[ad_1]
DENY: Tom Hagen denies all allegations of murder of the wife that the police make against him and is clear that he has nothing to do with the disappearance of Anne-Elisabeth Hagen. Photo: Private
Three weeks before Anne-Elisabeth Hagen’s disappearance, she is said to have opened up about the marriage pact with Tom Hagen. The police believe that this reinforces their hypothesis on the subject that she disappeared.
The police believe that Anne-Elisabeth Hagen on October 9, 2018 participated in a meeting in Lørenskog with several people. The 68-year-old man cried and said he was having a difficult time in his marriage to Tom Hagen, according to people who participated and have been questioned by police in connection with the disappearance case.
Witnesses have explained that they noticed the behavior, especially since she often seemed reserved and reserved.
22 days later, Anne-Elisabeth Hagen disappeared from the house in Sloraveien in Lørenskog. No one has seen her since.
The people who participated have told the police that afterwards they were left with several questions: Why was he no longer with us? Why did it suddenly disappear?
No one had heard from her, some of them explained in questioning.
The voices of these witnesses have been important to the investigation, and the police used their questioning no later than June this year, when they asked the Nedre Romerike District Court for permission to re-search the family’s cabins.
THE CRIME: The Hagen couple’s single-family home next to Langvannet in Lørenskog is central to the police in the murder case, as they believe Anne-Elisabeth Hagen was taken there during the day and because the house is controversial and a cause of conflict in the marriage pact between her and murder suspect Tom Hagen. Photo: JØRGEN BRAASTAD
Police later argued that there were good reasons to suspect Tom Hagen of murder or complicity in the murder, and they were confirmed.
Prior to his arrest, the Nedre Romerike District Court had given the police the green light several times to conduct a secret investigation against him.
After his arrest on April 28, Tom Hagen was jailed by the same court, but his defender Svein Holden brought the decision to the Eidsivating Court of Appeal. Most who believed they suspected the foundation was too weak, and Tom Hagen were released.
Police cannot locate Tom Hagen at the scene: Such is his video alibi
Despite this decision, the district court ruled in June, partly on the basis of several new documents, that there was again good reason to be suspicious. Svein Holden never appealed this decision and therefore it stands as the last legal evaluation of evidence until now.
Several new findings were presented: Birthday cards and private notes on conflicts.
Police insist that Tom Hagen has a role in his wife’s disappearance and that the questioning of the meeting participants supports their theory that marital problems may be a motive.
He himself denies criminal guilt and denies having anything to do with his wife’s disappearance.
When Tom Hagen posed for a longer interview with NRK a few weeks ago, he described his wife as “a wonderfully nice person.” He described the marriage as good, despite the fact that “we have had obstacles along the way, like everyone else.”
Hagen children strongly against the police: “Wayward, lost”
VG has also previously written that Tom Hagen on questioning has denied that they ever sat down to seriously discuss divorce. He has also dismissed revenge, jealousy, and money as motives he might have had.
The three adult children have also said in coordinated questioning in the summer of 2019 that they do not recognize each other in the witness descriptions of a troubled marriage, including the witnesses mentioned in this case.
People who knew the couple before the disappearance, including Glenn Hartmann-Hansen and the couple who were in the theater the day before Anne-Elisabeth Hagen’s disappearance, have also said that everything seemed normal.
The seas: The couple of friends from last night
At least two of the participants in the aforementioned meeting at the beginning of October 2018, during questioning, explained that for many years they knew Anne-Elisabeth Hagen and thus gained a certain perception of privacy and marriage.
According to these, he said the reason he was sad was due to the much-discussed marriage pact with Tom Hagen and the 1993 supplement. Here Sloraveien 4 is transferred to Tom Hagen’s separate property.
Read also: The evidence from the central police was incorrect
Also in a conversation with one of the participants in late summer or early fall in 2018, this should have been a topic:
Cross-examination reveals that Anne-Elisabeth Hagen later said that Tom Hagen made her sign a paper just over 20 years ago, and that this role would make her hereditary if she left it.
Police believe the document in question is an addition to the marriage pact, which various experts have called highly biased. Anne-Elisabeth Hagen would have kept a car, 200,000 crowns and a cottage plot at Biri.
LOST AND INSPECTED: Anne-Elisabeth and Tom Hagen. Photo: Private
In an interview with the police, Tom Hagen explained that he panicked after a conflict in his marriage in 1993, as the house belonged to his wife’s alleged throwaway jointly owned. The garden must have been afraid of being thrown in and thus the house transferred itself, he explained.
He has also explained to the police that the spouse had full knowledge of the transfer and that there had been no one “hurtful discussions»On the subject, but that on one occasion he mentioned that it should not be like that.
The police, for their part, believe that the cohabitation conflict of 1993 has never ended and that they can document that Tom Hagen has mentioned the problems in his private notes. Police also confirmed that the marriage agreement is part of the investigation.
According to Romerikes Blad, the police argued in court in June that “the defendant has an economic, emotional and social motive.”
New details of the investigation: What happened in this bathroom?
DEFENDANT: Attorney Svein Holden. Photo: Frode Hansen, VG
VG has asked defender Svein Holden several questions. In an email, you write that you find it frustrating to be asked to respond to research leaks and that you cannot answer questions due to your duty of confidentiality.
– I still allow myself to affirm that there is a lot of information in the research material that expresses a completely different vision than the one presented here. These sources describe a good relationship between Anne Elisabeth Hagen and Tom Hagen in 2018, and it is discouraging that this type of information does not reach the columns of VG.
Hagen supporter with defense speech: This is why Tom Hagen is innocent
The defender further writes that the main interest should be to find out what happened to Anne-Elisabeth Hagen.
– It has been Tom Hagen’s goal for more than two years. From the first moment, he put everything he could at the disposal of the police, books, folders, houses, and he has had the same attitude until today. The police could search houses and cabins over and over again, until the duration of the seizures became so unreasonably long that we had to go to court, and then the Court of Appeals confirmed that the seizure time had to be limited.
It also says that this is why the June ruling was not appealed.
– After some 10,000 articles on the case, we are concerned that what may appear to be a “black paint” systematized by Tom Hagen of VG does not bring the case closer to a solution.
Police inspector Agnes Beate Hemiø in the eastern police district informs VG that the police, for the sake of the investigation, cannot comment on “the information provided in the questioning or the police evaluations in this regard.”
also read: Asked in a television interview, but there are no plans for further interrogations.
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY: Ståle Kihle represents Hagen’s three adult children. Photo: Frode Hansen
Hagen’s child development assistance attorney reacts to the research leaks and believes the information is not in the public interest. It indicates that, as a result of the duty of confidentiality, “it is forbidden to give a complete picture of the case.”
– I remind you that my clients are victims in this case, with the enormous burdens that this entails. VG’s editorial staff clearly do not take this kind of consideration, in addition to the above, in their editorial activities, says development assistance attorney Ståle Kihle.
Anne-Elisabeth Hagen’s attendance attorney, Gard Lier, says the following:
– It is believed that it is very stressful for those closest to Anne-Elisabeth Hagen that the details of the marriage, and that they may not even know, are published in the media. Beyond that, I will not comment on details of the case.
