Marius Borg Høiby News & Current Events Part 1: December 2023 -


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
The investigation continues...
...the work on this case differs somewhat from the others, it concerned a double-digit number of victims, a high number...What has primarily been demanding about this case is the media pressure that comes because of Høiby's person, says Kruszewski.

Celebrities and their adjacent people, get a different treatment from anyone that has done to women the same Marius is accused of. In this case the people and royal observers like us have seen Marius grow up in front of the cameras. He was a public figure and, thus, became familiar to everyone who saw pictures of him enjoying life but not knowing what was happening or what was he doing to the alleged victims that are now in double-digit numbers.

Because he is a familiar face for many, everyone expects him to show remorse and come to terms with what caused him to be in this mess. Mainly his sense of entitlement and possibly the belief he is above the law and can get away with anything. Problem is he doesn't seem to get that in his head. And neither his family, and step dad Haakon, who decided to take him surfing in Portugal for what? Clear his mind from stress?

Marius is going to drag down everyone in sight around him because they enabled him and seems showed no concern from the declarations made by the many victims that have come out to tell their stories.
 
Several actors in the case have filed a motion for closed doors in one way or another on behalf of their clients.
Defense attorney Lill Vassbotn confirms that she has requested closed doors when her client is to explain herself and when they are to show images and media files related to her case.
(..)
 
Marius' defenders Ellen Holager Andenæs and Petar Sekulic say in Mediebobler podcast, that the police investigation has revealed that at least one witness has sold photos to Se og Hør.
Lawyer Petar Sekulic:
– I know that at least one witness has sold photos to Se og Hør. We know that. It is in our case documents. The police have examined her phone, and the communication between her and Se og Hør is there.
Se og Hør's editor-in-chief of Ulf André Andersen writes in a text message to TV2: "It is unclear what the two defenders are referring to, and I therefore do not wish to comment further. On a general basis, I would like to emphasize that Se og Hør has never hidden the fact that we, like all other major media outlets, pay for exclusive image rights when applicable. At the same time, I notice that the defense attorneys are once again trying to use Se og Hør as a lightning rod for the problems their client is facing. It's not a pretty sight".
 
Marius' defense attorneys confirm that he is undergoing drug treatment this fall.
Ellen Holager Andenæs and Petar Sekulic were prepared for the media pressure to be great. Now they make a rare exception on commenting the case, they express strong concern about the upcoming trial.
– It would be strange if we weren't concerned about the media pressure that we are now seeing develop. And it probably won't get much better as the case gets closer to going to court, says Andenæs.
However, it is social media that raises particular concerns among experienced defense attorneys.
– It is a form of coverage that is even more difficult to control. We can imagine a situation where the defendant is on his way into the courthouse, where there are many spectators – preferably young people – standing there with their mobile phones. They film and post on TikTok with negative descriptions about a person who is being accused in a case they have no insight into, says Sekulic.
 
Marius' defense attorneys confirm that he is undergoing drug treatment this fall.
Ellen Holager Andenæs and Petar Sekulic were prepared for the media pressure to be great. Now they make a rare exception on commenting the case, they express strong concern about the upcoming trial.
– It would be strange if we weren't concerned about the media pressure that we are now seeing develop. And it probably won't get much better as the case gets closer to going to court, says Andenæs.
However, it is social media that raises particular concerns among experienced defense attorneys.
– It is a form of coverage that is even more difficult to control. We can imagine a situation where the defendant is on his way into the courthouse, where there are many spectators – preferably young people – standing there with their mobile phones. They film and post on TikTok with negative descriptions about a person who is being accused in a case they have no insight into, says Sekulic.
Frankly, his lawyers need to shut up about their concerns for how "young people" will perceive Marius, and just do their best to give him a good defense. They sound very out of touch and they should not be going around talking about "controlling" social media reactions anyway. They have a client accused by many women of horrendous crimes, just get on with his defense, because Marius is NOT the victim here and there is no narrative they need to control.
 
Frankly, his lawyers need to shut up about their concerns for how "young people" will perceive Marius, and just do their best to give him a good defense. They sound very out of touch and they should not be going around talking about "controlling" social media reactions anyway. They have a client accused by many women of horrendous crimes, just get on with his defense, because Marius is NOT the victim here and there is no narrative they need to control.

As lawyers, their professional duty is not to shut up but, as you say, to give their client a good defense. If they believe false statements on social media will prejudice the judges or lay judges against their client, then that is their business.
 
As lawyers, their professional duty is not to shut up but, as you say, to give their client a good defense. If they believe false statements on social media will prejudice the judges or lay judges against their client, then that is their business.
I am specifically reacting to this said by Sekulic:
It is a form of coverage that is even more difficult to control. We can imagine a situation where the defendant is on his way into the courthouse, where there are many spectators – preferably young people – standing there with their mobile phones. They film and post on TikTok with negative descriptions about a person who is being accused in a case they have no insight into
Sure, they can be concerned about how social media might shape public perception, that’s part of any high-profile case. But they didn't point out possible false satements on social media, but about “young people" on TikTok "with negative descriptions about a person who is being accused in a case they have no insight into” . This makes it sound like there’s some hidden truth that would make everyone judge Marius differently if only they knew the real story. Right, no — he’s accused of serious acts, and people are reacting accordingly. If the defense wants to address public perception, there are better strategies than lamenting that people on the internet have opinions. Talking as though a more sympathetic “truth” just isn’t being seen is just not very believable.
 
It is regulated in the law and goes for everyone, not just media but of course also people on social media.


It is generally prohibited to photograph or film the defendant in connection with a criminal case.
The prohibition also applies to photography and filming on the way to and from the court hearing.
The purpose is to protect the privacy of the defendant and to avoid disruptions in court.
The court may grant permission for photography/filming if there are special reasons for doing so, provided that it will not have adverse effects on the case and other considerations do not argue against it.
An application for an exception must be submitted to the court in good time for processing.
 
It is regulated in the law and goes for everyone, not just media but of course also people on social media.


It is generally prohibited to photograph or film the defendant in connection with a criminal case.
The prohibition also applies to photography and filming on the way to and from the court hearing.
The purpose is to protect the privacy of the defendant and to avoid disruptions in court.
The court may grant permission for photography/filming if there are special reasons for doing so, provided that it will not have adverse effects on the case and other considerations do not argue against it.
An application for an exception must be submitted to the court in good time for processing.
The lawyer's statement makes a bit more sense now, thanks for that context!
 
Catching up, I see the case is now moving. Glad to read the defense for Marius is doing their work to the best of their abilities. Problem is when evidence and testimonies are exposed they will have an uphill battle to keep him cleared of charges.
And Marius can only blame himself for his actions.
 
"Marius' defense attorneys confirm that he is undergoing drug treatment this fall."
What great timing, just before his trail. Not like he had since August 2024, his arrest, to start. But of course he had a busy year traveling to London, Denmark, Italy, Monaco, Portugal, ...
Hope the treatment helps him, but regardless I hope he faces the full punishment of the law.
 
"Marius' defense attorneys confirm that he is undergoing drug treatment this fall."
What great timing, just before his trail. Not like he had since August 2024, his arrest, to start. But of course he had a busy year traveling to London, Denmark, Italy, Monaco, Portugal, ...
Hope the treatment helps him, but regardless I hope he faces the full punishment of the law.

I doubt there's a treatment for a condition of entitlement, arrogance you can get away with anything and physically abusing other people. For me, his treatment is a prison sentence and I agree with you he deserves the full punishment of the law.

When he gets out probably he can go back to Portugal for some surfing with his step-daddy, that might be on the throne by then. And maybe get a job like a surfboard teacher since it that seems to be the only goal he's interested in.
 
I doubt there's a treatment for a condition of entitlement, arrogance you can get away with anything and physically abusing other people. For me, his treatment is a prison sentence and I agree with you he deserves the full punishment of the law.

When he gets out probably he can go back to Portugal for some surfing with his step-daddy, that might be on the throne by then. And maybe get a job like a surfboard teacher since it that seems to be the only goal he's interested in.
Why scoff at Marius getting treatment for his addiction? Given that it's sure to include psychological help and possibly even medication it's the biggest chance society has of him not repeating his crimes once his sentence is over.
 
The timing of Marius undergoing therapy/drug rehabilitation is a little late. I remember that he also had therapy in previous years, several years ago, and last year, when the whole matter became public, he admitted that he needed help.
Apparently, he was also in a clinic in London, but left again after a very short time. Psychological treatment plus detox takes a long time, not just a week or two.
The announcement that he is now going to therapy is good, but can we believe it?
His court hearing is scheduled for February. Perhaps his defense attorneys advised him to start therapy now, as it might mitigate his sentence.

He would have had plenty of time to go to a clinic to get treatment for his problems, whatever they may be. Instead, he has been enjoying his luxurious lifestyle and gone on vacation as if nothing had happened.
I'm not even talking about his family, who, since Marius is of legal age, cannot force him to go to a clinic.
 
Why scoff at Marius getting treatment for his addiction? Given that it's sure to include psychological help and possibly even medication it's the biggest chance society has of him not repeating his crimes once his sentence is over.
No scoffing, and the treatment is a good thing. But, the timing is suspect. Treatment doesn't generally work unless and until the person actually wants it--which requires a fair bit of humility and ego death. If this is "for purposes of the trial," it likely won't work as well as it should as a treatment program since none of that has really happened. None of us know what exactly is going on, but months of multiple vacations and then a treatment regimen at the last minute point to this probably being the case. I do hope something sticks and helps.
 
For a rehab to work, you must want to become clean and you have to ditch your friends and preferably move far away from them. Because I doubt Marius' "friends" want him to be clean.
 
On Monday, it was announced that Aschehoug is publishing a book "Hvite striper, sorte får" ("White Stripes, Black Sheep") about Marius Borg Høiby, his alleged criminal circle and cocaine dealing.

About the book and Haakon:
Two investigative journalists write about how Marius and his friends can be connected to some of Europe's most notorious drug gangs. They write also about new details around August 4, 2024 - when Marius was arrested and charged with damage and violence against his then-girlfriend.
According to the authors, the Police Security Service (PST) was supposed to notify the Palace that the arrest was going to take place, but before that time, the PST itself was said to have been called by Haakon.
This was before the case was made public, and before the Palace had been informed. The authors believe that someone from within the police leaked information to Haakon that Marius was to be arrested.
Mette Marit also answered the phone, the authors write. She is said to have called her son to warn him. When the police arrested Marius about half an hour later, his cell phone was broken and the SIM card was gone.
Dagbladet contacted the Palace on Monday afternoon to hear if they wish to comment on the allegations surrounding Haakon. The Palace has responded that they will get back at a later date.

About the book and Mette-Marit
The authors claim that Mette-Marit was furious when she learned that her son had been arrested for the second time at the raiding of the cabin in Skeikampen – without the police having notified her first.
According to the authors, Mette-Marit was still informed – but via a completely different channel. A friend of Marius is said to have called her directly on a secret private number and told her what had happened.

A good column by Jan Bøhler, a columnist for Nettavisen, previously a member of the Parliament for 16 years and deputy chairman of the Parliament's Justice Committee. There, Bøhler worked extensively with criminal gangs and child and youth crime, which he has continued to do since.
He writes about the book among other things:
They give us new information that the police observed Høiby in the middle of Karl Johan one late summer night in 2023. There he is said to have stood in our main street up towards the Palace and sold bags of cocaine, without them opening a criminal case – as they would have done for everyone else.
The police have also reportedly found several money transfers between him and a former football player with close ties to a large drug network. "For two decades, the police had left Marius Borg Høiby alone," the authors write.
And about Haakon and Mette-Marit at the book:
They are quoted in several places as having known Høiby's friends. They have even been present when they have come to a party in Skaugum. The more we read about them, the more we wonder how it has worked out. They must also have realized that Høiby has had a lifestyle that could not be financed with NOK 20,000 a month, and should have questioned this. Or whether it is a proper use of their apanage, i.e. our tax money.
 
Last edited:
It is incredible if MM truly belives that she have the ”privilige” to be notified by the police before they goes to Marius… Yes she is his mother but she MUST be able to see that it is her son who is the big problem here and not the police ?

That the police has a tendency to ”turn a blind eye” when it comes to members inside or around the royal family until something happens that is so serious that it forces them to react is nothing unique for Norway… It’s not right but it happens everywhere (yes here in Sweden too)
 
I think that if they can connect Marius to several drug gangs the Crown Princely couple could end up in hot water over the way they have handled this.
Why are alarm bells not going off for the Crown Prince?
 
"The Crown Prince and Princess also do not come out well in the book. They are quoted in several places as having known Høiby's friends. They have even been present when they have come to a party in Skaugum. "
"They must also have realized that Høiby has had a lifestyle that could not be financed with 20,000 kroner a month, and should have questioned this. Or whether it is a proper use of their apanage, i.e. our tax money."
"why she suddenly became a cleaning lady, and what she cleaned. "Some of what would have been evidence in the house where Marius was allowed to live on royal land may have been removed,"

Yeah, Haakon and Mette-Marit have alot of explaining to do.
We have seen videos of the inside of their homes during these parties, they have know who Marius friends are, they have seen his lifestyle and never wondered where the funds came from, they became cleaning personal the moment an arrest is to be made ...
 
Yeah, Haakon and Mette-Marit have alot of explaining to do.
We have seen videos of the inside of their homes during these parties, they have know who Marius friends are, they have seen his lifestyle and never wondered where the funds came from, they became cleaning personal the moment an arrest is to be made ...

Guri Varpe from the Palace comments now the information at this book to Nettavisen:
"We do not wish to comment on all the details and allegations in this book. The book contains a number of falsehoods, undocumented allegations and insinuations, partly from anonymous sources. Some of the allegations concern matters that may be part of the ongoing criminal case against Marius Borg Høiby that the legal system is handling. Throughout the entire period, it has been the Royal House's intention not to comment on statements or allegations related to the criminal case. Therefore, we cannot now go into this."
The authors claim to have anonymous sources in the PST and the Police. Varpe writes that they cannot answer for what the authors say and says: "In March 2025, we were asked to contribute to the book, including through interviews, but we did not want to contribute to it".
 
Marius seems to have wanted to be seen selling cocaine and was certain he would not be arrested by the police because of who he is (and he was unfortunately correct). Selling it on Karl Johans gate close to the Palace is the Oslo equivalent of selling cocaine in front of Buckingham Palace or on the Champs Elysées. He wanted to be seen.
 
MM needs to step away from public royal life. She is not fit to be a Queen Consort. Sorry! JMHO.

If the allegations are true, she aided and abetted her son's criminal activity and she tampered with evidence!

Several posters (myself included) have been saying this for months now.

I'm sorry but Varpe's response is absolutely pathetic. It had been better if she had said a simply "No comment". We've read about and seen the photos of Marius wild parties at Skaugum. Does she really take the public to be fools?
 
Among those who have reacted strongly to the book are Marius' defenders, Ellen Holager Andenæs and Petar Sekulic. Especially this: "Because in the middle of Oslo's main street, which led up to the king's palace, Crown Princess Mette-Marit's eldest son stood selling bags of cocaine."
Sekulic told TV 2 on Tuesday evening that their client says the claim is false.
– Marius reacts strongly to this, and he rejects it as completely untrue.
The Oslo Police District's Press officer for Unni T. Grøndal commented on this claim, she wrote in an email to TV 2 earlier Tuesday: "We note that the book describes that he was observed by the police while allegedly selling cocaine on Karl Johan. We would like to clarify that based on our information, officers observed that he was intoxicated, but not that he had sold drugs".
The defenders are not currently considering taking legal actions against the book, but make a clear appeal to the publisher, that it will take action and go through the book again, and remove what is obviously incorrect.
 
Guri Varpe from the Palace comments now the information at this book to Nettavisen:
"We do not wish to comment on all the details and allegations in this book. The book contains a number of falsehoods, undocumented allegations and insinuations, partly from anonymous sources. Some of the allegations concern matters that may be part of the ongoing criminal case against Marius Borg Høiby that the legal system is handling. Throughout the entire period, it has been the Royal House's intention not to comment on statements or allegations related to the criminal case. Therefore, we cannot now go into this."
The authors claim to have anonymous sources in the PST and the Police. Varpe writes that they cannot answer for what the authors say and says: "In March 2025, we were asked to contribute to the book, including through interviews, but we did not want to contribute to it".

I think that is probably the best response Ms. Varpe could have given under the circumstances. In saying "The book contains a number of falsehoods, undocumented allegations and insinuations", she emphasizes that the Royal House do not concede all the claims. But because she does not issue specific denials, the response introduces a sliver of doubt on every story reported in the book. She also reiterates the family's respect for the legal process by not commenting on issues that could impact the trial.

The disadvantage of not denying any specific allegations is naturally that even the most damaging allegations will not be particularly discredited. But if, as I suspect, most of the reported stories are true, denying only those that are false would, by implication, have added supporting evidence that the others are true.
 
Review of the book, from the end of it:
""White Stripes, Black Sheep" is a hasty work, an incomplete book that should be approached with a good dose of (source) critical sense. Not a great reading experience, as such. But for the undersigned, who does not follow the daily crime journalism in the newspapers very closely – that is, that which is not explicitly about the Borg Høiby case – it was useful and interesting enough."
 
Back
Top Bottom