couldn’t agree more..

Well put James. He will not see freedom, ever.

I think you are correct. I got the distinct impression that this whole process was firmly in the hands of the judiciary. He must’ve gambled that he would create a highly politicized dynamic.What an awful, horrible and wasteful miscalculation: Norway is far too stable a society for that to have had any hope of happening. So bad a miscalculation, in-fact, that his sanity must really have been in-question, at some point.
Little there though in the way of consolation for the injured and the families of them and the killed. Cold comfort to know that they live in stable society.

“Very reasonable and worth considering?” You mean we should learn from other country´s best practices? What Irish Government would ever consider doing such an enlightened thing! :)

Reading the above, I’d be shocked if he ever tasted freedom again. The best thing for this bollix is for him to be locked up & completly ignored for ten years only to be visited by a muslim Norwegian Prime Minister. It would hopefully make his twisted brain explode.

Understandable to think but that is a common misconception, I can’t speak for Norway but in most common law jurisdictions like our own when a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity is handed down following a trial for murder the accused will likely spend more time in an institution than they would in prison and it is no more of a walk in the park for them. Insanity doesn’t mean you’re off the hook.

Believe it or not, murderers and sex offenders are two of the least likely categories of offenders to reoffend.

Of course, when they do reoffend the consequences are very serious for the victim; but it is incorrect to say that they can’t be reformed and will definitely reoffend.

I completely disagree Ned. The initial reporting of the sentence led to much confusion among people – just have a look on any social media network. I have also seen other journalists and people in the media (outside TheJournal.ie) claim that Breivik will walk free in 2033, which is not necessarily the case.

@ Ned -a green thumb for everything you’ve said above except for the word “mongoloid”, as it either insults Mongolians or the Devo song..

couldn’t agree more Ned, everytime I come on here I see peop…..oh look, tinfoil!!

@ Sinead – forgive me if I’m wrong, but I think that every journal article dealing with this court case and mentioning sentencing has stated that 21 years is the maximum possible sentence, but at the end of 21 years it would be possible to extend the sentence in 5 year increments. This has been clearly stated again and again and again. Given that, the readership and especially the regular commenters can’t fall back on the “it wasn’t clearly explained” excuse. They simply don’t bother to read the articles or other comments before commenting themselves. Shouting angrily is almost more fun then listening.

Ned, John and Barro,

I’m afraid your point is being undermined by the fact that the three of you are bringing the post off-topic.

If you need a refresher about our community policy, here it is: http://www.thejournal.ie/comments-policy/

And maybe take a look at this Twitter search to see the level of confusion that remains (across the world) about Norway’s penal system. https://twitter.com/#!/search/%23Breivik

Cheers,
Sinead

John,

We replied at the same time there. I’m hoping this article caters to current TheJournal.ie readers who haven’t read previous explainers or people new to the site.

As I said, the confusion isn’t confined to readers of this website. I saw journalists tweet about it earlier. Plus, I think it’s always interesting to examine how justice systems in other jurisdictions compare to Ireland’s. This in no way was an exercise to “spell out” facts as Ned suggests.

S

I see we have a know all online, even the worst comment can inform or reinforce your own view

I’m happy to concede that this is going off topic. I’d ask then that thejournal runs an open-thread article about how the readership and the commenting on thejournal, so the readership and commenters could talk about this and still be on topic. I think it’s a valid subject and one that many readers would want to participate in and/or see the results of. Perhaps with a poll.

Sinead, despite the previous article on Breivik making it absolutely clear that his sentence does not mean he will walk free, no questions asked, once that sentence is served, the comments were full of ranting about how disgraceful it is that he’ll be out so soon and calling for his death. It was absolutely clear that a good chunk of those commenting hadn’t even read the article.

This isn’t confined to this instance either, almost all articles on economics, business or politics have large comment numbers being made by people who didn’t even want to read the article, just wanted to air their opinion on a related matter or post comments belittling the people involved.

So although you said this isn’t trying to spell things out at a remedial level for the resident ranters, I will maintain the belief that it is.

Focus on good journalism, not catering to idiots who come here to argue and use as a soapbox, as certain new political ‘movements’ certainly do.

I would almost suggest moving to moderated comments that are seen to before they’re made public, as most media websites do, however I fear you’d drive the ranters elsewhere and thus ruin both the journal and whatever site you inflict the ‘rebels’ on.

Winter is coming.

What is the definition of a psychopath? Someone who is insane? In that case the offender would be committed to a psychiatric institution for as long as he poses a threat.

I’ve never seen data that suggests that paedophiles have an above-average risk of reoffending – quite the opposite actually. And rehabilitative treatment has been found to be effective with these types of offenders.

My point was (and is) that you can’t say that they can’t be reformed and will definitely reoffend. The majority of them don’t reoffend.

And you can’t keep an entire category of offender locked up forever because there’s a chance some of them will reoffend. Each individual should be assessed and safeguards put in place. Mass permanent incarceration is not the answer.

Corporal? Like–beating him? You don’t mean Capital?

I was subjected to corporal punishment when I was 5 years old. It’s not very nice, so I’ll have to disagree with you on that one.

sorry i meant Capital. im very hungover.

Terry, your one of many victims in this country. Fair play for voicing it. A lot do not speak up (I understand that talking about it is far from an easy thing) and those that inflicted such torture fade away getting away with it. If more speak up, these animals will be remembered for what they really are.

Barry, I got the ruler across the knuckles a couple of times in school. I’m not really a victim. It was outlawed the following year.

Eric, I’d imagine capital punishment to be even more painful than corporal punishment, possibly resulting in death., so I’ll have to disagree with you again.

What?

Right so Terry, I’m a bit of topic alright.

*off

Love it! But, who said anything about violence? Just would like to fully debate this matter, honest….really…………

Lads, can we keep it on-topic and away from personal insults and calls for fights. Have had to delete a few comments already on this.

If you need a refresher on our community policy, check it out here: http://www.thejournal.ie/comments-policy/

Ah Sinead, that’s uncalled for. I was obviously trying to make light of the argument. There’s no point in allowing comments if you are going to censor harmless ones such as those.

Capital punishment allows the criminal the easy way out.

Joe it’s understandable to take your personal zeal into account here but Norways legal system is reflective of its culture. Their whole system is coming under a great deal of heat over this individual case. Albeit a rare crime for anywhere, it is an especially rare crime for Norway. Their system reveals a great degree of enlightenment in their society and demonstrates that they have the fortitude to try and rehabilitate rather than the cowardice to simpy carry out punitive measures and whats more impressive is that they don’t spread themselves between the two things unlike our friends across the atlantic, where we see on a daily basis how that system is failing them. In the latter example there is also the issue of where one draws the line between what you call a smaller crime and that of a larger or more serious one. Legal systems are never black and white as the danger in a miscarriage of justice invariably presents itself in the grey areas.

Breivik will no doubt suffer for the rest of his years but this case was a test for the Norweigans and I think they have handled it without compromising themselves.

Ironically that was his issue with Norway. The murdering bastard will now benefit from their lefty liberalism gone too far.

He hasn’t been given internet access and he can’t communicate with the outside world. The laptop is just for typing and for study – no internet.

Norway has a relatively low rate of reoffending upon release so it would appear that their system works (and it is much cheaper to run than ours).

Yes Declan, a real pearl of wisdom from you there, we’ve seen how punitive systems have performed so well over the ages.

Yes, making him a martyr is definitely a good idea.

what about the victims of this looser and their families they should hang him