The case in summary: Serial rapist Julio Kopseng, sentenced to 21 years in custody for the rape of 20 women and an attempted rape, gets leave from prison. Two of Kopseng’s victims feel unsafe when he is out and ask the police for a restraining order. Kopseng is appealing the visiting ban in court, and has been upheld in the district court in one case. He has also been supported in his appeal to the Court of Appeal in Steinmann’s case. Kopseng’s defender says that Kopseng should not contact those offended in the case in any case, and that it is not a human right to have contact and visiting bans. FRP’s Helge André Njåstad believes that care for the victims should weigh the most heavily and that the inmate must ensure that the victims feel safe. Never Aleine, a voluntary organization for women exposed to violence, will have a lifetime ban on contact when someone is convicted of violence in close relationships. The summary is made by an AI service from OpenAI. The content is quality assured by news’s journalists before publication. – I feel that he continues to wreak havoc with me, says Marthe Steinmann, Kopseng’s former roommate. 47-year-old Julio Kopseng is serving a sentence of 21 years in custody for rape of 20 women, and attempted rape of one woman. When the ex, sentenced to custody, is out on leave from prison, Steinmann has asked for a restraining order from the police – and got it. news knows that at least one other woman has done the same. But the visiting ban is appealed to the court by Kopseng. First to the District Court, then to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has now considered Steinmann’s claim and agreed with Kopseng. – I don’t understand where we are going, how is that possible? is Steinmann’s reaction to the court’s decision. Last winter, Kopseng applied for parole, but he was not allowed out of Ila prison. Prosecutor Andreas Strand thought the danger of repetition is too great. Shortly after Kopseng was refused probation, the first letter about leave was dumped in Steinmann’s mailbox. The first was four hours, the second seven hours and the third eight hours. The next leave will probably be extended. – An indirect threat Steinmann asked for a reverse violence alarm for Kopseng, but was refused. She then asked for a security alarm for herself, but was not granted this by the police. In the past, Steinmann has been upheld in a visiting ban, but now the claim has been rejected by a court of appeal with dissent between the judges. One of three judges wanted to grant Steinmann a restraining order, two wanted to reject it, and then the claim was rejected. The Kopseng case In 2013, Julio Kopseng was arrested and remanded in custody for several rapes. In 2016, he was sentenced to 21 years in prison with a minimum term of 10 years for the rape of 18 women, one attempted rape and gross mistreatment of his former roommate. He was sentenced for the rape of a further two women. in 2018 The sentence was historic, as no one has previously received the law’s strictest punishment in a rape case. In August 2023, Kopseng applied for probation, after having served the minimum term of ten years: three years in custody and seven years in custody. The court arrived in February this year that he is not released on probation, because the risk of repetition is still too high. Prosecutor Andreas Strand referred to Kopseng as “undoubtedly one of Norway’s most dangerous men” – I cannot understand the appeal in any other way than an indirect threat that “I want to seek you out”. Marthe Steinmann believes that a visiting ban is very little intrusive into Kopseng’s leave. – The only thing he is told is: “You are not allowed to contact her. Stay away.” Marthe Steinmann lived with Kopseng for nine months and wants him to have a restraining order when he is on leave from prison. In October, she explained why in court Photo: Tommy Iversen / news It is voluntary for victims to appear in court when questions about a restraining order are to be decided. Steinmann believes it is important that she is heard by the judge, so “the case is not just about the law”. – I am left with all the trauma after what he has done. Steinmann emphasizes that she does not want to remove Kopseng’s possibility of leave. – It is his right to get leave after serving such a long time. But I also deserve to have a sense of security. Visiting ban The prosecution can grant a person a visiting ban if there is reason to believe that the person will: commit a criminal offense against another pursue or violate another’s peace create disturbances that are particularly burdensome for another person. A visiting ban means that the person is prohibited from staying in a certain place, stalking, visiting or otherwise contacting another person Source: Criminal Procedure Act § 222 a When Kopseng appealed the police’s decision on a visiting ban to the district court, it meant that Steinmann had to travel several miles. She wanted to tell the district court judge how traumatized she is after rape and abuse. The district court judge agreed that there was “doubtful reason to believe that Kopseng may be guilty of criminal acts towards Steinmann”. One judge in the Court of Appeal agreed, but the other two agreed with Kopseng. Julio Kopseng’s lawyer sees no need for him to have a visiting ban under cover from the prison and is fronting the inmate’s appeal. Photo: Nadir Alam / news – Not a human right Heidi Reisvang is Kopseng’s lawyer. – Kopseng is granted leave with very strict conditions. There is also a condition that he must not contact the offended parties in his case, explains Reisvang. When you have those frameworks as a backdrop, there is no need for a contact and visiting ban, the lawyer believes. She also points out that her client is not alone on a perm, but together with “Vegen ðgær”, a non-profit organization where the employees themselves have experience of drugs, crime or as relatives. – Can’t he then just accept a restraining order? – As we see it, he must not take the burden of such coercive means, just because he is him, and just because he is in prison, says Reisvang. She reminds that there are “some legal conditions that must be met”. – The complaint means that Steinmann and other victims have to appear again and again in court, is there something the inmate is thinking about? – The aggrieved person is not obliged to attend, but is encouraged and constantly to do so. I can understand that, but it is not a human right to have contact and visiting bans, says Kopseng’s lawyer. One of the other women Kopseng has been convicted of raping also experienced that Kopseng appealed the restraining order she asked for in the district court. There he was supported and the visiting ban was lifted. The woman appealed further to the Court of Appeal, which rejected the appeal. The consideration of the victims must be given the most weight and then we must take better care of them, believes Helge André Njåstad, who is the leader of the Justice Committee. Photo: Nadir Alam / news Frp: – The victims must be prioritized news has asked for a comment from Minister of Justice Emilie Enger Mehl, but the minister will not comment on “an individual case that is for legal consideration”. Leader of the justice committee Helge André Njåstad from the Progress Party thinks the rounds in court are problematic: – The Progress Party believes that it is the care of the victims that should weigh the most, and then we must take better care of them. Njåstad believes that it is the inmate who is going on leave who must ensure that the victims feel safe: – Through a ban on visitors or even stricter measures with, for example, a reverse violence alarm. Njåstad believes that inmates who do not want to take care of the victims must stay in prison: – It is not a human right to get leave, and if there is a risk that the victims will be contacted, then that is an argument in itself to avoid the use of leave. According to Njåstad, it is not the victims who must stand in court and defend why they should feel safe. – Society must ensure that. Demand a lifetime restraining order Veronica Bratseth is the leader of Aldri Aleine, a voluntary organization for women exposed to violence. – It is absolutely terrible that Marthe has to stand in this fight. And I know she’s not the only one. Having to fight for new visitor bans all the time is incredibly tiring, believes Bratseth. Aleine will therefore never have a lifelong contact ban when someone is convicted of violence in close relationships. Bratseth believes that defenders will disagree, but comes with a reminder: – We have to think that those who are exposed to partner violence will be damaged for life. In 2013, Julio Kopseng was arrested and sentenced to 21 years in custody for 20 rapes, mistreatment and an attempted rape. Photo: Privat / news Hiding For Marthe Steinmann, furlough means more unrest. – I sleep badly and get more scared. When I walk the dog, I skitter when I meet other people, says Steinmann. She believes a restraining order gives her “a little security”. – If he actually chooses to contact me, it could be punishable for him. And then the list might be a little higher. – Someone will think: Can’t you go away or hide during the hours he is out? – Yes, and I have done that. But why should my freedom be restricted when he starts to get more freedom? I don’t understand that. Published 20.11.2024, at 13.41 Updated 20.11.2024, at 17.30
ttn-69
Reacts to serial rapists not being banned from visiting – news Norway – Overview of news from different parts of the country
