– My main conclusion was that there was no DNA evidence for Viggo Kristiansen, says Farmen. She is an expert in DNA and has been an expert in several criminal cases. In 2009, she prepared a report on the Baneheia case on behalf of Kristiansen’s defenders. – Was there DNA evidence for several people? – DNA of the same type as Jan Helge Andersen was found, including a pubic hair at the crime scene. DNA findings of unknown origin had also been made, but these have clearly been checked out of the case. DNA contributions from Jan Helge Andersen have been proven, but not from Viggo Kristiansen, according to the attorney general. Photo: NTB SCANPIX/POLITIET Central to the case was a piece of DNA evidence which was previously interpreted as evidence that there had to be two perpetrators. This view has now changed: – In a total of nine of the samples taken from the girls, a DNA contribution in the form of a complete or partial profile, compatible with the convicted, Andersen, has been demonstrated. No similar findings have been made in the case of Kristiansen, says Attorney General Jørn Sigurd Maurud. This is the Baneheia case * Stine Sofie Sørstrønen (8) and Lena Sløgedal Paulsen (10) were raped and killed in Baneheia in Kristiansand on 19 May 2000. They were found two days later. * Viggo Kristiansen and Jan Helge Andersen were sentenced respectively to 21 years’ detention (10 years’ minimum) and 19 years’ imprisonment for the rape and murder of the two girls. * Andersen confessed – Kristiansen has always claimed that he is innocent * The commission for resumption of criminal cases had the case on its table for the seventh time in the summer of 2017. * In February 2021, the commission decided that Viggo Kristiansen will have a new trial of the criminal case. Should have ended earlier The conclusion the attorney general refers to comes from a Danish report that was prepared two years ago. Farmen believes the findings in the Danish report are almost identical to what she said eleven years earlier. – Do you have any thoughts that this case could have been closed earlier? – Absolutely. After all, it has been eleven or twelve years since we came up with the first report, and it is many years to sit and wait for the case to be reopened. Lawyer Sigurd Klomsæt represented Viggo Kristiansen when the case was requested to be reopened the first time. He is also the one who commissioned the report from Farmen. – It is obvious that Viggo Kristiansen has been unjustly imprisoned in these years. It is not just that he has been in prison, he has had an extremely strict regime, he says to news. Lawyer Sigurd Klomsæt represented Viggo Kristiansen when the case was requested to be reopened the first time. Photo: Berit Roald Helen Sæter, who headed the readmission commission when Klomsæt tried to have the case reopened, does not want to comment on this case. In 2010, the commission concluded that new DNA analyzes did not contribute to weakening the evidence against Viggo Kristiansen, and therefore did not shed new light on the case. Did not attach importance to the report Farmen believes that the readmission commission did not attach importance to her report in 2010, when the commission believed that nothing new came to light. – We thought there were several new things. She refers to the assessment of the DNA evidence, which she believes was overinterpreted the first time. The farm also notes that the Spanish DNA experts who analyzed the biological material in 2000 reported an uncertain finding. This uncertain finding did not come to light in court in 2001. – If they had come forward and reported on those findings at the time, the issue of pollution would have been addressed from the start, she says. It is about the previous assumption that there had to be two perpetrators probably due to the fact that the samples have been contaminated. DNA of the same type as Jan Helge Andersen was found, including a pubic hair at the crime scene. Photo: Lise Åserud / NTB On Friday, State Attorney Maurud said that contamination has been detected in two of the samples. This helps to strengthen the hypothesis that the results in the original samples may be due to the fact that they have been contaminated. – There is no DNA evidence which establishes that Kristiansen is guilty, says the Attorney General.
ttn-69
Should have been resumed 13 years ago – news Norway – Overview of news from various parts of the country
