– One year in prison is a good, and I hope adequate signal that no one will go out and hunt wolves illegally, said the prosecutor in the case, Tarjei Istad.
The Supreme Court has concluded the appellate court interpreted the law incorrectly and measured for mild penalties. The defendant has been sentenced under the Criminal Code and not pursuant to the draft law.
“General Preventive considerations dictate a strict reaction. It’s aggravating that there is talk of a planned and organized hunting, and that the experiment were three wolves, where two were a territorial and breeding pairs, it says among other things in the Supreme Court decision. “
Verdicts is sharpened as follows:
- Trial 1: Prison for one year. Loses the right to hunt in three years. (Prison for 9 months in the Court of Appeal)
- Trial 2: Prison for six months. Loses the right to hunt in three years. (Prison for five months in the Court of Appeal).
- Trial 3: Prison for five months. Loses the right to hunt in three years. (Prison for 120 days in the Court of Appeal).
- Trial 4: Prison for 120 days. Loses the right to hunt in three years. (Prison for 120 days also in the Court of Appeal.)
- Accused 5. Was acquitted in the Court of Appeal. Supreme Court cancels acquittal.
The prosecution appealed against the High Court’s interpretation of the law and sentencing. The Supreme Court has therefore taken the appeal to follow and repealed the judgments of the Court of Appeal.
The Supreme Court adds the basis of the defendant number one, who has received the strictest punishment, was the one who organized the hunt and had the most important role.
– We note that the Supreme Court has landed on using criminal law in instead of the draft Act. This means that the maximum sentence is much stricter, says lawyer Helge Hartz, who defends the man who received the longest sentence.
The defendant number two participated with tracking or posting and fired several shots in the direction of the wolves at range. Defendant number three participated as spores or put on record.
The District Court the defendants sentenced by the so-called mafia section, concerning organized crime. It was the not the Court of Appeal nor the Supreme Court.
– Important signal, said prosecutor
Four of the five defendants are convicted of violating Penal Code section 152b, relating to lessen a natural population of protected organisms that nationally or internationally threatened with extinction.
It is the prosecutor in the case, Public prosecutor Tarjei Istad in ØKOKRIM satisfied with.
– the Supreme Court has thus placed serious environmental crime in the Penal Code and not in milder special laws. It is a signal to both the hunters and the police to continue to take this seriously, said Tarjei Istad.
The defendant number one is also guilty of violations of the draft Act and Firearms Act.
One of the accused was acquitted of complicity in wolf hunt in the High court. The Supreme Court has revoked the acquittal, but not rendered a new judgment against him.
– This means that his case must be reprocessed in the High Court, says his defense Jørn Mejdell Jakobsen.
Read all about it here: Illegal Ulvejakt