The Court of Appeal thus lands on the same conclusion as the district court did last fall.
It was the night before Wednesday 24 June in 2020 that two people were found brutally killed with a knife at Storhaug in Stavanger.
The man himself called the police and reported the killings.
He was quickly apprehended, and admitted that he had killed the couple. However, he did not plead guilty.
He is also said to have sent pictures of those killed.
Both the accused and the two killed had come to Norway as Syrian asylum seekers.
Plan the killings
The accused has in the Court of Appeal admitted that it was he who stabbed and killed. However, he has claimed that this was in self-defense because his girlfriend attacked him first. The accused has also claimed that the murder of his ex-wife was an accident.
The Court of Appeal does not believe this explanation.
According to the court, the accused planned the killings. The way the two were killed supports this, according to the court. The two were stabbed 13 times each – several of them fatal.
The court has also relied on the explanation of a fourth person who was in the apartment when the murders took place. The witness says the man attacked the couple, and that the ex-wife’s boyfriend, among other things, tried to flee from the accused.
Furthermore, in addition to sending pictures of the killed, the accused also sent audio messages in which he said the following:
“I killed both of them and got peace in my head.”
The court also believes the killings were honor-related. This is supported by several testimonies from the environment of the accused. In the time before, he is said to have talked about that the ex-wife could get to the “zero point” if she did not move back to him, in the sense that she would be killed.
The accused has also explained himself about shame and honor in the interrogations.
Will consider appeal
Odd Rune Torstrup is the defender of the accused 44-year-old.
Odd Rune Torstrup, lawyer.
Photo: Ole Andreas Bø / NRK
–
– My client has been informed about the verdict, and I will go out to him in prison tomorrow and discuss the verdict with him. We are of course considering an appeal, but the right of appeal to the Supreme Court is quite limited, so we have to see what we can possibly appeal against, the lawyer says.
– Are you surprised by the verdict?
– We have defended him to the best of our ability, and I will not comment on whether we are surprised by the verdict or not. He has presented his arguments. Then it’s up to the court to judge. We take note of this and possibly move on if there is a basis for it, says Torstrup.
–
