Many have asked me questions about how the French legal system actually works, and have reacted in many cases very strongly to the fact that SOS Racism and LICRA were there as third parties able to argue in favour of my conviction and able to ask the judge for economic compensation directly to them from me, if I am found guilty.
This apparently sounds completely absurd to some, and is difficult to understand, but Frenchmen I have spoken to have explained to me that these organisations work that way, and are allowed to work that way, to ensure that everybody who oppose them and their agenda will not only be destroyed financially, but also be forced to finance their organisations. The ‘racism’ of Frenchmen (or others they get the opportunity to sue) has thus according to the Frenchmen I have spoken to become a source of income to them, and they use this for all it is worth.
Nobody in France (or elsewhere for that sake) filed a complaint against the Thulean Perspective blog, and the case against me was started solely on the initiative of politicians in Paris, and came after and as a result of their illegal arrest of my wife and me in July last year. When LICRA and SOS Racism heard of this, they jumped on the opportunity to go to court and ask for compensation from me, for according to them having sabotagued their effort to race mix the French people.
Yes, you probably didn’t misunderstand anything of what I said above: the lawyer representing LICRA (“International League against Racism and Antisemitism”) said in court the 3rd of June, as I and others present there too understood it, that the organisation he represents is working to completely race mix the French population, something they aim to have achieved in 50 years from now, and my work, with my according to him ‘very effective weapon’, the Thulean Perspective blog, had made this work so much more difficult for them. He also argued that I made money from spreading ‘racism’ with my blog (although in reality I have a dramatically lower income now compared to what I had before I started the blog, something the court knows). According to him, because of me they had to spend more money and more time to achieve their goal. Ergo I had to pay them 5000 EUROs, as some sort compensation…. and another 5000 EUROs to SOS Racism, in addition to the 5000 EUROs the prosecutor argued that I should pay to the French state, as part of the punishment – if found guilty.
I will not discuss why organisations whose common agenda is as I understand it to expose the French people to what International law define as genocide (see in particular c below, but also b and d) are allowed to even exist (in France itself!). Nor will I discuss why there seems to be a consensus that their work is legitimate. Nor will I discuss who are behind these organisations, but I encourage you to investagate the matter yourself.
According to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article II, genocide is:
…any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
- (a) Killing members of the group;
- (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
- (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
- (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
- (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
As explained here, the evidence used against me is made up of print screens, but I can add that the evidence is also made up of some other fabricated evidence, where real posts from Thulean Persepctive have been modified by ‘anonymous’ individuals, and have then been presented as real TP posts to the prosecutor (and presented in court as print-screens…).
Related post here.
As some of you know, yesterday I was in a court of law in Paris, and was under attack from the prosecutor, the lawyer of LICRA (“International League against Racism and Antisemitism”) and the lawyer of SOS Racism in France, who all referred to different print-screens, attributed to me and my blog. My lawyer informed them about the fact that a print screen is not sufficient evidence in a court of law.
The Thulean Perspective blog is a standard free blog from WordPress, that anybody can dublicate in a few minutes (using the same standard blog, with the same setup, and by copying and using the images used in my blog), and then by using cut and paste replace their own address with that of my website – and then make a print screen of it. It is thus very easy to make false articles seemingly written by me on my blog.
Which one is real? You tell me… (look at the website addresses).
My lawyer then moved on to prove beyond all doubt that there are many out there who wish me no good, so to speak, and that there are hundreds of individuals who claim to be Varg Vikernes and several of websites who claim to be official Varg Vikernes-websites, and who produce material in my name – most often material that I don’t agree with.
I can not take action against them though, because I have unfortunately legally changed my name to Louis Cachet, and thus I have no papers confirming that I am Varg Vikernes.
If the evidence used against me yesterday proves to be enough for a conviction, something it by the way has of course not been in any previous cases here in France, then it opens up for a world very different from the one we live in today, and a world very far removed from justice: a world where anybody can just pretend to be anybody else, write something in their name, publish it and have the person they pretended to be pay for it – legally, socially or in other ways.
I wish to thank my lawyer, Julien Freyssinet, who did a very good job pointing at the facts, when the opposition spent all their time focusing on emotions, thoughts, theories, wishful thinking and false evidence.
Also, I wish to thank the several good men who helped me out in Paris, before and after the trial, and who courageously spend so much of their time fighting for Justice and Truth – in a system that seems to be losing more and more of both. I will not name any of you this time, because some of you got in trouble after the last time you helped me out. You know who you are, and so do I. Thank you very much!
Further, I wish to thank the Gendarmerie in the court building in Paris, who kindly helped me avoid the harassment of the journalists and photographers who refused to stop taking pictures and who followed us wherever we went, even after I had talked to those of them who were not only there to produce lies and slander.
Finally, but not least, I wish to thank all those who came to show their support, for whatever reason.
These facts about Vikernes and his case are published here to counter the lies of the many media institutions.
-Born in Bergen 1973 as Kristian Vikernes. Is not baptized.
-Changed name officially to Varg Vikernes in March 1993.
-Has never had either of the middle names Larsson, Larssøn, Kvisling or Quisling as claimed by many media institutions.
-Is not a “self-declared Neo-Nazi” as claimed by many media institutions. Vikernes is an Óðalist.
-Stopped playing so-called ‘black metal’ in early 1993. Has recorded three bardic metal albums since then, but is no longer even a metal musician. Vikernes plays electronic music.
-Convicted in 1994 for first degree murder, but claims himself that he killed in self defence (in August 1993), and explained himself in complete accordance with all technical evidence. Aarseth was killed because he panicked and attacked Vikernes when Vikernes approached him to tell him to stay away from him. According to many witnesses, Øystein Aarseth had plans to knock out Varg Vikernes with a stun gun, tie him up, put him in the trunk of a car, drive him into the forest, tie him to a tree and torture him to death, whilst filming it. Vikernes knew about these plans as Aarseth told about them on the phone to a friend of his, who let Vikernes listen to it all. The ‘Norwegian’ court (and the media…) still claimed that “Varg Vikernes had no clear or understandable motive for killing Øystein Aarseth”. All of Aarseth’s friends of course knew better, as proven by this letter (from Anders Odden).
-Øystein Aarseth was not a “band collegue” of Vikernes, but an acquaintance and a business associate: Aarseth owned the label that released the first album of Vikernes’ band, Burzum. The relation Vikernes had with Aarseth’s band, Mayhem, was that he helped as a studio musician in 1992 by recording the bass track on one of their albums, and was for a brief period a member of the band. Vikernes had not been a member of that band for more than half a year when Aarseth was killed.
-Convicted in 1994 for having set fire to 4 churches, solely because one single witness for each case (and 2 in one of the cases) gave false testimony against him in court. The witnesses were ‘big surprise’ all friends of Øystein Aarseth, some of them outspoken enemies of Vikernes, and they were also the ones who actually set fire to these churches (they too were convicted for this, but were given more leninent treatment because of their false testimonies against Vikernes). One of these witnesses (Bård G. Eithun) admitted in 1998, under oath in a court of law, that he had given false testimony against Varg Vikernes, and that he had done so because the Norwegian police had asked him to do so (“to get back at Vikernes for killing Aarseth” and to get a more lenient treatment himself, when going to court for his own crimes).
-Varg Vikernes was also found not guilty of having set fire to Fantoft stave church. I stress this, because there seems to be a general understanding that Vikernes set fire to the Fantoft stave church.
-Was in 1994 defended by a lawyer who according to medical examinations was 100% unfit for work during the whole process. Vikernes was given no opportunity to test his guilt again, in a court of law. He was not allowed to appeal to a higher court, save in relation to the length of the sentence.
-Vikernes stated clearly in all contexts where he was allowed to express himself that he was a nationalist and an Odinist (his preferred term for Pagan at the time), but was consequently presented as a “devil worshiper” or a “satanist” by the media. Not one single media institution in Norway diverged from this practice until 1995, when Dagbladet finally admitted that Vikernes was not a Satanist.
-Went through meticulous psychiatric examinations in 2002, concluding that Vikernes is not a psychopath and has no indications of psychopathy (“personality disorders”) or any other mental illnesses or deficiencies either.
-Was in 2003 convicted to 14 months in prison, after having not returned from a leave, for having hi-jacked a car during an escape from armed men in the Norwegian mountains. The Norwegian police claimed never to have been there, and the judge wrote in the verdict that Vikernes had encountered hunters with ski-masks, automatic rifles and German shepherd dogs, who blocked the only escape route Vikernes had from his cabin by parking a huge SUV sideways in the middle of the road. The SUV was by chance (according to Norwegian former FSK soldiers Vikernes has spoken to) identical to the one(s) used by FSK, the Norwegian Special Forces, a military unit with police authority (…). Vikernes drove his hijacked car to Oslo, in order to give himself up to the police in a place where there would be many witnesses (…). Vikernes claims to have escaped in the mountains only because he by chance spotted the armed men before they spotted him. Vikernes was himself unarmed. Odd Einar Dørum was minister of justice in Norway at the time (please Google translate the Norwegian entry: the English entry is very deficient).
-In 2002 the Norwegian government changed the law stating that prisoners with a 21 year sentence should serve only 12 years in prison to a law that stated that prisoners with a 21 year sentence should instead serve 14 years (2/3 of the full sentence). This law was in relation to Vikernes (but not in relation to several other prisoners…) made retroactive, in violation of both the Norwegian constitution and international law. When Vikernes had served 14 years the department of justice turned down his applications for a release on parole on grounds that Vikernes now had served for so long that he needed to be ‘better prepared for a life in freedom’, and that they had not been given the time to do so yet (…). So Vikernes had to serve another 2 years before he was finally released after just under 16 years in prison.
-The wardens in all the prisons Vikernes served in (when this question was discussed) and even the Norwegian secret police wanted Vikernes to be released after 12 years in prison, but politicians in Oslo still turned all his applications for a release on parole down, until the media (VG and Dagbladet) put so much pressure on them that they finally released him. According to the lawyer John Christian Elden, Vikernes was released after heated debate in Oslo, and with only one single vote tipping the scale in his favour.
-In 2008 Vikernes officially changed his name to Louis Cachet: Louis after a great uncle and Cachet being the surname of his wife. He did with help of the Norwegian secret police, who advised him to do so, and also because the name “Varg Vikernes” was very impractical in Norway at the time. Vikernes experienced that solely because of the name “Varg Vikernes” he was e. g. not allowed to order plane tickets, rent cars, order train tickets, rent a room in a hotel, open up a bank account, etc., either because the person taking to him though he was joking or more often because ‘good citizens’ didn’t want life to be easy for a person falsely declared by the media to be a “self-declared Neo-Nazi”. Vikernes still uses the name Varg Vikernes in everyday life, and only uses the name Louis Cachet when he has to (i. e. for signing things, legal documents etc.).
-Had in 2010 according to the Norwegian secret police more than 350 impersonators, pretending to be Vikernes, on Facebook alone.
-Moved in 2010 to Bretagne, later the same year to Auvergne and in 2012 to Corrèze – all in France.
-Arrested in 2013 by DCRI accused of “terrorism or conspiring to commit acts of terrorism”. False evidence was produced and presented to a judge to make him sign papers giving DCRI the right to arrest Vikernes and his wife in the most gentle way possible. No information about any children in the house was given to the judge. Nor was any information given to the judge about the fact that Vikernes’ wife was pregnant at the time. DCRI shot their front door open and smashed the window and did not even identify themselves as policemen until after they had entered their home. The evidence used as an excuse to arrest Vikernes and his wife was an e-mail address claimed by an anonymous source to be Vikernes’. Apparently a copy of Mr. Breivik’s manifest had been sent to this address (as if that would be a good reason to arrest even the rightful owner of the e-mail address).
The front door after DCRI had been there:
-DCRI already knew that the e-mail address used as an excuse to arrest Vikernes and his wife was not his (they have means to find such things out, fast and easily), so they were satisfied with an investigation into the matter consisting of a single question to Vikernes/his wife: “Is this your/Vikernes’ e-mail address”. Vikernes and his wife replied: “No”, and that was it (…).
-All charges for terrorism were dropped, and Vikernes and his wife were released from custody after three and two days respectively. The names of Vikernes and his wife were cleared by the police (but certainly not by the media). The police found that Vikernes and his wife had done nothing illegal whatsoever.
-Vikernes’ wife had purchased and owned 4 hunting weapons (a .22 LR bolt-action rifle, a .22 LR lever-action rifle, one 12 Gauge side-by-side shotgun and a .223 Remington bolt-action rifle). These weapons were bought legally over a time period of several months, and not all at once or in a very short time, as claimed by most media institutions. The firearms were purchased by Vikernes’ wife, because she was in a rifle club and wanted a hunting licence to be able to hunt medium and small game later on, something she believed was important in relation to survivalism.
-Mr. Manuel Valls was at the time the head of the department responsible for the arrest.
-In 2013 politicians (and not at all the [secret] police…) tried to have Vikernes expelled from France, on grounds that he was a risk to national security. Three different judges in Brive declared that there was no reason whatsoever to expel Vikernes.
-Vikernes and his wife work in France, and pays taxes normally like others working and living in France do.
-In 2013 Vikernes had to go to court in Paris accused of “racism, Antisemitism and apology of war crimes and crimes against humanity”, but his defense lawyer was not allowed to see the ‘evidence’, made up of 900 pages of mainly print-screens, until a few days before the trial, so it was postponed until the 3rd of June 2014….
And that’s where we are now…