The police prosecutor who allowed brutal robbers to avoid remand is behind several informal money transfers to private individuals in Gaza. She has now been replaced and has disappeared from Facebook.
On 5 October, a family in Ullern was subjected to a brutal home robbery, unlawful detention and violence. The robbery was meticulously planned. The robbers were arrested the same day, thanks to a vigilant neighbour with a camera and a mobile phone.
The robbers were released from custody. The victims do not dare speak to the press, for fear of reprisals. Witnesses describe the robbers as being from Pakistan, the Middle East and Africa. It is also unclear whether any questioning has taken place. Document has enquired, but received no reply.
The police prosecutor who released the robbers has now been removed from the case. She has also disappeared from Facebook, where she posed wearing a Palestinian scarf and called for a boycott of Israel.
On 8 November, Document reported that the police prosecutor who decided to release the robbers is a Palestine activist in her spare time.
Palestinian activist in the police force let the robbers go free
The police respond
The police respond to the case and defend Police Prosecutor Mari Bystrøm Julnes:
“We refer to the article published on 8 November claiming that the police released the robbers, in which Document conflates the responses from the Oslo Police with the newspaper’s personal allegations that one of our employees is an activist. We ask the newspaper to stick to the assessments that the police have actually made and to which we refer in the replies we have sent you»
This is what Steinar Wulfsberg-Gamre writes in an email. He is Senior Communications Adviser at the Oslo Police District.
He goes on to write:
«We refer to section 4.1 of the Code of Ethics, which states that editorial teams must emphasise objectivity and consideration in content and presentation, as well as section 4.2, which makes it clear that a media outlet must distinguish between factual information and commentary. Nor can we see that personal and private matters are relevant to the assessment made in this case, cf. point 4.3 of the Code.»
Document responds
In response to the police’s claim regarding «personal allegations by the newspaper that one of our employees is an activist», Document replies as follows:
«I agree that the definition of an activist may be subject to subjective assessments. A single post on Facebook does not necessarily make someone an activist. However, when the person in question posts several items on the same topic and these dominate their public profile, the perception of activism is reinforced.
Furthermore, on three occasions, the person in question has organised fundraising campaigns via Spleis for the same cause.
Taking all this into account, we at the Document editorial team have come to the conclusion that this constitutes activism. We are also of the view that a significant proportion of Norway’s population, if not the majority, regard this as activism.»
In response to the police’s assertion that personal and private circumstances in this case are irrelevant to the decision made to release the robbers, Document replies as follows:
«Activism of this kind is most frequently, if not exclusively, found amongst that section of the population which advocates lenient sentencing, liberal immigration policies and apologetic attitudes towards crime committed by people with a refugee background. This case concerns a particularly serious crime of the kind the public fears most, committed by five people with an immigrant background from Islamic countries.
We have not pointed to any causal link between the police prosecutor’s personal views and the assessments made in the course of his official duties. However, in Document’s view, shedding light on the police prosecutor’s views is relevant to this case. It also appears to be relevant to the public.
It may well be that the police believe they are on solid ground for not remanding the suspect in custody, based on the Criminal Procedure Act. However, an interpretation that the police may have overlooked in this context is described as follows:
‘Police prosecutor Julnes is incorrect in stating that only the risk of evidence being tampered with, the risk of reoffending or the risk of absconding can provide grounds for remand; in addition, consideration must be given to “the public’s sense of justice”. The condition that release would ‘offend the public’s sense of justice or create a sense of insecurity’ provides a legal basis for remand in custody under Section 172 of the Criminal Procedure Act, often referred to as ‘remand for the purposes of law enforcement’.
This provision is an exception to the ordinary grounds for detention (such as the risk of evidence being tampered with or the risk of reoffending). It permits detention solely on the grounds that the offence is so serious that society would react strongly if the accused remained at liberty pending trial»
Question: Why has the public’s sense of justice not been taken into account in this case?»
After two days, Document has still not received a reply to the question.
Three transfers to Gaza via PayPal
Prosecutor Mari Bystrøm Julnes has organised no fewer than three fundraising campaigns on Spleis for Gaza, totalling 61,750 kroner (≈ US$ 6,500). According to her, the money has been transferred to private individuals in Gaza via PayPal or GoFundMe.
In the first fundraising campaign, she raised 50,550 kroner. It was titled “Emergency aid for families in Gaza – tents, clothes and food”. A total of 105 donors contributed to the campaign, which ended on 27 November 2024. In the invitation, Julnes wrote:
«The most effective way to help in Gaza is to donate directly to families. UNRWA has been banned by Israel from operating. In the north, they have been completely cut off from all aid and assistance. Through social media, I have come into contact with five families who desperately need your help to survive. They are living solely on donations. Winter is on its way and the children have no clothes. One of the families lives in a plastic tent made from rubbish. Your contribution will go towards tents, clothes and food for the children. The children range in age from a few months to 8 years. Every krone will go directly to them. We are safe here. They do not. Help make their lives a little better❤️
For your information, payments to the five families are made via donation links they have set up through GoFundMe and PayPal. I have used these links several times to make donations to these families and have received photos in return showing that they have bought food and clothes for them.»
«Mari Bystrøm Julnes is responsible for the content of this fundraiser and for ensuring the money goes to the stated cause», reads the text below the post.
The first Gaza fundraising campaign from Julnes (AI translated).
Source: Sparebank 1 Spleis
Good contacts in Gaza
On 14 February 2025, the next Spleis campaign came to an end. The text at the time read as follows:
«Hi everyone! As many of you know, I’m in contact with several families in Gaza. These are families who need your help. Very little emergency aid is getting through. Much of what does get in is stolen and sold back to the people at an outrageously high price. Those who manage to bring goods into the country can set whatever prices they like due to the shortage. The families have no money and are dependent on donations and aid. It is winter and they are living in tents that do not keep the cold out. Please help them buy blankets and winter clothes❤️🙏🏼 I know we all have a few kroner to spare.»
That campaign wasn’t quite as successful. Only seven donors contributed a total of 2,700 kroner.
She therefore tried again in May of the same year, assuring people that all the money would go directly to the families.
» Just when you thought the situation in Gaza couldn’t get any worse, it has. Israel has closed all borders and no emergency aid has been allowed in since the peace agreement collapsed. No supplies have entered since 2 March. The United Nations health organisation has announced that its stocks in Gaza are completely empty. This means there is no food and very little of anything else. Thousands of children are starving to death. Meanwhile, we live in abundance. Please lend a helping hand and donate. Everyone has a few kroner to spare, and every amount can help. I am in contact with several families, and their stories are heart-wrenching. They are watching their children slowly waste away, powerless to do anything. But you can. Donate and help ensure that some people can get hold of what little remains. Help some of them to survive. ❤️🙏🏼 Every krone helps! The money donated will go in full to the 10 families I’m in contact with.»
The response was slightly better than the campaign in February, with 26 donors contributing 8,500 kroner.
Risks?
Based on what Julnes herself writes on Spleisen, Document sent her the following questions.
“How many times, apart from the three attached Spleisen campaigns, have you carried out similar donations?
Private money transfers to people in Gaza are risky and not necessarily straightforward to carry out. In particular, if money passes through informal channels such as a hawala network, it may inadvertently end up supporting the terrorist group Hamas. This may be regarded as terrorist financing and is a criminal offence under Section 135 of the Penal Code.
Transfers via GoFundMe and PayPal are considered informal channels.
Can you verify that the money has not ended up as terrorist financing, or financing of other illegal activities?
Can you provide documentation showing that the money has been transferred and to whom it has been transferred?»
We never received a reply. Document therefore contacted Sparebank 1, which owns and operates Spleis, regarding the risks associated with using informal channels. And we received a reply.
«Spleis is a trust-based service, and we assume that the information provided when setting up a Spleis is correct. It is the organiser’s responsibility to ensure that the purpose of a spleis is genuine and that, once paid out, the money is used for the purpose for which it was raised. This is specifically stated in our terms and conditions (https://www.spleis.no/vilkar).
It is also the donor’s responsibility to familiarise themselves with who and what they are donating their money to.
With regard to fundraising for Gaza and other crisis areas, we recommend that the funds raised should go to reputable organisations that are on the ground and providing assistance. However, we recognise that emergency aid in certain countries and areas does not reach its destination, partly due to blockades, and that there is a great need for assistance at an individual level. For such areas, there is no 100 per cent guarantee that the funds will reach the intended recipients or be used for the stated purpose
For Gaza/Palestine specifically, we have created this page (https://www.spleis.no/stott-gaza) where we explain that we review all fundraising campaigns for those affected by the war in Gaza, and that it must be made clear who the campaign is intended to help and what the money will be used for. We also state here that we do not permit general Gaza fundraising campaigns without a more specific stated purpose.»
Police lawyer Julnes’ description of the purpose of his Spleis fundraising campaigns has clearly been taken on board by Sparebank 1. Head of Communications Tone Mesna at Sparebank 1 Spleis goes on to write:
» As regards the organiser of the three Spleis fundraising campaigns you mention, this is an organiser with whom we have been in dialogue – in line with our guidelines. The fundraiser has given us no reason to doubt that she has good intentions, that the cause is genuine and that, through her contacts, she is confident the money will reach its intended destination.«
However, she emphasises that this trust rests with the fundraiser, Mari Bystrøm Julnes.
Removed from the case – disappeared from Facebook
Document never received a reply as to whether the public’s sense of justice had been upheld in this case.
However, we had asked Julnes for access to the document confirming that the conditions for remanding the Ullern robbers in custody had not been met. We never received a reply to this. On the other hand, we did receive a reply from another police prosecutor after the article was published.
«I have just taken over responsibility for the criminal case. It is not standard practice to draw up such a document. No such document exists in this case and, consequently, there is nothing to consider granting access to»
This is written by police solicitor Anders Østberg Raaum, in response to our enquiry to Julnes.
Document thanks him for the information and writes:
“I therefore understand that the decision not to remand the arrested persons in custody was made verbally by the police prosecutor in charge.
Have all five perpetrators been interviewed? If not, why not?
Does your reply mean that responsibility for the further handling of the criminal case has been transferred from Police Prosecutor Mari Bystrøm Julnes to you?»
Raaum responds by asking for time and stating that he will get back to us once he has familiarised himself with the case.
In the meantime, Police Prosecutor Mari Bystrøm Julnes has deleted her Facebook page, on which she posed wearing a Palestinian scarf and called for a boycott of Israel.
