The core argument is that since he can't sit in a common prison population (since he will most definitely be murdered) and isolation for the full 21 years he is charged with is against...
The core argument is that since he can't sit in a common prison population (since he will most definitely be murdered) and isolation for the full 21 years he is charged with is against international human rights, he wants to be set free on parole instead.
His last appeal for the same was struck down in the end, with some comments at the lowest level of courts in Norway and then struck down all the way up the Human Rights court in Strasbourg.
Chances are high that the same will happen again this time.
Here's an English article from 2017 about his last formal complaint in which he comments that even though he is allowed visits, no one but his mom visited until she died. So now its his lawyer mostly that comes by
That is an interesting quagmire: How much obligation does the state have to protect you from fellow citizen's righteous anger? I mean, putting him on parole is out of the question. Involuntary...
The core argument is that since he can't sit in a common prison population (since he will most definitely be murdered) and isolation for the full 21 years he is charged with is against international human rights, he wants to be set free on parole instead.
That is an interesting quagmire: How much obligation does the state have to protect you from fellow citizen's righteous anger?
I mean, putting him on parole is out of the question. Involuntary isolation is out of the question too. Giving him the choice of whether to go in solitary or in the common prison is making him choose between being tortured and being murdered. Isolation with frequent supervised visitation might be the best way out of the quagmire. And if no one wants to visit him.... well, let's just say the government doesn't force anyone to be friends with me either.
The core argument is that since he can't sit in a common prison population (since he will most definitely be murdered) and isolation for the full 21 years he is charged with is against international human rights, he wants to be set free on parole instead.
His last appeal for the same was struck down in the end, with some comments at the lowest level of courts in Norway and then struck down all the way up the Human Rights court in Strasbourg.
Chances are high that the same will happen again this time.
Here's an English article from 2017 about his last formal complaint in which he comments that even though he is allowed visits, no one but his mom visited until she died. So now its his lawyer mostly that comes by
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/norway-mass-murderer-anders-behring-breivik-prison-isolation-radicalized-damaged/
That is an interesting quagmire: How much obligation does the state have to protect you from fellow citizen's righteous anger?
I mean, putting him on parole is out of the question. Involuntary isolation is out of the question too. Giving him the choice of whether to go in solitary or in the common prison is making him choose between being tortured and being murdered. Isolation with frequent supervised visitation might be the best way out of the quagmire. And if no one wants to visit him.... well, let's just say the government doesn't force anyone to be friends with me either.