Desperate investigators try to link my client to the Borglum murder, says the lawyer.

A fundamental principle in a legal system is that it is preferable to let ten guilty go free than to condemn one innocent. Another principle is that police investigators must not be predisposed when conducting investigations.

However, these two principles are at risk of colliding with the prosecution's handling of the case of the 30-year-old man charged with stabbing pregnant Louise Borglit to death in Herlev's Elverpark in November 2016.

According to the defendant's lawyer, Christina Schønsted, who argued in the Glostrup Court on Thursday, there are several examples where this is not the case.

---

Witness Influence?

------------------

The lawyer also points to the summoning of a witness who has been spoken to by the police several times.

The witness is a woman who was out for a walk in Elverparken when the crime occurred. Her account formed the basis for the description of the suspect that Copenhagen West Police issued, and which, according to the prosecution, matches the suspect.

Shortly before the woman was to testify in court, she was contacted by the police. And it smells, says Christina Schønsted.

- She has been interrogated extensively and almost ten times. First several times in 2016 and then continuously. Therefore, it is suddenly strange that she is to be interrogated again just before she is to give her testimony in court.

- There are numerous publications on how witnesses can be influenced. I'm not saying it happened. But it is certainly very unusual that it happens, just before the defendant is to testify in court.

Christina Schønsted adds that she has been a prosecutor for 15 years and a defense lawyer for 5 years.

---

What does the accused say to Frank?

----------------------------------

Several hours of audio recordings have been played in court. Here is a summary of some of them:

In connection with Frank visiting the accused in Nørre Snede Prison, the accused said:

- You know what I'm in for, and let's just say something else, you've said something else, so we can say "yes" to it... can you follow me... So we've been messing around a bit.

The accused has in court denied having confessed. He compared Frank to a "little boy who keeps asking for candy." He said it only to make Frank quiet.

In another clip, the accused talks about a knife.

- If they find the knife, they'll take my papers again, and then I'll be charged. That's how it works, brother.

The police have never found the murder weapon in the case. In court, the accused explained, that it "was just talk."

---

Undercover Agent in Prison

--------------------------

The most central and remarkable aspect of the case is that the police used an agent from the Police Intelligence Service in the fall of 2020, who was inserted into Enner Mark Prison, where the accused was serving a sentence for attempting to murder his ex-girlfriend.

Here, the agent, codenamed 'Frank,' became friends with the accused. What the accused did not know was that all his conversations with 'Frank' were recorded.

It is the prosecution's belief that the accused, on several of the recordings, admits to having killed Louise Borglit. 32-year-old Borglit was in her eighth month of pregnancy and had gone to the hospital for a check-up, the same day she was brutally murdered.

On one of the clips, the accused says to 'Frank':

- If they find the knife, they'll take my papers again, and then I'll be charged. That's how it works, brother.

The murder weapon in the case has never been found, and in court, the accused gave a detailed explanation of how he threw it away in a garbage bin, before he was admitted to a psychiatric hospital for four days after the crime.

The accused himself has denied that there is any truth to the story. And it's his unwavering honesty that speaks for him, says Christina Schønsted on Thursday.

- He talks about it to make himself interesting. He fills him with lies. It's pure spin.

During the course of the case, it has come to light that the accused had no visits from family since 2013 and that his only visitor in prison was a Red Cross volunteer.

- His vulnerable situation also clearly shows that he wants to appear interesting, says the defense lawyer.

While the defense's proceedings are ongoing, the accused smiles a little and nods affirmatively several times when the defense lawyer delivers his points.

---

Makabre and Quirky

------------------

On Tuesday, it was the prosecution's turn to proceed. Prosecutor Bo Bjerregaard referred to a prison visit log from Enner Mark Prison, where the accused, on a walk with 'Frank' in the presence of a third person, described how Louise Borglit was killed.

- She falls down. Cuts off her nose, he says among other things on the clip.

It had not been known before that Louise Borglit's nose had been cut off. Therefore, it can be concluded that the accused must be the murderer. Where else could he have gotten that information from, asked Bo Bjerregaard rhetorically.

The accused has in court explained that he knew it because his former lawyer and the police had shown him the autopsy report in connection with his earlier interrogation.

- I'll just say that anyone who has seen the autopsy report will remember it. Because it's so macabre and so quirky, says Christina Schønsted.

Both a detective and the former lawyer have given testimony in court.

Read also: Cellmate to accused in Louise Borglit case: He talked again and again about murder in the park or forest ( )

The detective noted that he "would like to say coldly and cynically that I haven't done it. But it's been five and a half years, so I can't say that it's excluded."

The lawyer said:

- If it was part of the case files at that time, he could have seen them. But I can't remember if I said: "Now we'll look at these here files."

- But it's not unusual to look at those kinds of documents.

© Ritzau Scanpix

---

Supreme Court Overrules Recordings

------------------------------------

Since the Glostrup Court initiated the case in May last year, the proceedings have been tumultuous. The defense objected to the use of evidence from 'Frank.' The court found that the evidence should first be heard before a decision could be made on its admissibility.

Later, the court came to the conclusion that most of the evidence could be admitted as evidence, but not all recordings. Afterward, the Land Court and the Supreme Court examined the recordings. On May 14, the Supreme Court ruled that the evidence could be used.

The Supreme Court weighed the fact that it was a very serious case, where other investigation methods had been exhausted.

Defense lawyer Christina Schønsted has protested the use of evidence, as she believes that the entire case should be about the fact that the case has been so delayed. The Glostrup Court has rejected this, and now the Eastern Land Court is appealing the issue.

---

Defense: They know it well

-----------------------------

According to Christina Schønsted, it is mysterious that the police did not stop 'Frank's' employment in Enner Mark Prison when the accused spoke about the severed nose. In fact, Frank's work continued.

The prosecution requires that the 30-year-old be sentenced to life in prison if found guilty.

The verdict is expected on June 10.

Warning: This article was translated by a Large Language Model, in case of doubt, you can always visit the original source.