The survivors believe the story that the former police officer (42) tells us here in Lower Telemark District Court, sticking together.
It is a reaction I understand. After hearing the defendant’s explanation, we are left with many questions about what really happened the night of August 3 last year when the 33-year-old woman fell off the Brevik Bridge and died. We hardly get answers to all.
The defendant has 15 years experience as a police officer. He has served in UP and he was for several years in the police district’s emergency unit. There are policemen who are called out on the toughest assignments.
In helpless
42-year-old is accused of having abandoned Braathen the helpless condition of the bridge approximately 3:45 o’clock at night. Attorney Kjetil Omholt mean to prove that he left her even though he was aware that there was a real risk that she could fall more than 40 meters into the sea.
The prosecution believes that This triggered a duty to take care of her even though he was not in service. She died of neck injuries immediately after she hit the water surface. About noon Saturday 3 August, she was found in the sea near Sandøya in Bamble.
In the alternative, apply the charges false statement to police. In his first statements claimed 42-year-old that he had been on the bridge at all; he had taken leave of Braathen before they got there. Ten days later he was charged with perjury – after police had surveillance photos that showed him on the bridge with Braathen.
He was caught lying by his colleagues and capitalized explanation. Now he acknowledged that he was on the bridge when Linn Madelen fell into the water. Thus the extended police indictment to include murder. Later, the Attorney General concluded that there is no evidential basis to prosecute him for murder.
deny conditions
Linn Madelen Braathen had a long psychiatric history, which the defendant was well acquainted with. It was also the reason why police initially believed it was suicide.
In the court is defendant crystal clear that he had no relation to Braathen. Although she has said anything to friends and printing a chat log indicates that there was something more than friendship between them. The contents of the log is clearly sexual, and it seems that it was the defendant who was the driving force in the conversation.
The former policeman claims he never thought that her friend was going to jump from the bridge. When she first did it, there was little he could do. He did not notify anyone, did not call the police; just went home to her family without telling any of it had happened.
The question the court must consider is how an experienced police officer can act so irrationally.
The vast majority of the rest of us – which is far from any police background – would surely have raised the alarm at once.
Published:
No comments:
Post a Comment