate, but that “in theory it could be a matter for the Bureau” – if there is a connection to the person concerned’s service in the police.
The Bureau: – Understands that the question is being asked
In other words, the question is whether the abuses the coach allegedly committed were separate from his job as a police officer, or whether they were connected.
– It is not whether the act was committed during working hours or not that is decisive for whether the case should be investigated by the Bureau, but whether it has a connection to the service, points out Guro Glærum Kleppe, assistant chief of the Bureau.
In TV 2’s case complex, several of the girls have expressed that the coach’s position in the police affected their relationship. It must also have weakened the belief that it was worth notifying or reporting.
None of the alleged assaults that TV 2 has mentioned should have happened while he was at work as a policeman.
ASSISTANT HEAD OF THE SPECIAL UNIT: Guro Glærum Kleppe. Photo: Terje Pedersen / NTB
TV 2 has asked the Norwegian Police Directorate whether the Bureau should ideally have had a greater mandate to catch more such cases.
They do not want to answer that question, and point out that the Bureau itself must answer.
– It is primarily a matter of resources. It is clear that if the Special Unit’s mandate is to be extended to include such cases, the unit must have a completely different budget, organization and staffing than today. We fully understand that the question is being asked, says Glærum Kleppe.
She adds that the topic was considered by a public committee back in 2009, and the committee was then divided in its view on whether the mandate should be changed. The topic has not come up in the debate in recent years.
Can request an extended mandate
The Bureau’s investigation of sex offender cases was given a lot of space in their 2021 annual report.
Among other things, it says to read:
“The specialist unit believes that the management of the Norwegian police must also recognize the risk of employees abusing their position in the police to acquire sexual relations with vulnerable people”.
Furthermore, an external body is called for to illuminate the matters well enough:
“The special unit’s experience is that it is of crucial importance to get the cases clarified that there is an independent investigative body outside the police that investigates such accusations against officials.”
Glærum Kleppe points out that the Bureau can, in theory, ask for the opportunity to deal with cases that go beyond its mandate, but that this will be a discretionary assessment.
– Whether it is necessary to ask the Attorney General for an extended mandate in such cases depends on a concrete assessment of the facts of the case, she says.
