Bakke believes that Rind and his family incurred a trauma that will last a lifetime. – Hamar Arbeiderblad

Update case by pressing F5 (the last update added bottom)

It is nearing the end of the trial where a 39 year old man from Hedmarken stands accused of, among other things to set fire to the house in an attempt to kill Magistrate Ola P. rind and his family.

the accused have always denied having anything with the deed to do. He said no to almost all other charges as well, apart from a small point about drug use.

Today you can get a summary of the case seen from the prosecutor’s side when Tormod Bakke keeps its procedure or its argumentative post put it another way.

Ground will eventually in its procedure lay down an allegation of criminal.

Tuesday will defend the team on equal footing hold its procedure before it all ends with procedures from aid lawyers.

Then, the five judges in the case write, and to arrive at a pre-judgment. This will take several weeks.

Kl. 08.36 : The trial is planned to start at 09.00

At 9:03: The court is set and prosecutor Tormod Bakke should start with their procedure.

At 9:06: The prosecutor says there is a long indictment with many conditions, but it is huge leap from the most serious charges to less serious.

At 9:12: – This case is very serious. It is all agreed, says Bakke. He also says that the case is unique in a national context.

Bakke believes that Rind and his family incurred a trauma that will last a lifetime.

– Not sided investigation

At 9:24: The prosecutor says there was no basis for claiming that the fire at rind was affixed. Bakke believes both Hedmark Police and the Oslo Police have done the necessary research to find out that the fire was affixed.

Bakke believes there has not been a one-sided investigation of the accused, but that the police also have investigated other people. He pointed out that it is quite far out of the investigation has been conducted questioning by other alibi candidates.

At 09:30: The prosecutor believes that the main proceedings in everything has been largely influenced by the defendant’s perception of the police in Oslo have long been after him.

Bakke says that the defendant since 2013 has been subject to a very intensive investigation, and do not doubt that there may have been a strain for defendants. He emphasizes that the investigation is not due to an attempt a possible miscarriage of justice, as the defendant has largely claimed.

At 9:54: Bakke says there is no forensic evidence after the fire that makes you specifically say who is behind, but that must largely benefit from the testimony of witnesses and defendants.

at 10:05: Ground talking a lot about witnesses credibility now. Where forensic evidence is absent will the Court’s assessment of the witnesses credibility affect.

At 10:17: Bakke believes that the case has been shown that ex-wife is not some shuttlecock and she has own perceptions.

– The idea was that she would burn inside

At 10:49: The prosecutor is now entering on the evidence of some of the most serious charges. He starts with the defendant should have tried to get a man to light the house of a friend of the accused former partner. Prosecutor cites points from the man’s explanation that it was to be lit on gasoline, and the door should be locked with chains. The prosecutor believes opinion of the defendant was that the woman would burn inside.

He believes that the testimony of the man who should have been commissioned to ignite strengthened when he could describe a detailed itinerary. The Prosecutor’s view is that the man’s explanation is very credible.

At 11:01: The prosecutor mentioned that a neighbor claims to have seen the accused car was gone overnight house the Magistrate burned. The defendant claims even he was at home that night. Police also found that at the defendant’s cell phone was set a day back on July 22, 2013, the night the rind house burned.

The prosecutor mentions several letters and SMS messages. In a text message to his former partner accused shall inter alia have written “the corrupt judge rind”.

11.05 The prosecutor believes there is no basis to assert that the defendant is a fan of Anders Behring Breivik, but that some of the thinking must have fascinated him.

At 11:17: The prosecutor enters my ex explanations. He believes a turning point for his ex-wife was then the defendant should have subjected her daughter to violence.

At 11:26: The prosecutor has the impression that my ex will explain himself on one thing at a time, and that there is no flood of information coming from her.

The prosecutor says that his ex-wife has been in a dilemma where she on one side knew that the defendant has made criminal offenses, but on the other side must have thought of the consequences it could have for her and the children’s safety on she told him.

At 11:46: The prosecutor pointed out that his ex-wife testified about two cases of violence against her, and that he believes there is no reason to believe she exaggerates this.

Ground mentions that his ex-wife testified over three days in court, and that she has maintained a very extensive explanation.

At 11:51: Ground talking about former fellow inmates of the defendant that the defendant should have attempted to remove ex-wife. Bakke says the fellow inmates testified about details that have proved to be true.

Bakke says his view is that the fellow inmates explanation is credible, and that much of what he has said is confirmed.

At 11:53: Bakke believes the defendant has assumed the role of victim from the outset. Bakke believes it eventually has been shown that the defendant has a day and a night side.

Bakke believes that the false confession from the defendant has no evidential value, but that it is a “strange thing”.

Ground also says that there is one thing that recur, and that is that things must be avenged.

At 12:05: The prosecutor summarizes that he does not believe there is any doubt that the defendant tried to get a man to set fire to the house of the friend of his former partner. He also believes that it is the defendant who has lit the house of Rind.

The prosecutor believes the defendant should be found guilty on the point 1-6 in the indictment.

Also on the indictment point that goes on that he should have sprayed ammonia on police officers, says Bakke that the defendant must be convicted.

At 24:27: The prosecutor requested punishment on all counts except for two.

Kl 13.28: The prosecutor asks that the defendant sentenced to detention for 18 years with a minimum term of ten years.

Bakke says there is no doubt that a timed penalty is not sufficient to protect the community.

In addition, the prosecutor forward claims to Gjensidige of just over 8.4 million, and 570,000 to Hamar.

Kl 13.54: It is now counsel Inger Johanne Reiestad Hansen who keep their procedure. She is counsel for the friend of sworn daughter. Her friend was in the house when it burned. Reiestad Hansen now describe how the fire has affected the girl afterwards.

She says that the life of the girl has been turned on its head after the fire.

Reiestad Hansen make a claim for compensation to the girl capped at 300,000 crowns. In addition, she requests compensation for income of 350,000 million because of delayed education.