The time in prison has not changed Johny Vassbakk’s perception of what he did on the night of 6 May 1995. When the appeal against him started in the Gulating Court of Appeal this morning, Vassbakk maintained that he did not kill Birgitte Tengs on Gamle Sundveg outside the center of Kopervik almost 30 years ago. District judge Jarle Golten Smørdal asked whether Vassbakk pleaded guilty after the state prosecutor had read out the indictment. – Not guilty, replied Vassbakk. He arrived at the courtroom two minutes before 9 o’clock today, and quickly looked over at the large press. Birgitte’s father, Torger Tengs, is in court to follow the whole case. His wife, Karin, is not present today, but is expected in Stavanger on certain court days, according to the assistance lawyers Erik Lea and John Christian Elden. Torger Tengs in place with assistant lawyers John Christian Elden (from left) and Erik Lea. Photo: Gunnar Morsund / news The first judgment handed down on 6 February in Haugaland and Sunnhordland district court concluded that the finding of Vassbakk’s Y chromosome in the trace sample from Birgitte’s pantyhose could only be explained by his being guilty of the murder. The court believed that Vassbakk’s extensive mode of abuse from the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s helped to substantiate that, in the court’s opinion, he had to be the perpetrator. An important premise for the district court judgment was the mutation that had occurred in the hereditary material between Vassbakk’s father and Vassbakk himself. This gives Johny Vassbakk a unique genetic material that few others in the family line can have. Defense attorneys Stian Kristensen and Stian Trones Bråstein in place before the appeal started today. Photo: Gunnar Morsund / news The DNA dispute becomes central In the Court of Appeal, the dispute over the DNA evidence is again. Two expert judges and five co-judges must rule on the defenders’ objections that an infection may have taken place, i.e. whether DNA from Vassbakk may have been transferred in other ways than through an act of murder. For example, in that police officers who handled Birgitte’s pantyhose may have had dealings with Vassbakk in the same period. The Y chromosome found on Birgitte’s pantyhose is the prosecution’s central evidence against Johny Vassbakk. Photo: The police This spring it became clear that more than 60 new samples from Birgitte Teng’s pantyhose were to be sent to the Forensic Medicine Institute in the Netherlands, NFI. The samples are taken from what are probably the perpetrator’s handprints. The prosecutor, State Attorney Thale Thomseth says that there are some preliminary findings in these analyses, but will not say which ones for the time being. The analyzes are now for quality assurance. – The final answers to the new tests will be ready in good time before the experts have to appear in court to explain themselves. Therefore, we saw no reason to ask for any postponement of the trial, says Thomseth. The prosecution with police inspector Unni Byberg Malmin, state prosecutor Thale Thomseth and state prosecutor Nina Grande before the appeal started today. Photo: Gunnar Morsund / news Judge asks for a reset Judge Jarle Golten Smørdal and his colleague, Arild Oma, have been concerned that the five fellow judges should come to Stavanger courthouse today with an open mind and a blank slate, to the extent that one can be unaffected in a case that has been the subject of formidable media coverage for almost 30 years. “The district court’s judgment in itself has no value as evidence. It is only what emerges during the appeal hearing that we can attach importance to. If the district court’s judgment is read too thoroughly, it can become difficult to distinguish between what came out in the appeal case and what was in the district court’s judgment,” Smørdal wrote in a letter he sent to the fellow judges when they were summoned to serve in the court . Birgitte Tengs was killed in 1995.
ttn-69
Johny Vassbakk maintains that he did not kill Birgitte – news Rogaland – Local news, TV and radio
