– It is for the court to get as much information as they need, says prosecutor Thale Thomseth. On Wednesday, the Haugaland and Sunnhordland district courts move out. Both judges, defenders and defendants will then go to Karmøy for inspection, – We are going to the pedestrian street in Kopervik. So that the court gets a good overview of where Birgitte’s last safe movements were. And then we’ll go up and look at the crime scene. So that the court gets a good impression of what it looks like there, says Thomseth. Acting public prosecutor, Thale Thomseth. Photo: Øystein Otterdal / news The Esso station at Avaldsnes and the Karmel prayer house will also be visited on the route. It was here that Birgitte was at a party the night before she was killed. Then she hitchhiked with some girls to the center of Kopervik. The last, safe observation made by Birgitte is around 00:10. – We think it is important and useful for the court to see both the pedestrian street in Kopervik and the crime scene. It is clearer to you when you see it in geography, says defender Stian Kristensen. Sharp criticism On the morning of 6 May 1995, a farmer found Birgitte Tengs murdered. In court, he harshly criticized the police. He believes they did not secure the crime scene well enough. – The whole of Karmøy is very dissatisfied with the police, he said in court. According to the farmer, one of the police officers asked if he had plastic at home. The plastic used by the police at the crime scene has been widely discussed in court. Photo: news The farmer collected plastic. But he does not remember whether the plastic was new or used. He also says that both he and the police stomped around the crime scene. It could have ruined tracks, he believes. Police Superintendent Lars Grindheim was one of the first police officers to arrive at the scene when the farmer reported it. In court, he said they were thinking about tracking. They put up barricades. But they didn’t wear gloves. The plastic was to be used in case it started to rain. In court, he admitted that this was not so smart. – No, one has hindsight. But I chose to do it, says Grindheim. One of the police officers who was at the scene reacts himself to how it was handled. He has testified in court, and reacts to the fact that there were so many people walking around there. – I think it was strange that so many people were allowed to enter the crime scene, he explained. The witness said he was called in to cover up with plastic. – I should never have been inside that crime scene, actually. It should have been planned in advance. Believes pollution may have occurred The defense attorney for the accused 52-year-old is now questioning how real the evidence is. He believes contamination may have occurred. Defense attorney Stian Kristensen believes that a crime scene inspection is important for the court. Photo: Øystein Otterdal / news – You didn’t have much knowledge about contamination or other ways a crime scene could be contaminated at the time. There are challenges with using new technology at a crime scene that was secured in 1995. Back then you had a completely different discipline than what is required today, says Stian Kristensen. In court, Grindheim admitted that the police did not think contamination. – No, it was about securing and covering, he said. The prosecutor’s office is aware of the criticism and that trace protection is done in a different way today. – But we do not make any other assessments of the evidence we have. Those who did the work then did it to the best of their ability. So we have been clear throughout that the way in which tracks were secured was different in 1995 than it is today, says Thale Thomseth.
ttn-69
The court will see where Birgitte Tengs was killed – news Rogaland – Local news, TV and radio
