For Your Information:
Breivik’s Conviction has been appealed by means of review.
On 27 August 2012 an application was filed with the Norwegian Supreme Court for Review of the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement, to set aside (A) the Necessity ruling, and (B) the conviction; to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry. The finding of guilt, in the absence of full Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Conclusions renders the Guilt Finding Inadequate.
Copy of the Notice of Motion and Founding Affidavit are available at
http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/nom--affidavit.html
News.PK: Email Letter:
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 7:45 PM
To: 'News.PK: Chris Cork'
Subject: PK.News: The Breivik Verdict
Mr. Cork,
Hi. I read your article on TheNews.PK.
For Your Information:
Breivik’s Conviction has been appealed by means of review.
On 27 August 2012 an application was filed with the Norwegian Supreme Court for Review of the Oslo District Court: Breivik Judgement, to set aside (A) the Necessity ruling, and (B) the conviction; to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry. The finding of guilt, in the absence of full Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Conclusions renders the Guilt Finding Inadequate.
Specifically the Application requests the following orders:
[A.1] Set Aside the Judgements ‘Necessity (Nødrett) Ruling’
[A.2] Set Aside Defendant’s Conviction (Finding of Guilt) and Remit to Oslo District Court for hearing of Further Evidence to conclude Objective and Subjective Necessity Test Evidentiary Enquiry.
[A.3] If Defendant refuses to cooperate with Further Evidence proceedings; an order to change his plea to ‘guilty’; and/or ‘Non-Precedent’ Setting Declaratory Order
[A.4] If Failure of Justice Irregularity Does not Influence Conviction and/or Sentence Verdict; a ‘Non-Precedent Setting’ Declaratory Order
[B] Set Aside the Judgements Failure to disclose the pending Judicial Ethics violation complaint against Rettens Leder: Wenche Elizabeth Arntzen, filed on 06 June 2012 to the Secretariat for the Supervisory Committee for Judges , as a violation of Aarhus Convention Article 3.(3)(4)(5) principles, and general ECHR public accountability Transparency (Lithgow & others v United Kingdom) principles
Copy of the Notice of Motion and Founding Affidavit are available at
http://ecofeminist-v-breivik.weebly.com/nom--affidavit.html
Respectfully,
Lara Johnstone