Defender Kristin case: – Do unacceptable behavior him a killer? – NRK

Both Henning Hotvedt (39) and people in his circle have told that he exposed his ex-roommate for an attempted rape after it had become final between them.

– the defendant has never hidden the event of unwanted sexual activity. It’s an event he ashamed of, that helps to shed a bad light over him, and he has had a bad conscience, says defender Brynjar Meling.

– But such incidents which makes him a possible killer? Or is it that he explains about such unacceptable behavior, which strengthens his credibility?

Henning Hotvedt (39), who is accused of killing Kristin Juel Johannessen (12), see down in the table.

Twelve-year-old was found strangled and killed 5. august 1999.

Warns jury against fear to disappoint Kristin’s family

Hotvedt is for the second time charged with murder, after previously having been first convicted and then acquitted for it.

Behind Hotvedt in Court of Appeal sitting Kristin’s mother, father and sister. They have 17 years struggling to find answers to who killed their daughter and sister.

Meling warns in its procedure jury against letting the desire to give the family answers, become paramount.

– the bereaved have experienced the most painful parents and siblings may experience. They have been through processes with straight laps earlier, and they have even closed down a major piece of work and exercised pressure on the police to get them to resume the case, says Meling.

– The father with the set from a legal perspective is that one must not think that “now we will not send this poor family home without a response.” It’s a psychological element to it as you must be aware of, says Meling to the jury.

WANT ANSWER: Behind defender Brynjar Meling and defendants in the courtroom sitting Kristin Juel Johannessen father Roar and sister Linda. Also the mother is present in court. The family has fought for years to get the police to resume murder case.

Photo: Pedersen, Terje / NTB scanpix

– his big problem is that he has no alibi

Henning Hotvedt testified that he was on a boat trip along with ex-girlfriend and their two children together in the days before Kristin was killed. The tour ended with the ex-girlfriend brought their kids and the boat and ran away from Hotvedt after an argument.

Hotvedt came to a couple of friends, where he stayed from August 4th to August 5th, the day Kristin was killed.

he testified that he went from friend pair at 14 o’clock on August 5. Since then he has not been with other people before he at 20.30 o’clock went to a children’s party with his brother.

Kristin rode home by 18.30 o’clock on August 5 to take a swim in the evening with a friend. The clock 21.15, she was reported missing to the police, and then had family and friends already initiated a large-scale search and rescue.

Kristin matter

– Hennings big problem is that he has no alibi between the hours of 14 and when he comes to his brother in 20.30 time duration. That one does not have an alibi, is a problem, but from there to say that he based it must be the perpetrator, it is a good piece, says Meling.

He also notes that witnesses testified that Hotvedt behaved perfectly normal when he arrived at his brother’s house that night.

– the prosecutor has portrayed him as degraded and unstable, that it was about to fall over for him, and that he had need psychological help. How likely is it that he just hours after a murder should act so cold and quiet ?, asks Meling.

Said he had done something unforgivable

While the prosecutor Alf Martin Evensen in his procedure drew a picture of the defendant as a man who struggled mentally summer Kristin was killed, who was annoyed because he had poor economy, and that fits with witnesses descriptions, believes defends Meling picture is not as clear.

Trial former partner has told the court that Hotvedt after it was over between them in May 1999, assaulted her. This also Hotvedt even explained.

– She continued despite the adverse event to be friends with Henning says Meling.

Both ex-girlfriend and her girlfriends have told defendant repeatedly threatened to kill her cohabitation.

the ex-partner’s girlfriend has told the court she met Hotvedt shortly after the murder of Kristin, in mid-August 1999 and that he then threatened to take their life.

– he had it not okay and said he had done something unforgivable. But he never said what it was, she said when she testified.

Meling emphasizes to the court that neither friend nor any of the others who knew about the defendant’s threats to harm themselves or commit suicide , put it in the context of the murder of Kristin.

– They thought that it was related to the attack on ex-girlfriend. There was no one who said that “there goes a killer free here, and we have a friend named Cindy who say that he has done something unforgivable.”

– Unable to appraise Witnesses memory

Meling reminds the jury that it is 17 years since the murder and that he believes therefore less reliance to Witnesses memory.

as an example he mentions that one witness testified that she thought Kristin had white helmet, while the helmet was actually dark.

– It proves that one can not rely on your memory of a witness after 17 years, not in such a serious matter, says Meling .

– not in control of who had access to the evidence

the day after Kristin was found murdered, she was autopsied, and her nails were secured as to whether one could find traces by the perpetrator.

in many years, there was only Christina’s own DNA on the nails, but new and improved technology meant that forensic tried again last year. Then came the breakthrough. At Christina’s nails found DNA from two people: From Kristin itself and from the defendant Henning Hotvedt.

Kristin nAILS: these bags are the nails that was cut by Kristin Juel Johannessen fingers during the autopsy, retained. On the nails of his left hand has the coroner found skin cells belonging to the defendant Henning Hotvedt.

Photo: Runa Victoria Engen / NRK

Meling has consistently questioned by how the nails have been kept in all the years that have elapsed since the assassination, considering the defendant’s DNA may have rubbed off on nails from such seizure of the defendant.

– The police can not document how the evidence has been stored continuously. The nails lying in lynlåsposer, no other seal, which allows one will not notice it if someone has touched the evidence. It is also not in control of who has had access to the evidence, says Meling.

– There is no need to ask or suggest that police planted evidence. It is only necessary to ask whether this allows for the degree of doubt that it must come accused the benefit.