Baneheia, Viggo Kristiansen | Reacting to the NRK journalist’s comment: – An “open football match coverage”

This week, Viggo Kristiansen and Jan Helge Andersen met for the first time in 22 years. It happened in Sør-Rogaland district court. The former has been acquitted in the case and took the witness stand on Tuesday, where Andersen stands accused of murdering Lena Sløgedal Paulsen (10).

Eight weeks have been set aside for the trial.

On Thursday, NRK’s ​​crime commentator Olav Rønneberg published a comment that caused author and journalist Bjørn Olav Jahr to react.

“Okay, then this case seems to be something quite different from what I thought”, the latter begins a post on Facebook, and refers to Rønneberg’s comment.

Read also: Reacting to the press taking pictures of Viggo Kristiansen and his girlfriend

– It is special

Jahr reacts to one thing in particular.

Rønneberg writes:

“The judges in the case must themselves assess the two explanations and their credibility. But it is not unlikely that the court will rather lean towards the technical evidence in the case, which will be presented to the court in a few weeks.”

Jahr himself thinks it goes without saying that the technical evidence weighs more heavily than the judges’ own credibility assessments, but tells Nettavisen that the most important thing is to assess who explains himself reliably, i.e. comes up with explanations that agree with the technical evidence.

– What is said must be supported by evidence. That is what constitutes whether the explanations are reliable or not. I think that in this case the technical evidence is overwhelming, and I think it is strange that you make an “open football match coverage” out of it. It is special to read the quote from Rønneberg, explains Jahr to Nettavisen.

NRK answers

Nettavisen has been in contact with Rønneberg, who refers to NRK’s ​​news editor Knut Magnus Berge.

– Olav Rønneberg is a very experienced crime commentator who has been sent to Sandnes to provide his analysis of the court proceedings, his job is also to see the case from several perspectives, says Berge to Nettavisen, and adds:

– He obviously works journalistically and based on sources to provide a background for his opinions. I do not feel that this comment gives the impression of an “open football match”, but of how the case stands according to the evidence so far.

Also read: Viggo Kristiansen grilled for two days: – He has been through a tough ride

He rejects that NRK sees the trial as either or: That it is either the explanations or the technical evidence that the judges will look at.

– Of course, the whole picture of evidence is important when the court has to draw its conclusion, but I do not feel that in the comment it is presented as an either/or. This is a summary comment based on the evidence so far. The comment naturally also points towards what will happen next in the trial, and gives an assessment of the importance of the technical evidence, concludes NRK editor Berge.

Jahr clarifies that he believes several media are conducting this type of journalism in connection with the trial against Jan Helge Andersen, not just NRK.

Jahr has previously published the book “The murders in Baneheia”.

– A mob

Rønneberg also writes in his commentary that “Several who follow the trial believe that per today is closer to a verdict on complicity. In that case, Andersen will receive an additional penalty, and he will have to pay compensation to the survivors. But the consequence will then be that you are left with no definite answer as to who killed the 10-year-old.”

Jahr thinks this is completely wild to write. He says that such coverage is often justified by the fact that as a journalist you must be balanced and that both parties must come forward, but believes that this case is quite special, as Kristiansen was acquitted and cleared of the murders of the two girls back in 2000.

– The impression is that you are reading about two equals. It should have been clarified enough that Kristiansen was out of the case. He has served time, received treatment and apologized. I experience it as a herd of hyenas and a mob attacking Kristiansen. It’s bad to watch, says Jahr, and adds that he hopes the journalists are as interested in the technical evidence that will be presented, as the attendance of Kristiansen and his explanation.

Read also: Direct: The Baneheia case continues – discovery of abuse material becomes a topic

However, Rønneberg clarifies in his comment that Andersen is the defendant in the case, and that Kristiansen has been acquitted and that he appeared in court as a witness.