– I have a son who is terrified of going outside, says Jan-Einar Borgerud, who now risks imprisonment after he intervened in a fight at the Kjennerudvannet bathing area in Kongsberg. To Document he explains why he intervened.

– To be completely honest: It seems to me as if the police are protecting this immigrant gang, Borgerud tells Document.

It was an evening at the end of May 2024. Marianne Brandtzæg received a telephone call she had long feared: Her son and his friend were at the bathing area Kjennerudvannet in Kongsberg. The immigrant gang was there as well.

Since the son and his friend are under 18 years of age, Document chooses to anonymise them. We refer to them as Jakob and Emil.

That gang was the group Marianne had asked the police for years to protect the boys from. The gang consists of foreigners, most of them holding citizenships other than Norwegian. The few who have citizenship have parents from abroad.

– Someone called from Kjennerudvannet and told us that my son and his friend were there. Then the gang went there to get him, Marianne tells Document.

She and her former partner Jan-Einar Borgerud rushed into the car. They have another son together.

Terrorised for years

The background to the incident stretches back many years. “Jakob”, Marianne’s youngest son, has been harassed since primary school. The bullying escalated into outright violence, robberies and knife threats.

– He has been robbed, almost stabbed. There is always something, says Jan-Einar Borgerud.

The family has filed repeated police reports. They have asked for restraining orders, contacted the school, the police, child welfare services (barnevernet) and the Educational-Psychological Service (PPT). According to the family, the result has been the same every time: dismissal.

– Everything is dismissed. They do not spend any time on the things I report, even though we have a lot of evidence, says Marianne Brandtzæg.

One of the pieces of evidence Brandtzæg refers to is a video in which the man who is now the injured party, whose first name is Ahmed, films himself while repeatedly striking Jakob in the face. It is clear that Ahmed is enjoying himself during the incident. He shared the video on social media.

In another video he slaps another boy and tells him to say “Sorry, boss” to Ahmed. “If not, I will rape you,” he says in the video. This leads the boy to say “Sorry, boss”.

A third video shows Jakob being subjected to violence with a knife, and that he is bleeding from the face.

Three of the boys in the gang had restraining orders against the stepson when the altercation at Kjennerudvannet occurred. The 16-year-old injured party in the case had himself been convicted of violence against the stepson only months earlier, in January 2024.

Document is entirely dependent on tips from our readers. Do you have good tips or information you wish to share? Contact our journalist by e-mail.

Marianne Brandtzæg is the mother of “Jakob”, who was subjected to the attack by the immigrant gang. She supports Borgerud 100 per cent, she says. Photo: Private

The police armed themselves – but did not intervene

When Jan-Einar and Marianne arrived at Kjennerudvannet, they first encountered the police. The gang had been ordered to leave the bathing area, but the situation was far from over.

At a bus stop the family was pelted with stones by the gang of boys. When they stopped, Jan-Einar says that five or six boys set upon the stepson’s friend.

– Crude insults were shouted back and forth. That is completely clear, but nothing that should lead people to jump you, Borgerud tells Document.

During this time four police officers stood nearby observing the incident.

– I shouted to the police, but they did nothing. It felt like an eternity, says Borgerud.

The explanation from the police is that they had received information that someone in the gang had a pistol. They therefore had to arm themselves before leaving their vehicles, and the police students who were present were not permitted to participate.

The report about a pistol later proved to be incorrect. However, in the area where the gang had been staying at Kjennerudvannet, a set of brass knuckles was found.

The police have described the duration of the incident as “a few seconds”.

For Jan-Einar, the seconds passed slowly.

– I managed to go behind the car, fetch an iron bar, walk in front of the car and intervene. Four police officers were standing there watching, and nothing happened. I struck the first one I got hold of, he says.

He struck 16-year-old Ahmed several times with the iron bar on the shoulder, back and arm.

Charged with bodily violation

Borgerud is now charged with bodily violation under Section 271 of the Penal Code (straffeloven § 271). The prosecution authority, represented by police prosecutor Eldbjørg Håkonsen Martinsen of the Sør-Øst police district (Sør-Øst politidistrikt), maintains that the violence was unlawful.

Borgerud himself believes he acted in self-defence.

– I am a fairly outspoken person who is not afraid. I will do anything to defend my boys, he says.

This is not the first time he has been charged with violence. In 2023 he was sentenced to four months’ imprisonment for violence against two 15-year-olds whom he believed had bullied his son. On that occasion as well he claimed self-defence, but the court held that he had taken the law into his own hands.

– Marianne was fined for NOT intervening

While Borgerud is now charged for intervening with violence, Brandtzæg experienced the exact opposite: She received a penalty notice for not intervening in a fight in which one of the boys was beaten.

– I received a penalty notice for not intervening when he was beaten once when I was outside, and now Jan-Einar is charged for intervening. What are you supposed to do? she asks.

The son who does not dare to go outside

The consequences for the family extend far beyond the courtroom. The youngest son, who will soon turn 19, lives according to his parents almost completely confined indoors.

– He does not dare go outside. He shuts himself in because he does not dare travel anywhere. He should be out doing things and having fun at that age, says Borgerud.

– He wakes up screaming, he is terrified. He seems completely broken, Brandtzæg adds.

– We are beginning to become rightless

Borgerud is currently unemployed but normally works as a lorry driver. Recently he has spent much time with “his boys”. But now he risks being sent to prison.

The prosecutor has requested 75 days’ imprisonment.

– When the police fail so badly that they allow these youths to come again and again and get away with extreme violence and robbery, and it only becomes worse – then something is terribly wrong, says Brandtzæg.

Jan-Einar summarises it this way:

– The law must be the same for everyone, regardless of what skin colour you have. I have nothing to be ashamed of. This must come to light. Young people should be able to move freely without being afraid.

He adds:

– We feel that we Norwegians in Norway are beginning to become rightless.

The injured party

Ahmed, who was 16 years old and was struck with the iron bar, is today over 18. He holds Syrian citizenship and has a long criminal record. Several videos that Document has seen show him using violence, issuing threats and attacking others. In particular this has affected the boys mentioned in this case.

According to himself, Ahmed has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a result of being struck with the iron bar. He struggles to sleep and states that he has been very afraid.

The Sør-Øst police district has been presented with the allegations from Borgerud and Brandtzæg. Document has also sent questions about why they are prosecuting the man who defended his stepson and his friend, while the gang that carried out the attack is not being prosecuted.

Police prosecutor Eldbjørg Håkonsen Martinsen writes the following in an e-mail to Document:

The matters referred to form part of a main hearing that is still under consideration in the judicial system.

Since the court has not yet determined the question of guilt, and consequently no judgment exists, it would not be appropriate for the prosecution authority to comment on the content or the premises of the case in the media at present. Until a legally binding judgment exists, I must therefore refer only to what has previously been stated during the main hearing.

We will have to return to the questions when a legally binding judgment in the case exists.