Conversation with Ingunn Røren, journalist with Drammens Tidende, at her home on 25th March 1996:-
A man answered.
F. Yes, hello good evening. Is … I presume it’s your wife, Ingunn Røren.
Man: Er OK.
F. The journalist? Yeah?
Man: The journalist. One moment [He speaks in Norwegian to Ingunn Røren].
F. Yes, Hi there Ingunn, it’s Frederick xxx here, sorry to phone you at your home.
IR. Ah, huh.
F. It’s just that about three weeks ago I had your article translated into English and see that you’ve written that I’ve threatened to kill Heidi’s son.
IR. That you?
F. …… threatened to kill Heidi’s son.
IR. Yes according to Heidi.
F. You wrote that yeah, and you believe her do you?
IR. I’m not sure but that’s what she said and I’m not saying that you did, but I’m saying that’s what she said you did.
F. Cos, I certainly didn’t and there’s no way that you should print this without er … you can’t print this stuff without some evidence. You know she’s been in a psychiatric unit, you know her past because you had those letters [my fact sheet] translated into Norwegian.
F. And it’s just disgraceful. And my mother has never wanted to put me in a mental hospital and you could have checked that out easily. That’s an obvious lie to make because her parents wanted to put her in a psychiatric unit when she was a teenager.
IR. But how come you’re still so interested in Heidi?
F. Because I’ve just discovered what you’ve printed.
IR. Yes, but I thought you read that a long time ago.
F. No, no, no I didn’t. I only read one article which was … …
IR. Yeah, but I’ve only written one article.
F. No, it was in all the newspapers. It was in Bergens Tidende and that’s what I had translated. Only four weeks ago did I have your article translated and it’s just as well isn’t it? It’s a good thing that I know what you’ve written about me and that I’ve threatened to kill her neighbours, her, her family … I’ve written 400 obscene letters … it’s all rubbish. And you know perfectly well it’s rubbish and you know also the reason I sent those books on Aids and Abortion is because she slept with someone taking heroin - she knew she could catch Aids; she knew she was putting herself at risk and she had two abortions.
IR. What’s that to me?
F. Because I bloody well slept with her while she was ………
IR. Yeah, but that’s your problem.
F. Yeah, but it’s also her fault as well. It’s my problem for sure but you should know the reason why I sent those letters, to try and teach her a lesson. You’ve printed something that’s totally misled the public just to get a sexy….
IR. Yes, but if you have a problem with that, you have to contact the editor.
F. Yeah, I will contact the editor … but she [Heidi] doesn’t even want to contact the police. She’s avoiding them because they haven’t closed the case yet and they don’t believe her.
IR. She has contacted the police and they do believe her.
F. They don’t believe her.
IR. They do.
F. When was the last time she spoke to the police then? She has never spoken to Torill … … never!
IR. She has spoken to Nedre Eiker [Torill’s station], the police in the community where she’s living… She has spoken to them and they have a report on you.
F. You gave me her number [Torill Sorte’s].
F. And Svein Jensen told me he doesn’t believe her but they have to let Torill speak to her and Torill has been trying to get in touch with her for months and Heidi’s avoiding them.
IR. That’s not what I’ve heard. If you have a problem with what I wrote you have to contact the editor.
F. Yeah I will contact the editor, but …
IR. It’s his responsibility.
F. Yeah, but you wrote the story.
IR. But it’s his responsibility. He is the one who selects what to print and what not to print.
F. Well OK, when the police have…. She’s not bringing a case … I mean ten months [since the newspapers came out]… I wish she would bring a case so I can show her up in Court, because she’s got no evidence. There’s no 400 [obscene] letters - she destroyed them all [so Heidi told the newspapers] and you’d have thought she’d have kept them wouldn’t you for her case?
IR. I’ve seen some old letters and she has not destroyed them. [I was specifically referring to the 400 obscene letters every single one of which Heidi said she destroyed as per Verdens Gang report of 26.5.1995 but Ingunn Røren misunderstood me and referred to other letters I’d written].
F. And what’s wrong with the letters; what have I said in the letters that’s so bad?
IR. There were lots of things but that’s your problem; you have to take it up with Heidi.
F. Yeah, I will take it up with Heidi but also I’ll take it up with you when I pay you a visit and if I have to bring the police with me I will so help me God; you’re not gonna get away with this. You didn’t print my name either did you? Why’s that?
IR. What,- I didn’t … … …
F. Why didn’t you print my name in the newspapers if it’s all true?
IR. Why should I?
F. Because every other newspaper does if they’ve got their facts right.
IR. Yeah, but if you still have a problem on this, please call the editor.
F. I will call the editor, but you are going to have to face me even if I get the police and I’ll get their blessing first … I’ll ask them first.
IR. I don’t think you’ll get it.
F. I think I will because they said to me that they cannot contact the newspapers themselves but I can and I will say to them - “Look, I’m gonna go round there and you’re welcome to be at the front door when I do” and if they don’t want to be there then I’ll face you and your bloody editor and you try and deal with us, O.K. because you’re not getting away with it …
IR. Call the editor.
F. Yeah, I’ll call the editor but you are the one that wrote the story. It’s you …
IR. He’s the one [the editor] who’s responsible and his name is Odde and you have to call him at work tomorrow.
F. Yeah, I’ll certainly do that but don’t you worry, you’re not gonna get away with it…
IR. Yes, yes, yes, bye bye.
F. Yeah, piss off you bitch!!
The next day (26th March 1996) I telephoned the newspaper and spoke
to a Mr. Strand, another editor at Drammens Tidende: -
Answer: “Drammens Tidende”, a woman responded.
F. It’s your editor I’d like to speak to … what’s his name?
Answer: Yes, wait a minute … Hans Arne Odde
[then after a minute’s wait] I couldn’t find him - he’s in a meeting.
F. Has he got a secretary?
Answer: I shall try; just a moment please [and I was then put through to her].
F. Hello, good morning. I was wondering when your editor Hans Odde …
Secretary: Yes, just a moment please [and I was put through to a man].
F. Yes, hi, good morning. Are you Hans the editor?
S. I am one of the editors, yes. [But not the Chief Editor, Hans Odde. This chap was a Mr. Strand].
F. Oh one of the editors. My name’s Frederick xxx, and you did a story on me last May about Heidi Schøne and I had that article translated only four weeks ago and it’s obviously calculated to give me a lot of trouble, especially as you’ve written that I’ve attempted [I should have said ‘threatened’] to kill that girl’s son, all his neighbours and all the other stuff which is all complete rubbish and I wanted to speak to the editor who allowed this idiot - Ingunn Røren - to first of all believe that stuff and secondly your editor [who] allowed it to be printed because you should’ve known that the girl who made those accusations has been in a mental hospital. So I want to speak to your editor just to see how this was allowed to happen.
S. I have never spoken to you before but I think you have been speaking to another of the editors and you have been speaking to this reporter.
F. Yes, I spoke to her yesterday.
S. So I know you have been in touch with many of our people.
F. Yeah, that’s right because what you’ve done is upside down and you should’ve known before that this girl was all about because you had reports in Norwegian that all her neighbours received. Now she’s been telling lies and trying basically to get me put in prison by making up all sorts of rubbish – that I’ve tried to rape her; that I’ve tried [I meant threatened] to kill her, her neighbours, her son, her family; that I’ve written 400 obscene letters and thank God that the police, now, do not believe her … and in fact she’s avoiding them. I want to know how your story could possibly be printed, it’s so…. I know you have to try and get sexy stories………
S. No … …
F. And all the rest of it … …
S. We don’t have to.
F. I cannot understand, when you knew beforehand the girl was in a psychiatric unit and all the problems that she’s had and yet you go and print this stuff … if it wasn’t for the evidence I’d kept … if I didn’t keep some of her letters … I only kept a few…. The rest I threw away…. But I kept a few and thank God I did because the police have read them. I want to try and prosecute her … but I must first of all discover how you come to print this story. I’m phoning so many months later because it was only four weeks ago that I had your particular article translated and I’d never read before that I’ve [threatened] to kill her son and I want to know from you what day I made this threat; whether I made it in a letter, a phone call; whether she told her neighbours; whether she reported this threat to the police straight away. I want to know these facts.
S. I have no comment on that.
F. Yeah, that’s right. I’m not gonna let this go because that girl, like so many people in your country, ruins lives …… those love letters that she sent me that you’ve got obviously disprove that I’ve been terrorising her for thirteen years, so I need to speak to the person who allowed your reporter to print and if I can I will have your people in Court.
F. I understand your chief editor is Hans …Odde. Is he free at the moment?
S. No, he’s not – he’s in a meeting.
F. So, when the police have finished, once they can find Heidi to talk to, I will ring you again and ask you to give them a call so that we can get to the bottom of this story, but I bet you won’t print anything will you … you won’t print the truth … the fact of what her past is and what she’s done, will you? You’ll just keep quiet.
S. We’ll try to print what is true – yes for sure we will.
F. Well that’s good to hear. That’s nice to hear. OK. Well what I will do…… if you can speak to your editor and tell him… … once I’ve spoken to Torill Sorte and Svein Jensen in the Nedre Eiker police - once they’ve interviewed Heidi, I will then be in touch with you and you can ring the police so that we can have their conclusions.
S. What are the names of these policemen?
F. Torill [Sorte] and Svein Jensen – they are the Nedre Eiker police and the only reason I knew about them is because Ingunn Røren gave me their phone number and their phone number is (32) 878170. Torill tells me that with Heidi – “Every time I try and get in touch with her, her husband calls me to say they want to drop the case”. Now if I have been threatening anyone’s lives …I’ve been writing 400 obscene letters, making filthy phone calls … and you say my mother wanted to put me in a mental hospital, that I do obscene things in front of her [Heidi] and I make her watch, then that should be enough of a case shouldn’t it to go to the Courts don’t you think? Don’t you think so if it’s true?
S. Well, I will not comment on that. All stories have at least er two … …
F. Sides to it. You knew her past. You knew she was sleeping with someone taking heroin.
S. I didn’t.
F. No, no, but the editor did because all those ... I sent literally hundreds and hundreds of those Norwegian articles [my fact sheet] to everyone in Norway. Hundreds of people, everyone under the sun cos I’m sick and tired of being accused of attempting to rape someone. I’d never do this. She’s been raped … she was raped by a Bergen shopkeeper in the 1980’s. She was beaten up by her boyfriend in 1990 … anyway someone in your office knew about her past. They had the whole picture and they said it was false … they said I’d been making false accusations and course comments – none of it was false. I’m a lawyer and so help me God I would not tell a single lie.
S. What did you say your name is? .
F. xxx. What’s your name by the way?
S. S -T -R –A- N- D. [He spelt it out for me]
F. Mr. Strand?
F. OK, it’s very kind of you to be patient enough to talk to me cos I’m afraid I did lose my temper yesterday evening – well I didn’t lose my temper except at the very end with Ingunn Røren.
S. She felt a little threatened.
F. I will call again once the police have finished with Heidi.
S. Yep OK.
F. Bye bye.
S. Bye bye
Conversation of 26.3.1996 with Nils Rettersdøl:-
F. Yes, hello, good morning, is Mr. Nils Rettersdøl at home?
Answer: Yes, just a moment.
F. Thank you.
NR. Er, Rettersdøl.
F. Good morning.
F. Hi, I hope you speak some English – you do? Good. My name’s Frederick xxx ... I’m the chap in England that you did a newspaper article on concerning Heidi Schøne.
F. Heidi Schøne. … You are the psychiatrist aren’t you?
F. That’s right, I mean, you did an article on erotic paranoia, d’you remember?
NR. No, I’m not quite sure.
F. Well I’ve got your photograph in the newspaper.
NR. Yes, but I don’t think I wrote an article. It must have been some sort of interview or something.
F. Yeah, but you must have read it.
F. Yeah. It’s just that … um, I was rather … … this is … what they’ve written in the newspapers is… it’s all rubbish. I just wanted to tell you the truth of the matter. Now, did the newspapers show you those reports that I was sending to her neighbours, did they show you that?
NR. Er, no. I think I have been busy … it was just a short interview or something.
F. Yeah, well the thing is this, they have used you in a most despicable way because this girl has been in a psychiatric unit herself in Lier and before I met her she’d had two abortions, she tried to kill herself twice and the reason I went to Norway in 1990 and got arrested is because I wanted to confront her because she had been sleeping with a boy who had been injecting heroin, OK? And I had slept with her myself once … only to discover that … and she didn’t tell me that she was sleeping with someone else and he was taking heroin … but I went there to Norway to confront her about the heroin aspect and I was sitting in her sister’s flat upstairs and the police came to arrest me. Now she has told them that I wanted to kidnap her son, and I’m reading in the newspapers … I’ve just had them translated yesterday and I see she said that I’ve threatened to kill her son, that I’ve threatened to kill her, her family, that I’ve sent 400 obscene letters … I’ve done none of this at all … I have not sent one obscene letter … I’m a lawyer and I would never expose myself to this shame and in fact the newspapers have said that she has destroyed all these letters [the 400 obscene ones]. Now I’ve kept some of her early letters and I’ve sent them all to the newspapers, together with a long report and they’ve printed nothing and I’ve spoken to the policeman in Mjøndalen and he understands my position and he’s going to … [and I continued with the other disturbing aspects of Heidi’s life]. I thought that you were interviewed and given all the information?
NR. No, no. It has just been some general remarks. I think on the …
F. I thought so because initially I was extre…[‘extremely’ I was going to say]
NR. Nothing else – I didn’t know anything about the case.
F. She’s pictured in the newspaper reading a book on Aids. Now this book … she became a Christian [and I explained about the speaking in tongues of Runar Schøne on the phone to me].
NR. Are you in England now?
F. Yes, I’m in England. I’m at home now, but I’ve got to do something about this … I’m planning something, I don’t know what … but this is just 180o off the truth [and I proceeded to tell the whole background of Heidi and justified my writing so many postcards and letters to Heidi, questioning her actions]. Do you understand my motives?
NR. Yes, yes.
F. When I read this about erotic paranoia, I just couldn’t believe it, because I pride myself on being as decent as I can [be]… what the newspapers have said is so shameful, I just wanted you to understand this.
NR. Yes, yes, yes. But you can be sure that I didn’t know anything about the case … the comment from an interview … but generally, quite generally …
F. That’s right; I though so because I couldn’t believe that you would basically put your reputation on the line.
NR. No, no.
F. They didn’t even interview her psychiatrist called Dr. Broch.
NR. In Lier?
F. That’s right; they didn’t interview him … and the newspapers… I said “Could you please print my side of the story,” and they’ve done nothing.
NR. Well that’s quite ordinary for a newspaper.
F. But it just seems so far from the truth that …
NR. Yes, they write it from their angle you know.
F. Mmm – Sex sells. Well OK sir, I’m very grateful for you listening to me and I just can rest easy now that you know my side of the story.
F. Right, thank you very much.
NR. Yes, all the best.
F. Bye bye.
Conversation No 2 with Nils Rettersdøl in April 1996:-
F. Yes, hi, good morning. Is that Mr. Rettersdøl?
F. Yes, Hi. It’s Frederick xxx here.
NR. Yes, yes.
F. I’m sorry to trouble you at home again, but did you get my material?
NR. All your papers, yes.
F. Have you managed to read through it?
NR. Yes, yes.
F. I don’t want to put words into your mouth but have you changed your … or got an understanding of my motives?
NR. Yes, well I have not had any special opinion about it before you know … because what I said was on a very general level without knowing anything about your case actually.
F. Why can you without knowing about me, why can you … … make these … I know they were general statements but why …… …
NR. I have made no statements about you.
F. What did they actually say to you then, the newspapers?
NR. Just asked about these … a general … …
F. What scenario did they put to you? What was the picture that they gave you? About me.
NR. I don’t think they gave me very much picture about you actually because I told them I couldn’t say anything about your case. It was more to answer on a general level.
F. They must have said, you know he’s um …
NR. No, I think it stands there also that you, that some doctors in Bergen had had the opinion that you had such a … erotic paranoia or something like that.
F. Yeah, well do you think that having read the stuff that I’ve sent you that I’m suffering from … … [erotic paranoia]
NR. No I don’t think so according to what you have written.
F. Yeah. It’s just that obviously I know you probably have seen a lot of patients and you have to deal with them smartly and kindly but I honestly wanted to … …you know, because it was such a shock to read all this about attempting to kill everybody….
NR. Yes, yes, yes … all newspapers are always … at least some of them are … …
F. Well it was all of them this time wasn’t it? It was the three biggest newspapers … …
NR. Verdens Gang, that is a … sort … like Daily Mirror.
F. But Bergens Tidende …
NR. Yes, that is a rather serious one.
F. They wrote a lot about how bad Muslims are and about a Muslim suffering from erotic paranoia and that bearing in mind what Heidi … the number of affairs she’s had … it’s rather hypocritical of the press to write that and you know it could have … if the Sun newspaper had got hold of that … then God knows what I’ve had to … go to the moon or something and they still can … they still might get hold of this stuff and for your information Heidi has not spoken to the police once – she refuses to go and see them. I don’t suppose you’re going to ring the newspapers and tell them off are you?
NR. No, I don’t think … this is rather an old history isn’t it?
F. Well, yeah, but it’s still … …
NR. I think the best for you would just be to drop it.
F. To drop it?
F. It still hurts … it hurts very much.
NR. It hurts but I think it hurts more to take all this … and go through it all … every thing … it’s very hurting I think.
F. Do you think she is just a wicked girl or is she suffering from something?
NR. Well that’s difficult for me to say.
NR. I think you’d be best in dropping it actually because it makes always a lot of trouble if you start up again such a case.
F. Forgetting about it would …
NR. That’s of course impossible.
F. Forgetting about it is … particularly as she could have ruined me by those allegations … … is a bit much. That’s why people go to court to prosecute people for perverting the course of justice. It’s something that’s hard to accept and I felt she had to be taught a lesson. I know she’s learnt some kind of lesson because all her neighbours know about her past … through those letters I sent. Well OK I’ll leave it at that and thanks for talking to me anyway.
NR. I wish you every happiness.
F. Thank you very much indeed, thank you.
NR. Bye bye.
F. Bye bye.
Telephone conversation with Ingunn Røren (June 1996):-
F. Yes, hi, good morning, is that Ingunn?
F. Yes, hi. It’s Frederick xxx here from England.
F. I understand that you’ve tried to call the police last week.
TS. Yes, I did.
F. Oh, when?
IR. Not last week, the week before.
F. Er, Ok. Well, er, the lady, the policewoman, Torill Sorte, I spoke to her yesterday and she told me that she hadn’t in fact spoken to you. You phoned last week.
IR. Maybe it was last week, I don’t know.
F. Yeah, that’s right, she says she hasn’t spoken to you yet but I spoke to her yesterday and they have found no evidence at all about any death threats to her son. Heidi specifically said that I made these threats in letters which …
IR. According to the policewoman, the investigation’s not over yet so …
F. Well, it is over in the sense that she will write to Heidi to say that there’s no death threats to her son in letters – that’s a big lie, there’s … …
IR. That’s not what she told me.
IR. That’s not what the policewoman told me.
F. Well I spoke to her yesterday.
IR. Yeah, but I have spoken to her several times and that’s not what she’s telling me.
F. What’s she told you?
IR. She’s told me a few things I can’t tell you but the investigation is still going on so she can’t speak about everything. You’re still under investigation.
F. Well, she told me specifically yesterday that she will write to Heidi saying that there is nothing … I mean I spoke to her yesterday and she said …
IR. Yeah, OK, when I see that letter I’ll believe that.
F. Yeah, well why don’t you give her a ring? Give her a ring now. You know her name’s Torill Sorte and she specifically said to me … …
IR. Yeah, OK, I can do that.
F. OK, but Heidi told [you] that I have made death threats to her son.
F. She told the police that. And the police asked her “Where’s the evidence?” And Heidi said “In letters he wrote which the Bergen police have”
IR. OK, I’ll ask her.
F. OK. But the Bergen police have spoken to Torill Sorte and she has said that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever in any letters indicating death threats to her son or her neighbours. And there’s no obscene letters, nothing, so you know you are gonna have to print some apology eventually.
IR. If it’s true what you told me now I’ll speak to the police and then decide what to do.
F. OK, speak to the police and I will give you a call back – when can I give you a call back?
IR. Today I’m leaving. I’m going to work with another … a murder case.
F. You’re leaving the newspaper?
IR. Not leaving for good, I’m travelling.
F. Well can I call you back in say an hour?
IR. No, I’m leaving the building, so I won’t be here today.
F. So when’s best to call you?
IR. Maybe on Friday.
F. OK. What she did say is that if Heidi comes up with some new evidence, then they may do something, but she says she doubts very much – well, Heidi would have come up with new evidence by now but the point I’m trying to make – I know you don’t like me, but the point is you’ve been conned; you’ve been lied to by that girl and I’m very surprised that - you knew she was in a psychiatric unit [as I assumed she saw my report in Norwegian specifying the BSS Clinic]………..
IR. No I didn’t.
F. Oh, you didn’t know that before [i.e. before Heidi was interviewed by the newspaper].
IR. I don’t think she is [sick]
F. Well why don’t you ring her doctor, Dr. Broch? His name is Dr. Broch at the BSS …
IR. Why do you still care about all this?
F. Because I want to clear my name, that’s why.
IR. I haven’t written your name.
F. No, no. I want to clear my name in the sense … I know you haven’t written my name, but you’ve accused me of things that I haven’t done and … why don’t you ask Heidi about the allegations she’s made to them [and I was going to add about a Bergen shopkeeper raping or attempting to rape her, but Ingunn Røren interrupted].
IR. I don’t care about Heidi; what you say about her. I don’t care.
F. But, I mean don’t you believe me?
IR. No I don’t.
F. Oh you don’t believe my story?
IR. No I don’t.
F. What specifically don’t you believe?
IR. I’ve tried to tell you this before and my editor has tried to tell you this and I will give the police a call; that’s all I’m going to do.
F. But can you … you must try and appreciate that I must try and understand why you don’t believe me, because you can simply ring up her doctor, Broch. His name’s Dr. Broch. Ring him up at the BSS Psychiatric Clinic. She stayed there in 1988.
IR. What’s the point about that? 1988.
F. Yeah, because you don’t believe she’s been in a Unit. She’s a sick woman.
IR. Even if she’s been in there, she’s out again.
F. Yeah, but she’s still sick.
IR. That’s not our business.
F. No, but you have …
IR. I don’t have the time any more. I’ll give the police a call about all this talk.
F. Oh, all right then, I’ll call you Friday, bye bye.
IR. Bye bye.
I made an immediate phone call to Hans Odde, Editor in Chief of Drammens
HO. Yeah, Odde.
F. Yes, hi there Mr. Odde, it’s Frederick xxx here. You remember I wrote to you about a week or two ago about Heidi.
HO. Ya, ya, I can remember that.
F. Yeah, that’s right. I seem to be having a lot of difficulty in getting – being able to discuss anything with that reporter, Ingunn Røren. She doesn’t seem to want to, er …
HO. No, if you have anything to discuss you should discuss it with me and not with her.
F. Oh, with you. OK. It’s just that, you know, she wrote the article.
HO. That’s right. But I’m responsible for everything in this newspaper … if you have anything to discuss please discuss it with me.
F. Yeah, that’s fine. Yeah, I spoke to the police yesterday.
HO. Did you?
F. Torill Sorte and she’s said there’s absolutely no evidence – Heidi claimed there was evidence in letters that the Bergen police had – that I’d threatened to kill her son – and I haven’t of course threatened to kill her son – it’s a dreadful lie and the police have confirmed that there’s no such letters; nothing, no threats. No threats to kill her neighbours. So I was just wondering are you going to print an apology in the newspaper about this?
HO. At the moment, I’m waiting for the decision from the police and when the police decide what to do with this case, I will write about that in the newspaper.
F. Good. Good.
F. Yeah. They have said that they will write to Heidi now and tell her there’s no evidence for anything but can you not yourself telephone the policewoman now?
HO. Yeah, we will and we will ask the police what they are going to do with the case and if there are no evidence, we will write about that.
F. Oh, wonderful. But the point is I would like you to telephone Heidi and ask her how I made these threats to kill her son and her neighbours. I’d like you to ask which neighbours I’ve threatened to kill and if you could find the neighbours, please and speak to the neighbours and also if you can find any of these 400 obscene letters. I understand she threw them all away, but I haven’t written any obscene letters. Whatever you have, if you’ve got any obscene letters then you must tell me, but I do not write obscene letters and I can’t understand why you don’t believe my story. Everything I have told you is 100 per cent true. I know I've been telling a lot of people in Norway about her but that’s the truth, because it’s very hurtful to hear that I’ve attempted to rape her. She has made allegations to the police I’ve attempted to rape her and she has also made allegations to the police many years ago that another Bergen shopkeeper has attempted to rape her and even when she was on holiday in the early 80’s she said that some Greek men wanted to rape her. I know it sounds unbelievable all this to you, but I swear to you it’s true. You have not asked me any questions and I’m prepared to answer whatever you want and admit to you what I have done, but I am not a pervert and I cannot understand why you have not discussed my side of the story with me, because I wrote to you a year ago; you know that and I sent you copies of her letters but you haven’t got in touch with me. Why?
HO. As I told you, I have your letter, your last letter and we will now phone the police and ask them what they are going to do with this case. We have asked them several times already and they have answered us that they are still working with it and when the police have decided what to do with the case we will write the decision in the newspaper. And I don’t know all the details that you are talking about, but I am not very interested in all those details either.
F. But what are you interested in?
HO. And I do not think that it’s a good idea to call Heidi now and ask her more questions about this.
F. Obviously I have to know how I’ve threatened … It’s a dreadful thing to accuse a man of threatening to kill her son when he hasn’t. I swear to you I haven’t. I love that boy. He’s friends with me. I’ve sent him presents; he’s spoken to me on the telephone. He’s told everybody what a nice man I am. For God’s sake, I have not threatened to kill anybody. So I want you to ask her when – the circumstances, the date, the times – she didn’t have a telephone for six years.
HO. As I told you, we find out about the decision that the police will make in this case and I have your address as far as I remember. You wrote your address in your last letter and when we write another article about this, I think I could send you the article and you can yourself see what we are writing about this case and if you have anything to add or ask about after that you can write to me again.
F. If I give you the number of the policewoman, can you phone her now yourself?
HO. I’m not quite sure if I will phone her myself just at the moment, but er I could have the number.
F. OK it’s 32.
HO. Just a moment – 32.
F. 00 and it’s Torill Sorte, Torill.
HO. Torill Sorte?
F. Sorte, yep.
HO. Is it an ‘S’.
F. Yes S-O-R-T-E.
F. That’s right. She’s been very good to me. And also there’s another police officer there called Svein Jensen.
F. Yeah, Svein Jensen and he told me many months ago that he did not believe what she was saying.
HO. OK. OK.
F. And I have to remind you that it was me who asked, who begged the police to get Heidi in. She did not speak to the police for eleven months.
F. It took that long and only when I asked the police to investigate the matter did they call Heidi in. So I have been pressing the police to investigate because I want to clear my name.
HO. I see.
F. OK then.
F. Thank you very much.
HO. Thank you very much and I will call the police now and ask them what they are going to do. As I told you when they have decided what to do, we will write an article about that in the newspaper and I will make a copy of the article and send to you.
F. Yeah but … I know you don’t like me.
HO. No, I’ve no reason not liking you.
F. But what you printed about me initially, about me. I mean I’ve got everything translated here and it really is dreadful stuff. I know you have to sell newspapers but not at the expense of the truth. I mean you never printed she wanted to marry me if I became a Christian in 1990 and the reasons I sent her books on AIDS and abortions is not because she has AIDS. I know she hasn’t got AIDS but she did sleep with the man who was taking heroin. She asked me to come and beat him up when he left her again. She had two AIDS tests; he had two AIDS tests and she knew she might catch AIDS.
F. And they were Christian booklets. She says she’s a Christian and they were Christian booklets. And you just have not told your public [this]. I’m not obsessed with her. I slept with her once and I could have caught HIV, yeah? She didn’t tell me she was sleeping with someone taking heroin. I don’t want to catch HIV. I know it’s my fault for sleeping with her, but the point is when I went to Norway in 1990 it was to confront her about her behaviour. Not because I’m obsessed with her. I am very angry. She puts herself at risk, tries to commit suicide once, twice and keeps asking me for help. I would please ask you to… I know it’s hard for you to believe me and all the rest of it but please realise that I am telling you the truth. And when I wrote a postcard – I admit I wrote a postcard saying “Freddy’s back”, but my English name is Frederick. Lots of people name me here as Frederick and I don’t … I know also about Freddy Kruger, but there’s nothing sinister about it. I was only writing to her because … [and there the tape finished]
On the 6th April 1998 I made a series of telephone calls to Norway as follows:-
Ingunn Røren, the journalist of Drammens Tidende
Answer: Drammens Tidende.
F. Hello, good morning, do you still have a journalist called Ingunn Røren with you please?
Answer: Just a moment [followed by quite a wait and then the phone going dead. I tried again].
Answer: Drammens Tidende.
F. Yes good morning, I’m trying to see if you still have a journalist called Ingunn Røren, please.
Answer: Just a moment – [the call was transferred].
IR. Ya, Ingunn.
F. Yes, hello is that Ingunn Røren?
F. It is?
F. Good. Well you remember me, Frederick xxx.
IR. Um, no.
F. Regarding Heidi Schøne?
IR. OK, yes.
F. Um, I’m taking hopefully criminal proceedings against her, Heidi. I’ve got a lawyer now and er got enough evidence, so I was just wondering if we’ll have your co-operation in coming to Court to be cross-examined on the things you’ve printed.
IR. You want me to come to Court.
F. Oh, yes, as well as your Editor, of course, but you …
IR. Yes, then you have to, to … give us a subpoena; your lawyer has to give us a subpoena.
F. A what? Oh, yes, that’s right, hopefully he will do that.
IR. ‘Cos we never go to Court unless the Court says we have to go.
F. I appreciate that, but it’s obviously important that you come along.
IR. But anyway you have to talk to my Editor about that because he’s the one who is deciding.
F. I’ll certainly talk to him about that but obviously, er, you gave the interview, but um …
IR. Yeah, but he’s the one who makes the decision.
F. Yeah, that’s right, but you gave the interview and you’re both involved in this, er…
IR. But he’s the one who’s deciding whether I’m the one who’s going to go to Court or not … because it’s the Editor’s decision … anyway.
F. Well … but if the Court decides you have to go…
IR. Yeah, then I have to go.
F. That’s right, so…
IR. Er, I should let you talk to him.
F. Yeah, I certainly will talk to him in a minute, but the thing is this … um …, as I want to put you on the spot. That Norwegian translation that you have of Heidi’s past had a reference, two references, to rape allegations. Um, did you talk to her about that?
IR. Talk to Heidi about it?
F. And what did she say?
IR. Er, I don’t remember exactly now because um, but we talked about it, yes.
F. Mmm, well can you think hard?
IR. I have to take a look at the interview because it’s been now er two years ago or something … so I have to check the interview.
F. Yes, it’s quite important to the er, let me say umm, conspiring to pervert the course of justice and why didn’t you make any reference to that in your newspaper about those allegations?
IR. I’m not sure. I think er it was because it was er … I don’t know, I don’t remember exactly because it’s been a long time since we did the interview. I don’t remember everything we talked about and why really.
F. But you do have your notes from the time do you?
IR. Yes, some notes. I’m not sure I have all the notes.
F. Why’s that?
IR. Because it’s been so long time ago and I can’t save up all the notes from every interview I do.
F. No, but hers in particular?
IR. No, it’s not that different from other interviews so...
F. But her … her notes in particular, do you have them? [I meant Ingunn Røren’s notes on Heidi but she misunderstood me].
IR. I did not … I don’t have any notes from Heidi. I have er … she gave me some letters that you wrote to her but no notes.
F. So how did the discussion of the rape allegations against two men, me included, … um
IR. We have never talk about two men.
F. Well she made allegations of rape against a Bergen shopkeeper in the early 80’s.
IR. I’ve never heard about that.
F. Well it was… huh! It was in the, er, Norwegian translation [my report] that everybody has [that started the ball rolling in the first place].
IR. Yeah, but I didn’t talk about an allegation against a man in Bergen.
F. Well, I wrote it in the Norwegian translation.
IR. Yeah, but Heidi never told me about that.
F. So what rape matters did you talk about?
F. Which rape matters did you talk about?
IR. I think I talked about er you tried to rape her once or something, I’m not sure …
IR. We didn’t talk much about it.
IR. Yeah, I’m not sure. I’m telling you it’s a long time ago. I think it was discussed little while…
F. So what was it? Trying to? Attempted? Actual?
IR. I don’t remember … I have to see if I have a notes.
F. Um, well let’s hope those … …
IR. Er your case is not that special. So it’s not important to remember everything we said and talked about.
F. No, not that special but it’s special enough obviously to make three newspapers and to get er Verdens Gang to get psychiatric opinions isn’t it? It’s that important!
IR. Yes, it was at the time, yes, but it’s not that important now.
F. No, obviously, er … …
IR. I don’t go around and remember everything that was said but if I find my notes I will know but er …
F. So when do you think you’ll find your notes or have time to look for them?
IR. Er, maybe tomorrow.
F. OK, good, well I’ll um, I’ll certainly give you a buzz back tomorrow.
IR. Er, yeah, anyway I suggest you talk to the Editor because he’s the one who handles all the cases and they go to Court. So it’s no use to talk to me about it, because you have to talk to him.
F. Well aren’t you trying to get rid of the responsibility for yourself in some way?
IR. No, it’s his decision. He’s the one that decides everything about cases that may go to Court. It’s not me. That’s just the way it is. It’s not er … It’s my responsibility as well but he’s responsible for me again.
F. Er OK, fine. Now the business of threatening to kill her son, which is again another matter I hope to have her punished criminally for. Um, what do you recall about that? It’s rather, er, a vital piece of information to give to everybody and I’m sure that stuck in your mind. Now exactly how, what did Heidi tell you about alleged threats to kill her son, who was two years old?
IR. She told me what it said in the interview.
F. Yeah, and what did um …what did … how did the threats come about?
F. How did the threats come about?
IR. I guess she told me.
F. Yeah, well what did she …
IR. I didn’t know what had happened so yes she told me. She said what it said in the interview. You had it translated to you can read it there.
F. Um. No …
IR. I’m only responsible for what it says in the newspaper.
F. Yeah, that’s right, that’s right, but she told you … In the newspaper it merely made reference to the fact that threats were made to kill her son and not how. Not how. So can you … she must have told you how. And don’t tell me she didn’t tell you because she must have told you in detail how.
IR. Anyway I’ll answer these questions in Court if the case …
F. No, no, no, no.
IR. I have no responsibility to answer up to you right now.
F. I think you’re hiding something … I think there’s a cover up.
IR. What should that be?
IR. What should I be hiding?
F. Tell me now please……
IR. No …
F. … how the threats were made.
IR. You have to go to Court against Heidi.
F. Yes, we will go to Court but……
IR. And then I’ll see if the Court tells me I have to go to the stand and testify, I’ll do that. Before that you have no right to make me testify right here and right now.
F. But we have a right to get evidence beforehand to present to the Court and your reluctance …
IR. Yes, my interview is the evidence you get from me. What it says in print and newspaper that’s the evidence you get from me. That’s it. I can’t tell you what I talked to Heidi about besides what it says in the newspaper.
F. So how did I make the threats? Over the phone? In letters?
IR. I’m telling you, when I interview something … someone, er, and I speak to them, I can’t tell everybody else what they told me. I have stand for what’s in the paper and everything else in the conversation between me and Heidi, that’s between me and her.
F. Yes, very good. That’s a very good way of escaping, er, justice isn’t it?
IR. Yeah, I think so … [she misunderstood].
F. Yeah, I certainly do.
IR. If the Court tells me to go, I’ll go … I won’t do anything until the subpoena comes.
F. OK, right. Your Editor, what’s his name and could you put me through to him please.
IR. I can’t put you through but you can get his number.
F. OK, what’s his name?
IR. Er, Hans H-A-N-S A-R-N-E O-D-D-E [she spells his full name for me].
F. And his number?
IR. That’s (32) 204307.
F. He’s in now is he?
IR. I don’t know. Try.
F. OK, I’ll try. Thank you very much.
F. Bye bye.
Followed immediately by a call to Ingunn Røren’s Editor,
F. Yes. Good morning, Mr. Odde, it’s Frederick xxx from London, um, regarding your newspaper article on Heidi Schøne, er, in May 1995, you remember?
HO. Mm huh
F. Good. Right. I’ve just spoken to Ingunn Røren and I’m hoping to take criminal proceedings in the Norwegian Courts against Heidi Schøne and I understand that we need a Court subpoena to force yourself and Ingunn Røren to testify. Is that the case?
F. Good. OK, well, um hopefully after Easter when my lawyer is back from skiing, I shall get him to, er, see what he can do to achieve this. Now I’ve asked Ingunn Røren over the phone now and she refuses to answer, but as you were the one who printed the story what I shall be after is Ingunn Røren’s notes that she took for Heidi’s interview and I hope they are still intact, specifically with regard to rape allegations that you knew about before you printed the story; the rape allegations against me and a Bergen shopkeeper in the 1980’s and also, just as important the threats that were made to kill her son when he was two; that and the exact discussions on how Heidi alleged I threatened to kill her son; that is the evidence I shall need from her and also why you decided to print those articles without reference to the rape allegations or to the fact that Gudmund Johannessen, her boyfriend, was in fact the one causing the sex-terror. Ok. Now do you have anything to say about the rape allegations or threats to kill her son now?
HO. Nothing, but er I want to tell you that er I don’t want to answer any questions from you at this time.
F. Why is that then?
HO. If I receive letters from the Court I will probably answer the letters from the Court but I think it’s right of me to be a bit formal at the moment.
F. Mmm. Why’s that though? Why’s that … you ……
HO. Because you are telling me that you have already engaged a lawyer.
F. That’s right.
HO. And that you are going to, to, er go to Court with this case.
F. That’s right.
HO. And because of that I think it’s right of me to be formal now.
F. Yes I …
HO. What I’m doing is that if I receive a letter from the Court I will probably answer the letter.
HO. But I do not want to answer any question for you at this moment of the case.
F. I accept that, quite. But the thing is you’ve had almost three years to answer the questions I’ve put to you in writing and in phone calls before and you didn't want to co-operate then either, so the fact that I’m going to Court now doesn’t really in actual fact make that much difference to you. You are not going to co-operate whether or not we go to Court, and you see, I believe what you’ve done is criminally irresponsible and I will be getting hopefully the psychiatrists who didn’t actually er, who were tricked by the Verdens Gang newspaper basically into giving evidence; they didn’t know what they were doing and getting the lot of you and um, you know, just to show that you Norwegians in general, um, are basically so dense in your newspaper articles and so hateful of foreigners, especially if they’re Muslim, er, you know and also I, after … I will discuss the matter with my lawyer but, er, I will hopefully be able to tell you that I want £50,000 compensation plus front page articles of apology and obviously if I don’t get that then the campaign against you and Heidi will carry on. OK, my lawyer will be in touch. That’s all I have to say.
F. Thank you very much.
F. Bye bye.
On the 14th July 1998 I was sitting at home in the morning wondering why I still hadn’t received my first letter yet from Gjone. So I decided to call him. He said he still hadn’t managed to send me a letter but he had in front of him at that very moment a copy of that morning’s local newspaper, Drammens Tidende, in which he said I was featured on the front page and again inside. So I asked what it said and instead of telling me even the gist of it, he said he would put a copy of the article in the post to me. I asked him why he hadn’t yet written to me and he said he’d now have to wait until I read the article. Great! It meant getting the whole damn thing translated first.
Furious, I phoned Ingunn Røren the Drammens Tidende journalist who wrote the story (14.7.1998):-
IR. Ya, Ingunn.
F. Yes, hi Ingunn, it’s Frederick xxx here.
IR. Yes, hello.
F. Hi, I see you did a story today.
IR. Yes, I did.
F. Yeah, good, so I’ll be getting the newspaper from my lawyer and if you’ve said anything that’s rubbish I shall look forward to seeing you in Court.
IR. That’s OK.
F. What have you said then?
F. What have you said?
IR. In the story?
IR. You have to read it.
F. Look, for fucks sake, I’m phoning you up to ask you what you’ve said. Are you some kind of idiot? What did you say?
IR. I just printed a story.
F. What the fuck was it? Are you dumb or something? Are you scared? What did you say?
IR. I’m not scared.
F. Yes you are, well say something.
IR. If your lawyers are sending you the newspapers, you can read it yourself.
F. `Yeah, but I have to translate the whole damn thing first, all right. It’s a pity I found her [i.e. Heidi’s] phone number isn’t it. I suppose that’s why er [you did a repeat story]… because none of you will answer the questions but I will see you in Court. And it will continue. You see if you think writing an article is gonna do anything it won’t. The hundreds of letters [reports in Norwegian] and they’re still going through – another 200 arrived this morning …
IR. 200 letters?
F. Yeah, 200, to everyone in Norway – all over with her photo, her past … [i.e. my report].
IR. Why would you wanna do that?
F. Well why do you want to do your article?
IR. Because you’re sending all the letters.
F. And all because you’re doing your articles. You said I threatened to kill her son, three years ago. You lying shit! I did not threaten to kill her son and her neighbours. Which neighbours? I haven’t attempted to rape her. She’s saying I’ve raped her now. I haven’t raped her. So I send the fucking letters.
IR. She said that you tried to rape her.
F. No, she didn’t. She told the police [this year in Mjøndalen] I’ve raped her, OK, raped her.
IR. She told me you tried to rape her.
F. She told the police … … [this year it was rape, I was about to add]
IR. It was an attempt to rape her.
F. She told the police I have raped her … she’s a fucking liar. And if you can’t understand - the girl’s been in a psychiatric unit, then I feel sorry for you. You need to go in psychiatric unit yourself. You know, you think I’m gonna take all that crap and do nothing about it.
IR. You can do anything you like, yeah.
F. Oh, can I? Well I’ll certainly sue you in Court. I’d like to see how you’re gonna get out of it. Why not give my lawyer a ring?
IR. Who’s your lawyer?
F. His name’s Karsten Gjone. You can have his number.
IR. Can you spell it for me – the name?
F. Gjone, G - J - O - N - E. Karsten; and I’ll give you his phone number ‘cos he’s in Drammen. He’s had my papers since January.
F. (32) and then his number is 837818.
F. Yeah, that’s right. He’s had the papers for months and unfortunately as he’s so busy in Court all the time he hasn’t had time to do much. ‘Cos I sent him the whole file from years and years – everything, with instructions to take you to Court. You personally, your editor and Drammens Tidende and Verdens Gang.
IR. Then I’ll see you in Court.
F. Yeah, I will see you in Court. Anyway, your editor, where is he?
IR. My editor – why do you want him?
F. I want to speak to him obviously.
IR. Yeah but he’s on vacation.
F. He’s what?
IR. He’s on vacation.
F. He’s on vacation. So who allowed the story to go through?
F. Who allowed the story to be printed? You say the responsibility is always with your editor.
F. Yeah and who allowed it to go through?
IR. It’s another editor.
F. What’s his name?
IR. His name is Bjorn.
F. How do you spell that?
F. Bjorn Dramdal. OK. You photographed Heidi again?
F. You photographed Heidi again?
IR. No, it’s an old picture.
F. Oh, it’s an old picture is it – so you’ve obviously gone round and interviewed her again have you?
F. You’ve obviously gone round and interviewed her again.
IR. No, I’ve just been spoken to her husband.
F. Oh her husband.
F. And not her. Oh, because the police are keeping quite a lot from her. They’re not telling her the whole country [are being sent reports by me on her] – there must be a good few thousand of those letters now over the whole country and the process will continue.
IR. That’s up to you.
F. Well it is up to me obviously, but you see you if you write a load of rubbish then obviously I have to “print” my own “newspaper”.
IR. You think people want those letters?
F. Well, I think actually quite a few of them, I understand, are quite interested in the other side of the story.
IR. Because most of the people who get those letters they call us and ask us what it is. They want us to have them …
F. They ask you what it is but you thrust your rubbish in their faces with your newspapers and you present a story of lies.
IR. You have told me you are going to sue me last year or something, so now you have to sue me.
F. Well that’s right, but when you phone my lawyer you will know he’s had my papers since January and I …
IR. I’ll give him a call.
F. I can’t force him to issue proceedings. I keep telling him to get on with it but he’s a busy man but you give him a call and you will see because if you think I’m not going to do it then think again, ‘cos I certainly will because I know I’ll win. So anyway, can you put me through to Bjorn Dramdal please?
IR. I’m sorry I can’t do that from this phone. You have to phone to the paper.
F. All right I’ll do that then. Bye.
I rang the main switchboard for the paper:-
F. Yes morning, Bjorn Dramdal please.
Answer: Just a moment.
F. Thank you.
A man answered.
F. Yes, morning, Bjorn Dramdal please.
BD. Er, who would you like to talk to?
F. I would say he’s one of your editors, Dramdal.
BD. Yes, that’s me.
F. Oh, that’s you. Yes, hi there. Name’s Frederick xxx. You did a story on me today, with Heidi Schøne.
BD. Ah ha!
F. I was wondering what the reason for that was.
BD. Excuse me?
F. What was the reason for you doing the story?
F. Heidi Schøne.
BD. Because she has this problem you know; yes who are you?
F. I’m Frederick xxx. I’m the chap that you are writing about.
BD. So you are the chap that is sending round the faxes.
F. Oh, faxes, hundreds of letters, yeah … all over the country. I think another 200 arrived today.
BD. You think so?
F. Well I hope so unless the post office stop them.
F. Yeah, because I’ve spoken to your journalist this morning and I’ve given her the name of my lawyer in Drammen…… he’s had my papers for five months with instructions to sue your newspapers. I’ve got a lot of evidence over three years now and I told him to issue proceedings. So the sooner he does this the better so that the truth can come out. But what have you been saying today?
BD. I think I have to put you over to the Editor in Chief, that’s Mr. Aaraas, just a moment please.
F. Well you, oh, OK [passing the buck again!].
A. Ya, Aaraas.
F. Yes hello there, good morning, the name’s Frederick xxx. I understand from my lawyer that you’ve done a story on me today.
A. I have, yes.
F. Heidi Schøne. My lawyer’s had my papers for five months now. I asked him five months ago to sue the three newspapers in Norway, but unfortunately he hasn’t time, because there’s so much to read and he’s so busy. But I spoke to him this morning and he told me there’s another story and he’s going to read through it [Gjone hadn’t himself had the time he told me to read through it but would put it in the post]. But the thing is, what have you said today?
A. What we have said today? Well er there’s no name in it [i.e. they hadn’t named me].
F. Why’s that then?
A. But …
F. Why’s there no name?
F. Why have you not mentioned my name?
A. Well why should we but we thought that we communicate through your lawyer. That’s the best.
F. Well, yes, you will communicate with my lawyer but I’m asking you a simple question. I haven’t got the newspaper in front of me so I can’t read it. I’m just asking you simply why did you not name me, because … …
A. I, I, I, do not answer any questions at the telephone. We communicate through your lawyers, OK.
F. You see, the thing is we had a very big story here in the English newspaper “The Sun” a few weeks ago about an Englishman sleeping with lots of women in Norway. The newspaper in Norway named him and the newspaper in England named him, so why don’t you name me? Have you got something to be afraid about?
A. I don’t answer any questions. Ask your lawyer to contact us.
F. I have. Can you ring him yourself please if I give you the number?
A. No, no, no. I’ve no reason to ring him. If he has anything to tell us I think he will write. That’s the way we do it, OK.
F. OK. You are aware that another 200 letters arrived all over Norway today? And 1,000 in the last month.
F. I just wanted to tell you that because if you want to write things er like three years ago that I’ve threatened to kill her son, which is complete rubbish … and she told the police three months ago that I have raped her; she first of all tells them [in 1986] that it’s attempted rape …
A. Well, I, I …
F. No, let me finish …
A. I have no reason to talk to you, so please …
F. Anyway, what’s your – you’re the Assistant Editor are you or the Chief Editor?
A. I am, I am …
F. Well, Assistant or Chief?
A. I’m the Deputy Chief Editor.
F. So Hans Odde is on holiday is he?
F. Deputy Chief Editor, and what’s your name please?
F. How do you spell that?
F. Well I understand her husband gave the interview but you can tell Heidi that if there’s anything in that newspaper, as I think there will be, that is lies and nonsense and it’s the same old stuff, then you know the campaign will continue in ways that you won’t believe, OK and the basic thing that will go out … is the one page Norwegian translation of her past. Ok?
A. Well ring your lawyer and he have to write to us then OK.
F. OK, right, bye.
I telephoned Deputy Chief Editor Aaraas of Drammens Tidende on the 16th July 1998:-
F. Yeah, Hi Mr. Aaraas, it’s Mr. xxx here.
A. Yeah, OK.
F. I got your newspaper this morning [i.e. the 14th July edition which my lawyer had posted to me].
F. Had it translated and I see you’ve written that er the first thing you’ve written is “the Muslim man” obviously trying to “get” the Muslims again and secondly you’ve put I’ve written 300 letters to Heidi in the last year.
A. OK, I haven’t seen the … today. Just a moment. Well we have nothing in the … Thursday.
F. No, no, in Tuesday’s newspaper.
A. Oh Tuesday, I see, ah.
F. I see you’ve put [in the sub-title] “Heidi was sent 300 letters in the last year”.
F. To Heidi yeah? To her address, yeah?
F. That’s what it means right? [referring to the actual Norwegian words used].
A. Well, I haven’t … just a moment.
He went to get Tuesday’s newspaper.
F. Yeah, page 5, yeah?
F. You see – “sent Heidi over 300 letters in the last year”.
F. OK, now what’s that mean – 300 letters to her?
F. To her address?
F. And have you got them?
A. I think so.
F. I don’t think so. Because I know how many I’ve written and you’ll have to prove it, which you can’t. I’ve written to her five times [my estimate]. Five times, and the only letters I’ve been writing to her is telling her that I’ve got a lawyer. I’ll be seeing her in Court, OK. And also another letter telling her that I’d discovered [a matter relating to] her first child Daniel, OK. There were two men who thought they were the father of Daniel and one of them was Gudmund Johannessen and the other was Bjorn- Morten. They both thought they were the father [of Daniel]. Now I’ve written maybe five, six letters to her and you will not find 300 letters in the last year – that’s 100% certain. As far as telephoning her is concerned, I’ve phoned her once in the last two and a half years. Once. And you will have no proof to the contrary, all right? So that’s a couple of lies I’ll be happy to expose in Court because I will go to Court, no matter what. I’ve got the money and I’ll be taking you to Court as well as the other two newspapers. Now you’ve mentioned a psychiatrist - repeating this trash of “erotic paranoia”.
A. Er if you go to Court, I have no reason to talk to you. As I said some days ago, we communicate through the lawyers.
F. No, no, not really, because it’s [the Court case] a long time off. I’m simply asking you … you know … I mean you obviously have got a lot to hide. I have nothing to hide, that’s why I’m telephoning you, right. But you seem to have a lot to hide. You wrote the newspapers, man. Now unless you’re from a mental hospital, you can explain to me - my simple questions, OK. Now, you’ve mentioned a psychiatrist at the last paragraph again repeating this trash [about erotic paranoia] um, I mean… …
A. Er, er, as I said …
F. Don’t avoid me.
A. We look forward to er get a letter from your lawyer, but I don’t want to communicate…
F. Why’s that? Have you got something to hide?
A. I don’t answer any questions.
F. Why not?
F. Yeah, fuck you then.
7th June 1999 letter from Drammens Tidende to the PFU:-
Postboks 46, Sentrum 0101
With reference to the report from PFU of 31.5, and to lawyer Elden’s letter to PFU on 24.5, I take it as the basis that PFU is dealing with the practical aspects of the complaint against the newspaper.
In connection with the proceedings, I ask PFU to consider the case as a whole – from the first article in 1995 and to the provisional final news report on 14th July 1998.
DT-BB mentioned the case for the first time on 27 May 1995 enclosure 1) following an article in VG which showed that Heidi Schøne had moved to N. Eiker. Our journalist Ingunn Røren contacted Schøne, who agreed to be interviewed. Her reason for appearing in the newspaper was to give people an explanation for all of the “reports” on her that had been sent to very many people – to neighbours, colleagues and occasionally firms. She produced examples of such letters which had caused her a great deal of trouble. Both Heidi Schøne and her husband Runar Schøne gave an impression of being nice and believable. The newspaper’s staff also saw a pile of letters that she had received from the Englishman, as well as several extreme books and newspapers dealing with AIDS and abortions. The Schøne family had reported harassment to the Nedre Eiker police office.
The journalist cannot remember whether she tried to contact the Englishman, but shortly after the first article was printed he rang her at the newspaper. He was calm during the first few minutes of the call and expressed himself well. Gradually he became more and more excited and shouted out a number of allegations against Heidi Schøne. Most of them were to the effect that she was a “sex criminal”. The man said that he had a number of letters which could prove what he said about Heidi and offered to send them to the newspaper together with replies to Heidi’s statements.
The journalist received a pile of papers from him a few days later. The papers were copies of cards which Heidi Schøne had sent to him and also a letter on two A4 sheets that were clearly replies to her statements. The letter (Enclosure 2) had obviously been written by a confused person and contained serious allegations against Heidi Schøne, assertions that Norway is the country in the world which kills most foster children [“foster” is the Norwegian word for “foetal” and was mistranslated by the Norwegian interpreter. What was meant here was that Norway performs the world’s highest percentage of abortions], a “conversation” between a foster child and a mother, exorcising of demons and a footnote which says that the letter is dedicated to the memory of all crushed Bosnian Muslims. Following discussions in the editorial office, we agreed that neither the letter nor any other of the man’s statements could be used, because he had to be protected against himself and because it was impossible to reproduce any of the statements in print. The letter confirmed the impression Heidi Schøne had given of the Englishman as a mentally disturbed person.
Later on, the journalist received a number of telephone calls from the Englishman, who was in a rage because the newspaper had not printed his letter. He mentioned several statements that he wanted to have in print, but these were very serious personal attacks upon Heidi Schøne, the journalist and editor-in-chief. The Englishman also telephoned the editor-in-chief, who refused to print the man’s two-page letter. The man also contacted the journalist privately and abused her live-in boyfriend because they were living in sin. The many conversations with the man strengthened the journalist’s impression that it was right to protect him against himself. On one occasion, he said that he would sue DT-BB, Bergens Tidende and VG in order to get money for a court case against Heidi Schøne. He rang back later and said that it was only DT-BB that he would sue, because the people involved in the other newspapers were men. The journalist had offended against the Quran as a woman by speaking in public. The man’s frequent telephone calls diminished after a while, but when the newspaper discussed the Schøne case again in July 1998, he rang repeatedly.
The background to resumed discussion for the case was that several firms, private individuals, schools, institutions and Drammen Municipality had already had reports sent to them by post or fax concerning Heidi Schøne. Several of the recipients contacted DT-BB, because the reports were formulated as if they were replies to enquiries from the newspaper concerning Heidi Schøne.
The man rang several times but was too excited and off-balance for anything reasonable to be got out of him. He denied having sent letters to Schøne, but stated at the same time that he would send 200 new letters within a week. Shortly afterwards, we received a number of new communications from people who had received letters concerning Schøne. We discussed the matter again in the editorial office and concluded that nothing the man had said could be published.
2. The complaint to PFU
On the factual points in this case:
a) The complaint: “NN has been recognized/identified by DT-BB readers”
NN’s name is never printed in DT-BB, nor other particulars that can assist identification. He is mentioned as “the Englishman”. When he nevertheless claims that he has been recognized, this is due only to the fact that he himself hunted for Heidi Schøne, gradually, as she had to move, and the readers of DT-BB whom he had contacted had understood that he must be the Englishman whom the newspaper spoke about. Constantly, from the newspaper’s side, it has been emphasized that he should not be identified or be made identifiable in the articles – in order to protect him, among other reasons.
b) “mentally disturbed”
The description “mentally disturbed” has been used. In addition, that he is suffering from “erotic paranoia”. The documentation in the case confirms that proof of the assertion exists and that relevant information can be provided for the readers to have full understanding of the case. Without this information, the readers would be left with fundamental questions regarding both the man’s behaviour, Heidi Schøne’s sufferings for 16 years and the lack of opportunity for the investigators to intervene and stop the harassment by the man.
c) “false allegations”
According to the complaint, NN maintains that “the other allegations about him in the article are also false …”
DT-BB has not printed false allegations and we are prepared to document all assertions if PFU finds this expedient for trial of the case. It is not actually stated in the complaint, either, which allegations have been made and are said to be false.
d) “smears him for no reason worthy of attention”
The newspaper is accused of smearing NN for no worthy reason. This assertion fails on its own unreasonableness. Seldom, if ever, has anyone experienced more pointless, schematic harassment as that which NN has been responsible for in relation to Heidi Schøne. The newspaper has discussed the harassment because NN spread hundreds or thousands of false, malevolent “reports” about her and gave the impression that the reports were commissioned by the newspaper. The discussion has provided local people with the explanation for the horrible reports and the sender has been protected by the use of non-identifiable descriptions of him.
e) “his religious persuasion is given prominence …”
The complainant considers it inadmissible, irrelevant and offensive for him and other Muslims that his religious persuasion is given prominence.
It is relevant for the case and the readers’ understanding of it to reveal that NN is a Muslim. This has also been an important point for him in the information and the conversations he has had with the newspaper staff and in the reports which he had made and distributed.
The complainant complains that he was not contacted before the newspaper printed the article on 14 July 1998 and that his written and verbal statements have not been put into print.
The newspaper had several good reasons for not contacting him or printing his statements, for example:
a) On several occasions, the newspaper staff tried to interview NN, but his statements were such that they could not be printed.
b) The newspaper considered printing all or parts of the written information that NN sent, especially the letter he sent after the first article appeared in print in 1995. The contents showed that nothing could be printed.
c) NN was not identified and no information was provided that can help the readers to identify him.
d) Internally within the newspaper the question was discussed several times as to how we could pass on the man’s views, but the outcome each time was that the man had to be protected against himself. In future, the newspaper can be criticized for not having made clear to the readers that this was the reason why his statement was not printed.
When NN brought DT-BB before PFU via a lawyer, we in the newspaper hoped that the lawyer would be able to help the man’s views be submitted in a form such that it could be printed. The complainant rejected the offer of space.
With kind regards,
Hans Arne Odde
Editor in Chief
Enclosure 1: Article in DT-BB 27 May 1995
Enclosure 2: NN’s “reply” to the article.
Call to Ingunn Røren, the journalist and liar with Drammens Tidende regarding her allegations made in her editor’s letter to the PFU dated 7th June 1999. On 13th July 1999 I telephoned her at her office in Bergen - she had left Drammens Tidende to work for Bergens Tidende. As you will see, God was smiling on me that day for Ingunn Røren walked right into my trap:-
Answer: Bergens Tidende.
F. Hello, Good morning, can I speak to Ingunn Røren please?
IR. Yeah, Ingunn.
F. Yes, hello Ingunn Røren, it’s Frederick xxx here in London.
F. Hi there, I just wanted to have a chat to you to ask you why you find it necessary to lie to the PFU about me saying that you and your partner are living in sin and that I won’t be suing your newspaper [whereas I meant and continued] I will be suing your newspaper because women mustn’t speak publicly and it’s against the Quran. I mean, why do you have to lie. You know I didn’t say that. In your heart you know I didn’t say that, and I think it proves to you the lengths you want to go to, er, I don’t know, to falsify things. You know I didn’t say that. You’ve no proof. You’ve no nothing. I didn’t say it. So why did you …
IR. I’ve told the PFU what you’ve told me … … and I told you also that I won’t speak to you about this matter anymore.
F. Yes, but why do you lie?
IR. So you have to take this case to the PFU and they’re taking their actions.
F. I want to speak to your partner because I never told him this. When did I tell him this?[i.e. that he was living in sin with Ingunn Røren]
IR. When you phoned my apartment.
F. I phoned your house once.
IR. Yes you did.
F. And are you telling me in that one phone call I told your partner … …
IR. Yes you did.
F. Well, you’re lying because I didn’t say that and your partner … um … I spoke to your partner for two or three seconds and I said to him “Can I speak to Ingunn Røren please… I presume that’s your wife”. That’s all I said to him and he went to get you.
IR. As I told you, I won’t discuss this matter with you. You have to speak to the Chief Editor.
F. It’s nothing to do with him. It’s personal between you and me.
IR. No, it’s not personal.
F. It is. It is personal because it’s your word and your editor doesn’t know whether you tell him the truth or not. He can’t prove it. But your partner, where is he? Is he still in Drammen? Is he with you here? Is he with you in Bergen?
IR. He’s none of your business.
F. He’s left you hasn’t he?
IR. He’s none of your business.
F. I think he’s left you and not surprisingly. But the thing is … I have to find him. I will find him because I never said anything of the sort.
IR. Then you have to find him. It’s none of your business.
F. Well, then, can you at least give me his name?
IR. No. He’s none of your business.
F. He is, because you … …
IR. It’s part of the PFU case … … I’ll await what the PFU has to say about this. I’ve told you before, I’m not gonna talk to you anymore about it.
F. You’re scared. You’re scared. You’ve got something to hide.
IR. I’m not scared.
F. That’s why you don’t want to talk to me.
IR. You’re the one that should be scared.
F. I’m not scared in the slightest. Why should I be scared? You know I’m not scared. I couldn’t give a damn about any of you stupid idiots ‘cos you’re a liar. You make up stories and you know it. In your heart … …
IR. I don’t care what you think about me. I really don’t care. I couldn’t care less actually.
F. I think you could or else you wouldn’t lie. And you’re all very upset because of the huge amount of publicity. All the phone calls to your office and the police and the newspapers about the truth about Heidi Schøne. I know you’re all terribly upset.
IR. Why should we be terribly upset?
F. Because of the lies …[her frustration causes her to say and print]
IR. Why should you hold the truth about anything. Who told you that you have the truth …
F. I know what I’ve done is all true. All I’ve said … …
IR. Why’s Heidi Schøne your matter at all?
F. Well she’s a … …
IR. She doesn’t matter to you at all.
F. Well she’s a liar and so are you. You’re enormous liars.
IR. She doesn’t care about you. She doesn’t want to speak to you.
F. She’s a sick woman. Been in a psychiatric …
IR. Why should you care? She lives in another country.
F. Because she’s a liar.
IR. Who do you care. She doesn’t speak to anyone that you know. I don’t think she’s a liar.
F. The point is … well you’re just as sick as her if that’s what you think. But the thing is you have started telling lies. So you categorically tell me that I told your partner he’s living in sin.
IR. Yes, you did
F. OK, well … …
IR. I told you and I’ll tell you once more I’m not gonna speak to you about this matter anymore because you’re just making out all these accusations without any proof
F. What accusations?
IR. I told you …
F. Which accusations?
IR. I’ve told you. I don’t wanna speak to you.
F. See, ‘cos you’re a liar.
IR. Speak to the Chief Editor.
F. No, no, no. He’s just as bad as you. He wants to close up and say nothing.
IR. Maybe you should think about it. Why doesn’t anyone want to talk to you?
F. Because you’re a bunch of arseholes all of you. You’re liars.
IR. So why should you care?
F. Well you do care. I don’t know. You’re probably twisted. You hate Muslims for a start. And where on earth does it say in the Quran that women shouldn’t speak publicly? That’s all rubbish.
IR. I don’t know.
F. You made that up.
IR. I don’t know.
F. The Quran says women can, must and [they] do speak publicly. And should speak publicly.
IR. Yeah, but I told you if you have anything else to say you should call the Chief Editor because he’s the one who’s handling this.
F. No, no, it’s personal.
IR. I don’t want to talk to you, I told you.
F. This is personal and I don’t think it’s anything to do with your Chief Editor. You’re just covering up and lying.
IR. You still have to talk to him ‘cos I’m not gonna talk to you.
F. Well, I have to find your partner or your ex-partner. I think he’s dumped you because you’re on the other side [of the country]; he’s probably working in Drammen and you’re here, you know. But … …
IR. I’m not going to tell you anything.
F. If I do find him, I’m sure he’ll say that I didn’t say that.
IR. Then talk to him if you can find him ‘cos I’m not gonna tell you anything about him.
F. The thing is Ingunn, I taped that whole conversation [of 25.3.96, which proved I did not tell off Ingunn Røren’s partner for living in sin] at the time, OK. I’ve got it.
IR. Yeah you probably did.
IR. It’s illegal but you have … …
F. Well it doesn’t matter … But the thing is it proves … …
IR. It’s illegal so you can’t use it in Court in Norway … ‘cos it’s illegal to tape records.
F. Well it’s direct evidence that proves you’re a liar. ‘Cos you’ve lied to me again just now. And this business about erotic paranoia – I spoke to the psychiatrist, Nils Rettersdøl, and he told me that whoever phoned him up from the newspapers told him nothing about Heidi Schøne – nothing – and told him very little about me. You twisted it. You gave a hypothetical situation and that’s another dreadful thing you’ve done yourself. The point is you’re so full of shit, I’m surprised … …
IR. It wasn’t me who call him [being Nils Rettersdøl] [Her article still said I was suffering from an “extreme case of erotic paranoia”.]
F. I’m surprised you can live with yourself for being such an awful liar. Why don’t you just give up and re-educate yourself in proper manners?
IR. Why don’t you just give up? The Heidi Schøne … …
F. Because, you’re the one … …
IR. She doesn’t want to talk to you.
F. Well, I’m not interested in the stupid idiot for Christ’s sake.
IR. Leave her alone.
F. Well, you started lying. She started making completely false allegations. OK.
IR. I told you I’m not going to listen to you anymore. So you have to call the Chief Editor.
F. I will call the Chief Editor but I think you know exactly what kind of a real liar you are and …
IR. I’m not gonna listen to this.
F. Well, you don’t have to … bye bye. Bye.