It was what I thought, ” says Lars-Jonas Nygard (86) to Dagbladet.
The former lagdommeren have written doktorgradsoppgave about “Lekdommerne in strafferettspleien”. He has just read Dagbladet interview with one of the jurors in the Eric Jensen-case. He provides a unique insight into how the process was up to the ruling where the previous stjerneetterforskeren was acquitted of narkosmugling – but known to be guilty of gross corruption. Just over an hour after the ruling was notified to the court and to the Norwegian people, put lagdommerne it to the side.
Probably, it has never before happened that a member in a such a prolific case has revealed details about what happened on the back of the store.
That was how I thought it would be, ” says Nygard.
JURYEKSPERT: Lars-Jonas Nygard. Archive photo: Bjørn Langsem / Dagbladet Show more “Death line”
the Prediction justifies the former lagdommeren with the experiences extracted from its doktorgradsoppgave, where he conducted research on juryordningen and spoke with over 150 lagrettemedlemmer.
Nygard says he assumed it likely that it would be difficult for the jury to sort the huge bevismengden, with thousands of SMS are sent between Eirik Jensen and Gjermund Cappelen over a long time.
– SMS-row were the “death line”, says Nygard.
– There could lagrettemedlemmene easily drown.
So the jury put forward the ruling they felt that the Eirik Jensen was corrupt – but they didn’t mean it was proven that he had assisted Gjermund Cappelen in to smuggle hashish.
jury Member: “We of the jury have been good friends Video Source
One of the jurors tells us now that there were six jurors who believed that Jensen also had to be judged for hasjsmugling, since cappelen in his criminal ventures – that Jensen should have allowed themselves to corrupt the of – was about marijuana. Thus, lacking only a vote for Jensen to be known guilty of all tiltalepunktene.
– There were six jurors who took the consequence of that corruption must have a source, the money must come from somewhere, believes Lars-Jonas Nygard.
So I was sure that there was one jury member who jumped off.
Jensen and his forsvarerteam, led by attorney John – Christian Fire, has consistently claimed the former stjerneetterforskerens innocence. Jensen has appealed often arise from the trial disregard the jury’s verdict to the Supreme court.
Reacting to the court’s decision: – Inhuman For openness
It occurs very rarely that the jury members after the publications about the process that takes place in the back room.
– the Person who now speaks need not have bad conscience, ” says Nygard.
– Although it could have been an advantage in that he or she waited until after the case was finally closed. Lagrettemedlemmer does not have a confidentiality obligation – meddommere have it, but not lagrettemedlemmer. I understand that they speak out anonymously. For honestly – it has been going on in the jury which deserves no silence.
didn’t tell her friends that she set in Norway-history’s last jury
Dominate
A problem Nygard has seen in several juries is that either the jury foreman or one of the jurors, dominates the other:
– They sit well together in months, he says.
It is clear it is human over – and underordningsforhold. It is not resistant to juryordninger. I had the in my interviews many of the cases where it is nor was not the mayor dominated, but where there were one or more members who did it. The idea behind the juryordningen is that the ten members shall discuss to clarify their stance, are mutually independent of each other, so they should vote for themselves – but not convince the other. Are you unsure of your own standpoint, it is very okay to get others to support it. This here is the live inner hooks.
The unknown jurydramaet: – Eirik Jensen one vote from being field for drug offences
