Professor involved in the doctor note case:
- Have not done anything wrong
UiO Professor Kjetil Sundet acted as expert witness in one of Norway’s largest drug cases ever. The case is now under investigation in relation to the scandal over doctor notes.
På norsk;)
FOTO: Aslak Johannesen
;)
FOTO: Aslak Johannesen
The neuropsychologist Kjetil Sundet examined one of the accused in a drug case regarding smuggling of 11 kilos of heroine in 1999 together with psychiatrist Pål Herlofsen. The latter is now suspected of selling doctor notes to criminals.
The accused in the drug case, who was named one of the masterminds, was originally sentenced to 18 years in prison by Romerike District Court. The District Court found no mitigating circumstances. When Herlofsen and Sundet, at lawyer Drevland’s request, examined him in relation to the appeal before Eidsivating Jury Court, they reached the conclusion that he had an IQ of around 60 and was practically mentally challenged, according to the verdict. However, he was considered accountable for his actions.
On the basis of the examinations by Sundet and Herlofsen, the court found that the accused had been unfit to plan and comprehend the consequences of his actions. This was considered highly mitigating, and his punishment was reduced from 18 to 11 years.
District Attorney reacted
After the Norwegian newspaper Dagens Næringsliv uncovered the false doctor notes, the authorities will now review a wide range of past criminal cases, one of which is this drug case.
- I will not reveal any specific names in the investigation, but it is of course natural to review this case, head of prosecution with Oslo Police District Carl Graff Hartmann says to Universitas.
District Attorney Kristian Nicolaisen already reacted to the findings of Sundet and Herlofsen when proceedings were active.
- I regarded it as unbelievable that a conniving and cunning mastermind in a drug case could be so mentally unfit. I don’t know if the report is false, but I am obviously entertaining a few thoughts these days, Nicolaisen says.
He underlines, however, that he does not have the expert knowledge to reach a conclusion, but he thought there was a large gap between Sundet’s and Herlofsen’s conclusions and his own observations of the accused.
According to Dagbladet, the accused later admitted to employees at Dikemark psychiatric hospital that he had exaggerated his mental problems.
Fabricated story?
Sundet was included in the proceedings when the accused claimed he had received head injuries in a motor cycle accident in Macedonia.
- Before medical experts were involved in the case, there was no debate over whether the accused had mental problems or had been involved in a motor cycle accident, District Attorney Nicolaisen says.
Professor Kjetil Sundet admits that considering whether the story of the accused was fabricated might be in order. However, he categorically denies that he is guilty of any misconduct in this case.
- I didn’t believe then, nor do I believe now, that Herlofsen or Drevland were manipulators. We may have been wrong, but I don’t think I have been taken for a fool, Sundet says to Universitas.
He explains that he was appointed by the court to measure the IQ of the accused, but that the remaining tests and examinations were conducted by Herlofsen. Sundet explains that he believed the accused had an IQ ranging between 65 and 85.
- Why does the verdict explicitly say that the accused had an IQ of about 60?
- The court may have devoted too much attention to the IQ number, and the defense lawyer of course took maximum advantage of that.
Sundet thinks the mental illness story may have been planted.
- But that is merely speculations. I will leave it to the investigation to find out what Herlofsen has done and not done.
- Do you think Herlofsen has done anything wrong?
- I believe he is innocent until prove and guilty.
Today, Ole Petter Drevland, who defended the accused during the 1999 trial, is representing Herlofsen in relation to the scandal over doctor notes.
