The Somali man Abdullatif (25), resident in Grimstad, has for the seventh time been convicted of violence. On this occasion, he struck and placed his then cohabiting partner in a chokehold in her own home. Sentence: five months.

Agder District Court (Agder tingrett) delivered judgment on 27 March in the case against a Somali man (25) resident in Grimstad. He was found guilty of aggravated bodily violation (grov kroppskrenkelse) pursuant to the Penal Code (straffeloven) § 272, cf. § 271, and sentenced to five months’ imprisonment.

This is the seventh time the man has been convicted of offences involving violence.

Struck sleeping cohabiting partner

During the night of Saturday 13 September 2025, the 25-year-old returned to his cohabiting partner’s flat in Kristiansand at approximately half past four in the morning. He was intoxicated on vodka, whisky and cannabis (hasj). The aggrieved party (fornærmede), a woman in her twenties, was sober and asleep.

When she asked him to lie down in the living room, he repeatedly called her a “fucking bitch” and threw objects around the flat. He then struck her with an open hand to the face. The woman went into the bedroom and telephoned a friend, holding the door shut. The man attempted to open it from the other side and eventually stated that he had trapped his finger. When she opened the door, he pushed her down onto the bed and struck her again in the face.

In the living room, he placed a brief chokehold around her neck. The court notes that the potential for injury in chokeholds is considerable.

When the woman put on clothes and attempted to leave the flat with her dog, the man pushed her so that she fell and struck her face against a doorframe or another object. She sustained a 1.5-centimetre laceration between the inner corner of the left eye and the bridge of the nose, which required two stitches. She suffered extensive bruising around both eyes and was medically certified unfit for work for two weeks.

Bleeding, she sought help from a neighbour. The man also destroyed her television.

Seven convictions for violence

The 25-year-old has previously been convicted six times in the period from 2017 to 2024. All convictions concern offences involving violence: bodily violations, bodily harm , abuse in close relationships, robbery and violence against a public official.

The aggravated bodily violation for which he is now convicted was committed during the probation period for the previous judgment. That judgment, dated 28 February 2024, was itself a combined sentence with an even older judgment from 2022. On that occasion, he was convicted of two bodily violations and violence against a public official and sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment, of which three months were suspended.

It is the suspended portion of that sentence which has now been converted and incorporated into the new combined sentence.

The court: Suspended sentence has not had effect

The court assessed the aggravated bodily violation alone at 90 days’ unconditional imprisonment. With a recidivism increment (gjengangertillegg) pursuant to the Penal Code § 79 letter b and a deduction for partial confession, the sentence for the offence itself was set at 120 days.

Normally, the recidivism increment is imposed as a suspended addition. On this occasion, the court chose to impose it as unconditional imprisonment. The reasoning is explicit: the suspended increment has previously not had “the desired effect”. That is: the court itself acknowledges that suspended sentences have not functioned for this man.

Nevertheless, the total sentence amounts to five months. With credit for two days in pre-trial detention.

By comparison, the statutory penalty framework for aggravated bodily violation is imprisonment for up to six years.

Smokes cannabis daily

The 25-year-old stated in court that he has applied for substance abuse treatment and anger management. He reported having ceased alcohol consumption after the incident but smokes cannabis daily. Defence counsel requested that the court recommend serving the sentence in a treatment institution.

The court refused. The reasoning was that the man has not been granted a place in any concrete rehabilitation programme. However, the court added that if such an offer were to be established, it would “appear positive both for the defendant and for society”.

He was additionally ordered to pay NOK 6,914 in compensatory damages and NOK 30,000 in redress (oppreisningserstatning) to the aggrieved party.

The judgment is unanimous.