It has almost been 17 years since Martine died. The girl’s daycare worker, Rita (53), has always said that she has not hurt the girl. Nevertheless, she was sentenced to four years in prison for killing Martine. Now the Commission for the Resumption of Criminal Cases has decided that Rita will be allowed to try her case again. – I was very happy, it’s just like that finally. Fortunately, I have had a lawyer who has stood up and fought for this for many years, says the daycare worker. Since she was sentenced in the Borgarting Court of Appeal in 2019, the mother of four has hoped that one day she would be believed. – I had made up my mind that I was going to be old and gray before the commission made a decision. So when I received a text message from my lawyer that the case would be reopened, I was surprised, says the daycare worker. – A good day for legal certainty Dagmammen is assisted by lawyers Thomas Randby and Sidsel Katralen. They are very relieved on Rita’s behalf. – This has been a long battle against a prestige case for the prosecution which was used to highlight the Cold Case group at Kripos. There was a blanket acquittal in the district court, while the court of appeal allowed itself to be convinced. Now, fortunately, there will be a new round if the public prosecutor does not throw in the cards, and modern science can be used as evidence for an acquittal, says lawyer Thomas Randby of Elden Advokatfirma. Unanimous decision – It is a unanimous commission that has concluded that there are grounds for reopening, says Anne Kamilla Silseth, head of the Re-admission Commission to news. The basis for the decision is that there is new evidence and circumstances which, combined with the other evidence that was presented to the court, give a reasonable possibility that the convicted person would have been acquitted, if the new evidence or circumstances had been known to the court when the case was convicted, writes the Re-admission Commission. The re-admission commission will now forward the case to the Supreme Court’s appeals committee. – They will nominate a new court of appeal to hear the case. It is then up to the prosecuting authority how and at what point, if any, the case will be reopened. From experience, it takes some time in these larger cases, says Silseth. Re-admission commission Body that assesses whether a criminal case that has been legally decided by the courts must be re-processed by the court. The commission is independent of the courts and will thus contribute to greater legal certainty in Norway. The commission has five permanent members. The chairman, deputy chairman and one other member must have a law background. In 2022, the commission dealt with 242 cases. Of these, 44 were definitely reopened. If the case is reopened, the question of guilt and/or the sentencing must be tried again. The case will then go before a different court than the one that handed down the judgment in the first instance. Source: Store norske lexikon og spoortåke.no This was the second time the readmission commission dealt with Rita’s case. Last time, it was rejected by the narrowest possible margin, three to two votes. – Tøft Marius Mørner Staurset is the assistance lawyer for Martine’s family. He had not had time to go through the entire decision when news made contact on Monday. Photo: Aleksandra Olsen / news Martine’s parents are, according to their assistance lawyer, disappointed that this case is not over. – It is tough that uncertainty is created around the verdict that was passed, and it is quite frightening that there is such a large professional disagreement, says Marius Mørner Staurset. – There are different opinions, and it is serious that there is so much disagreement in the field in such important cases, says Mørner Staurset, who is excited about what the prosecution will do and whether there will be a completely new trial. The first day happened Everything started in September 2006, when Rita was supposed to have her very first day as a nanny for Martine. Martine and her mother came at 10 o’clock. After the mother had left, Martine played on the floor, together with Rita’s same-aged daughter. Rita says she didn’t notice anything wrong with the girl at first, but that she got tired when they sat at the table eating. She took the girl to the couch to change her diaper. – When I lifted her legs up to wash her ass, she rolled her eyes so the white was visible. Rita became very worried and contacted her mum who got there as soon as she could. But none of them were able to get in touch with Martine, who had convulsions and was bleeding around the mouth. When Martine arrived at the hospital, she was unconscious. She later died at Rikshospitalet from major head injuries. Dropped twice The case was investigated over two and a half years. It was only dropped after the state of the evidence by the State Attorney in April 2008. Then by the Attorney General in April 2009. They thought it was uncertain how Martine got her head injuries and when she got them. The parties in the case disagreed about whether it happened before or after the one-year-old came to the daycare. Martine’s parents wanted answers and contacted Stine Sofies Stiftelse, an organization that works to uncover violence and abuse against children. Together they asked the police to reopen the investigation. In 2015, the Attorney General decided that the case should be sent over to the Cold case group in Kripos. Was initially acquitted The new investigation led to Rita being charged and prosecuted for killing Martine. Rita was first acquitted in the district court in 2018. Like the Attorney General and the State Attorney, the court believed that it was unclear both when and how Martine’s head injuries had occurred. In the judgment, it is stated that one cannot disregard the fact that “the damage may have occurred by accident or negligence”. Convicted of serious and repeated violence The case was appealed by the prosecution. In the Borgarting Court of Appeal one year later, Rita was sentenced to four years in prison and to pay NOK 130,000 in compensation: “The majority of the Court of Appeal is convinced that Martine suffered the defendant’s head injuries, and that they were not due to a fall accident.” The judges, with the exception of one, believed that the nanny had committed serious and repeated violence against thirteen-month-old Martine. Rita appealed the case to the Supreme Court – but they refused to bring the case forward. The final verdict came 13 years after Rita was supposed to look after Martine for the first time. Several child abuse cases petitioned to be reopened In addition to Rita, news knows of four other convicts in similar cases who have submitted petitions to the Reinstatement Commission recently. The background for several of the petitions is, among other things, a major disagreement among the experts about how medical evidence should be interpreted. A father who was sentenced to one year in prison by the Borgarting Court of Appeal for drugging his four-month-old son A father who was sentenced to ten months in prison in the Gulating Court of Appeal for drugging his six-week-old son A mother who was sentenced to one year imprisonment by the Eidsivating Court of Appeal for ragging her two-month-old son A mother who was sentenced to 14 months in prison for grievous bodily harm against her five-month-old son news is aware that two more convicts are considering asking for their cases to be reopened. No plans for joint processing The head of the readmission commission says that specific assessments must always be made in each individual case, and that as of today no decision has been made that these should be processed together. – We may have to come back to that at a later date, says Silseth. Disagreement about rag shaking (Shaken baby syndrome) “Shaken baby syndrome” is believed to be the result of the abuse of infants and toddlers. The hypothesis has been that the child was shaken so violently, that it could cause acute brain damage with subdural and retinal haemorrhages. The shaking of the child is believed to trigger strong forces and correspondingly large head injuries. “Shaken baby syndrome” is characterized by a so-called triad of injuries: Brain haemorrhage outside the brain (subdural haemorrhage), haemorrhages inside the eyes (retinal haemorrhage) and other damage to brain tissue. There is a lack of scientific documentation as to whether this is correct. There is professional disagreement about the diagnosis internationally, but the Norwegian professional community believes the condition is real. A Swedish literature review (SBU report) from 2016 of nearly 3,700 research articles on “Shaken baby syndrome” concludes that there is limited knowledge base (low quality evidence) that the symptom triad can be linked to traumatic shaking, and that there is insufficient knowledge base (very low quality evidence) for the triad’s diagnostic safety in traumatic shaking. The SBU report has received criticism for alleged methodological weaknesses and contrived themes. A so-called consensus report from 2018 asserts that the rag shaking diagnosis is a widely recognized medical diagnosis. There are various theories as to what the bleeding in the head can be due to, if the cause is not rag shaking. It can be due to complications during childbirth or congenital hydrocephalus. Reference is also made to studies which show that a large proportion of children are born with a subdural haemorrhage. This often disappears by itself. Opponents of the term “Shaken baby syndrome” believe that many caregivers have been innocently convicted of having stuffed their child. At the same time, there are undoubtedly cases of child abuse in such cases. The professional community in Norway has gradually moved away from the term “Shaken baby syndrome” as this says more about the mechanism than you want to know in some cases. Instead, the term “inflicted head injury” or “Abusive head trauma” (AHT) is used. AHT takes into account that the injuries can be caused by several factors, such as shaking in combination with blunt force. Since there is doubt and disagreement among medical experts, which in turn has major consequences for the legal process, research has also been done on this in Norway. In 2020 and 2021 respectively, a legal and a medical research report came out which concluded that several parents may have been wrongly convicted. Both reports received strong criticism from the country’s leading forensic pathologists. news knows of at least four convicted parents and carers in so-called ragging cases who have requested their cases be reopened at the Readmission Commission. (Sources: Norsk Helseinformatikk, Store norske lexikon, Statens beredning för medical och social evaluation and news) Hello! Care to share some immediate thoughts? Or do you have specific tips that we should take a closer look at? Please contact. We are a group of news journalists who have been reporting on this topic since 2018, and we work to uncover possible miscarriages of justice within this field in the judiciary. Tel. +47 920 35 641 / +47 905 04 257 / +47 922 05 955
ttn-69
Former daycare worker Rita believes she is innocent convicted of murder – the case will be reopened – news Trøndelag – Local news, TV and radio
