the case: – Then the scandal started

SANDNES (Dagbladet): The murder of Trude Espås in Geiranger, the murder of Birgitte Tengs in Karmøy, the murders in Baneheia, the triple murder on Orderud farm.

One of the common denominators for four of the most talked about murder cases in Norway: Former Kripos investigator Asbjørn Hansen.

On Friday, the now retired investigator took the witness box in courtroom 1 in Sandnes. There, Hansen, who led the investigation into the murders of Stine Sofie Sørstrønen (8) and Lena Sløgedal Paulsen (10), explained, among other things, the reconstruction of the murders.

Hansen began by saying that he worked 35 years in the police, 17 of them with Kripos – where he worked exclusively on murder cases.

– An awful lot of tips

– This is the biggest investigation I have been involved in. At the start there were probably 50-60 investigators who participated, says Hansen, who at the time had the role of emergency manager and assisted the Kristiansand police with knowledge from other murder cases.

Hansen says in court that a separate tip office was set up in connection with the murders. There, the police received what he describes as “an awful lot of tips”.

– I think 1,400 came in a week, because people could call whenever they wanted. The two who were charged were no more interesting than many others at the start, he says.

– Then the trouble started

During the work, a so-called perpetrator profile – an assessment of who could be behind the murders – was also drawn up by four people at Kripos. The conclusion in the report was clear: One perpetrator was behind it.

Hansen says in court on Friday that the allegations that Kripos had a group to prepare such profiles are completely wrong.

– There were allegations that Kripos had a group that could prepare a perpetrator profile. Then the mess started. It was a bit silly, because we who sat in Kristiansand almost had more experience than those who were to prepare the report, says the retired detective, adding:

– The report was never submitted to either me or the others in Kristiansand. We considered it more of a trial project – it has also been confirmed in retrospect, after it was scrapped.

“Compulsive Traits”

However, Hansen admits that they had difficulty imagining that one person would carry out the actions in Baneheia, which involved assault, murder, moving and hiding two girls.

Dagbladet has previously mentioned the report that was prepared. It states, among other things, that “choosing two victims and being only one perpetrator is considered high-risk behaviour”.

The report also lists 23 points, including:

• One perpetrator.
• Is used to traveling in nature.
• High degree of self-control.
• Is apparently normal, but experiences himself as a failure.
• Can seem kind and friendly on the surface. Probably has psychopathic traits.
• Has compulsive traits.

– He decided

The former Kripos investigator also talks about the reconstruction that was carried out in connection with the original case. Jan Helge Andersen attended this, but not Viggo Kristiansen. Andersen is now on trial for the murder of Paulsen – a murder Viggo Kristiansen has previously been convicted of, served and is now acquitted of.

– The reconstruction was a visualization of the confession Jan Helge Andersen gave. He was in charge and decided. It was based entirely on his explanation. I related to what he told and where he placed the figures, says Hansen.

– Why did you bring up things you had trouble understanding when you were at the crime scene?, asks district court judge Gunn Elin Lode.

– It seemed unnatural that he should sit with his back to the crime scene. So it seemed he refined his role at the scene. I was skeptical of his explanation about his own involvement, and said at one point that I didn’t fully trust what he said. But I also became quite sure that there were two people there, says Hansen.

State Attorney Andreas Schei follows up by asking Hansen:

– You say you were skeptical of his explanation about his own role, what about his explanation about Viggo Kristiansen’s role?, asks Schei.

– I found no reason to doubt it. When talking to all the people who were questioned, 20-30 different witnesses describing the relationship between the two. In retrospect, it has been a big topic that Jan Helge was asked if he could be a victim. I find that question quite natural, it would almost have been worse if he hadn’t been asked about it, answers Hansen.