– For me it was a completely normal day – NRK Rogaland – Local news, TV and radio

Viggo Kristiansen was asked about his movements in Baneheia on the day Lena Sløgedal Paulsen (10) and Stine Sofie Sørstrønen (8) disappeared.

Lawyer Celine Krogh Fornes, one of Jan Helge Andersen’s defenders, was keen to show the court that Kristiansen changed his explanation about his movements on 19 May 2000 as the investigation progressed 24 years ago.

– Then the next questioning was a while later, so you didn’t say that you had been in Baneheia either. Why didn’t you do that, asked Krogh Fornes.

– Because I didn’t remember. It was a perfectly normal day. For me, cycling through there was commonplace, replies Kristiansen.

Here you can follow the questioning of Viggo Kristiansen:

The latter explained that he cycled into Baneheia to look for Jan Helge Andersen. He cycled first to Svarttjønn, then to the north end of the third stump, then back.

There he must have met Andersen. However, this explanation came after the police had made it clear to Kristiansen that they had information about his movements in 2000.

– You didn’t remember that you had been further into Baneheia before the police told you?

– I can’t remember why I answered so and so…

Asked about the search operation

There had been great tension in the fact that the defenders of Jan Helge Andersen were to question Kristiansen. During the questioning, Kristiansen looked directly at the defender who asked the question. Andersen also avoided the gaze of his former comrade.

Viggo Kristiansen served almost 21 years in prison, but has now been acquitted and provisionally awarded NOK 55 million in compensation. Read more:

Eventually, the questioning turned more and more to why Kristiansen, who had a pronounced military and outdoor interest, did not contribute to the search operation.

Kristiansen explained that he believed that the search operation was for more adult and professional actors.

– Did you think it was strange that Andersen did not report?

– I can’t remember what I thought then. But what I think today, I don’t think it’s strange.

– Why not?

– Because he had been up there and killed two little girls, Kristiansen replied.

How good friends were they?

After a break, the questioning continued. Krogh Fornes lived in the friendship between Kristiansen and Andersen. Kristiansen has stated that they had been very good friends, but had begun to drift apart at the time of the murder.

The defense could read from the interrogations that Kristiansen described Andersen as his best friend.

Kristiansen says that he cannot answer who he hung out with the most in the time around 19 May 2000.

– In the interrogations in 2000, why didn’t you explain anything about the fact that you and Andersen drifted apart at this time, asked defender Krogh Fornes.

It became intense at times, and the referee had to break in several times when Kristiansen did not want to answer because he did not want to speculate on why he described Andersen as his best friend in 2000.

He said he also did not remember how he reacted when he learned that Andersen had confessed.

– It has been several years. Sorry, Kristiansen replied.

Had they talked?

Svein Holden, defense attorney for Jan Helge Andersen, then proceeded to a witness examination of Viggo Kristiansen on 4 June 2000. This was two weeks and two days after the murders.

– Do you remember if you went into this interrogation with an ambition and desire to explain the truth and inform the police as best as possible about the matter?

– You don’t do that all the time, Kristiansen replied.

– The reason I am asking the question is that in this 4 June hearing you say, and we will bring it up soon, “he does not know if Jan Helge Andersen had been in Baneheia earlier in the day”. And we know this is wrong. And what I’m looking for is why are you answering this wrong?

– Again, I cannot answer for what I thought then.

– There are two things you don’t say. You do not say that you have been inside Baneheia yourself and you do not say that Jan Helge Andersen has been in Baneheia. Why are these two things left out?

– I cannot answer that now.

– Could it be that you and Jan Helge have talked together? About what you were going to say to the police?

– No. It’s as I say, I had nothing to hide that day, Kristiansen replied.

Didn’t believe it

Before this questioning from the defenders, it was the prosecution’s turn, which had called Kristiansen as a witness.

– What did you think that Jan Helge Andersen had done this in Baneheia, asked prosecutor Johan Øverberg.

– At first I didn’t believe it. But then it was submitted that there was evidence against him, said Viggo Kristiansen in Sør-Rogaland District Court on Wednesday morning.

Kristiansen is uncertain about several of the details surrounding the day of the murder, 19 May 2000. He was also in 2000.

– As I said, it was a completely normal day for me. You don’t go around remembering details, said Kristiansen.

But eventually he realized that both Jan Helge Andersen and himself were becoming more and more interesting to the police.

– I guess I got more and more pissed off as the investigation went on, both at the case, he (Andersen, journ.anm.), the police, and how people tried to be manipulated into a case they had not been in and did not participate in.

Questioning

Kristiansen said yesterday that he was nervous, but it was mostly because of the disrespect of the press before his testimony in the new trial against Jan Helge Andersen. Otherwise, he answered confidently and clearly to most of the questions he received from the prosecution on Tuesday. The questioning continued today.

Andersen and Kristiansen both agree that they met near Svarttjønn at around 6 p.m. Kristiansen has explained that he was to get a spare key for his outdoor shed from Andersen. Kristiansen cycled up towards Baneheia to find Andersen. They met, sat down at a playground, and were observed by several witnesses.

Kristiansen’s explanation about the time afterwards is that he went and worked in the store, then he met Andersen and some other mates later, and that he looked after his little nephew. This is where Andersen’s explanation has been completely different.

Kristiansen’s lawyer Brynjar Meling gave a forewarning of what could come when, before the court was set on Wednesday, he stated that he expected the court to intervene if the questions from the defense in particular went too far, and beyond the presumption of innocence.

The two former comrades Kristiansen and Andersen have barely seen each other in Sør-Rogaland District Court, and Kristiansen has almost consistently referred to Jan Helge Andersen by his last name.

At the end of the day, in response to questions from the experts, Kristiansen got into how he saw Andersen.

– He was very monotonous and difficult to read. I have never seen him angry, said Kristiansen.

Andersen still says that Kristiansen was the main man

Jan Helge Andersen has maintained in court his explanation that it was Viggo Kristiansen who was the main man in the murders of Lena Sløgedal Paulsen (10) and Stine Sofie Sørstrønen (8) in 2000. Andersen has claimed for 24 years that Kristiansen threatened him to commit rape and murder.

Here you can read what Andersen explained:

However, the new investigation has revealed that the DNA from Andersen on Lena Sløgedal Paulsen, the girl Andersen was not convicted of having raped and killed. No DNA has been found from Kristiansen. He was thus finally acquitted after spending almost 21 years in prison. Something Kristiansen said was completely natural and something he also maintained when he asked his parents about the conditions in 2000.

– I said that I haven’t been there, so they wouldn’t find anything, Kristiansen said when asked by public prosecutor Johan Øverberg.

Andersen was also charged with this murder instead. Kristiansen has been summoned as a witness.

However, the public prosecutor presented some of the statements from Andersen for Kristiansen.

– Andersen has explained that they agreed to give each other an alibi. You should say that he came to you at 1930, Øverberg said.

– It’s almost something he has to answer, but we’ve never had any reason to create an alibi, Kristiansen replied.

– Did you notice anything about Andersen before the arrest? You knew that hair had been found and DNA had been taken…

– Jan Helge Andersen was a difficult person to understand, so I didn’t notice anything.

– Did you notice anything about Andersen on the trip to Denmark you had after the murders?

– I didn’t notice anything.

Can receive unconditional imprisonment

If Jan Helge Andersen had been convicted of both murders in the original trial, he would probably have received 21 years in prison instead of 19 years.

If he is now convicted for the murder of Lena Sløgedal Paulsen, he will very likely receive a sentence that corresponds to the difference, i.e. two years’ unconditional imprisonment.

Here you can read more about what the new trial is about: