You can only make this statement if you have no regard for the Norwegian courts.
He was found to have struck his child with a towel intentionally. This is beyond any reasonable doubt because the courts have found it to be the case.
On the scale of alleged incidents this is relatively minor I would say as reflected by the suspended sentence
Anyone of certain age is asking themselves....didnt my principal literally wack me with long paddle made of wood? Parents spanked kids all the time. Im not sure that was ever a good thing, but seems many times worse than this.
It was many times worse than this but that is Irrelevant.
Norway are a sovereign state and their judiciary and legal system have determined that this (hitting Ingrid with a towel) exceeds the threshold for abuse.
It really is not up for debate after that.
Again it's position on a scale of severity is reflected by the suspended sentence and small financial award made to Ingrid
Lots of posters on here not so subtly admitting that they take no small amount of pride in beating their kids.
Beating is a hospital visit whereas discipline is reminding that both the child and the parent have rights
Beat, verb: To strike repeatedly, to hit repeatedly so as to inflict pain
Discipline, verb: Control gained by enforcing obedience or order
Just because your child did not sustain injuries significant enough to require immediate medical attention does not mean you didn't beat them. No definition of discipline requires violence. If you can't discipline your kids without hitting them, then you are a lackluster parent.
WTF is wrong with this thread? This is extremely off the rails, even by LRC standards. Is Gjert and/or his fanboys spamming this thread? And why so many people supporting beating their kids?
Beating is a hospital visit whereas discipline is reminding that both the child and the parent have rights
Beat, verb: To strike repeatedly, to hit repeatedly so as to inflict pain
Discipline, verb: Control gained by enforcing obedience or order
Just because your child did not sustain injuries significant enough to require immediate medical attention does not mean you didn't beat them. No definition of discipline requires violence. If you can't discipline your kids without hitting them, then you are a lackluster parent.
Dumb. This is the definition of 21st Century parenting...
In case you don't watch the news, the world is a place governed by the aggressive use of force at all levels. Abuse happens when you abuse the responsibility it carries.
Keep on being an apologetist of an abusive maniac. Jacob and hist siblings have suffered enormously their whole life time in he hands of this control freak. Yes, Gjert produced massive starts, but at what cost and by whos choosing?
I don’t need to apologize. Gjert was cleared of all serious charges. Jakob, you, and others here need to apologize for unproven libel.
The only thing Jakob “suffered from” is being spoiled and not being able to do anything he wanted when he was a kid. Cry me a river.
This all started because Jacob and 2 of his brothers wanted to protect a younger sibbling and you find fault in that ?
Your trolling is not knowing the difference between being found not guilty and being innocent.
Not guilty means presumption of innocence. You are trying to reverse this. Prooving innocence is impossible. You would need to account 100% of your live with cameras from multple angles
It’s not that I’m requiring his innocence is proven, it’s that the OP is trolling by claiming that is what happened.
Anyway, feel free to celebrate this as a win for child abusers everywhere.
Lots of posters on here not so subtly admitting that they take no small amount of pride in beating their kids.
Seriously, there are some sick, twisted people on this thread. How can you have a child, allegedly love them, and raise your hand to them to inflict pain? Do these people get off on abusing animals too?
Beat, verb: To strike repeatedly, to hit repeatedly so as to inflict pain
Discipline, verb: Control gained by enforcing obedience or order
Just because your child did not sustain injuries significant enough to require immediate medical attention does not mean you didn't beat them. No definition of discipline requires violence. If you can't discipline your kids without hitting them, then you are a lackluster parent.
Dumb. This is the definition of 21st Century parenting...
In case you don't watch the news, the world is a place governed by the aggressive use of force at all levels. Abuse happens when you abuse the responsibility it carries.
Tend to agree. Humans are extremely aggressive, selfish creatures by nature, with an inherent drive to hurt each other if advantage can be gained or if they feel justified in some way for revenge.
This is true for children and adults. A good parent tries to steer kids toward resisting these worse parts of their human nature while making aware that other humans will sometimes or frequently indulge in their worse parts. So be wary.
Discipline that involves inflicting a small and fleeting amount of pain on your kids can not only help them realize that there are consequences to being little assholes sometimes, but it faces into reality much more than “gentle parenting”.
This all started because Jacob and 2 of his brothers wanted to protect a younger sibbling and you find fault in that ?
BS. Check the timeline of events. Ingrid was already out of the house when the three brothers published their hit piece on their father.
The reason they published the hit piece is they were getting flak for being mean to Gjert and Narve. They wanted to deflect the criticism of themselves and put it on Gjert. Their hit piece was all about saving face with the aim of keeping sponsorship money.
Not guilty means presumption of innocence. You are trying to reverse this. Prooving innocence is impossible. You would need to account 100% of your live with cameras from multple angles
It’s not that I’m requiring his innocence is proven, it’s that the OP is trolling by claiming that is what happened.
Anyway, feel free to celebrate this as a win for child abusers everywhere.
It’s not win for child abusers because Gjert isn’t a child abuser. He’s a loving and supportive father.
The court deemed there was no evidence that created a continuous fear in his children. The court has particularly emphasized that several close family members and outside witnesses have not seen or experienced abuse.
This is a win for justice. A win for the wrongfully accused.
It’s not that I’m requiring his innocence is proven, it’s that the OP is trolling by claiming that is what happened.
Anyway, feel free to celebrate this as a win for child abusers everywhere.
It’s not win for child abusers because Gjert isn’t a child abuser. He’s a loving and supportive father.
The court deemed there was no evidence that created a continuous fear in his children. The court has particularly emphasized that several close family members and outside witnesses have not seen or experienced abuse.
This is a win for justice. A win for the wrongfully accused.
If he was a loving and supportive father, why did half of his children go against him? That is a complete failure.
It’s not that I’m requiring his innocence is proven, it’s that the OP is trolling by claiming that is what happened.
Anyway, feel free to celebrate this as a win for child abusers everywhere.
It’s not win for child abusers because Gjert isn’t a child abuser. He’s a loving and supportive father.
The court deemed there was no evidence that created a continuous fear in his children. The court has particularly emphasized that several close family members and outside witnesses have not seen or experienced abuse.
This is a win for justice. A win for the wrongfully accused.
All of the posts by Free Man Not Guilty have the vibe of a divorced dad who lost custody of his kids because he was emotionally if not physically abusive. Probably writing a pro se argument to the family court as we speak comparing himself to Gjert.
It’s not win for child abusers because Gjert isn’t a child abuser. He’s a loving and supportive father.
The court deemed there was no evidence that created a continuous fear in his children. The court has particularly emphasized that several close family members and outside witnesses have not seen or experienced abuse.
This is a win for justice. A win for the wrongfully accused.
If he was a loving and supportive father, why did half of his children go against him? That is a complete failure.
Money. Things were fine until Jakob won the Olympics and got a windfall of money and elevation of status. When he got that money and elevated status, his ego got inflated and his mind got corrupted. That’s when he fired Gjert.
It’s not win for child abusers because Gjert isn’t a child abuser. He’s a loving and supportive father.
The court deemed there was no evidence that created a continuous fear in his children. The court has particularly emphasized that several close family members and outside witnesses have not seen or experienced abuse.
This is a win for justice. A win for the wrongfully accused.
All of the posts by Free Man Not Guilty have the vibe of a divorced dad who lost custody of his kids because he was emotionally if not physically abusive. Probably writing a pro se argument to the family court as we speak comparing himself to Gjert.
All the posts by people attacking me have the vibe of spoiled brats.
Someone needs to stand up for unappreciated dads who sacrifice themselves for their children.
If he was a loving and supportive father, why did half of his children go against him? That is a complete failure.
Money. Things were fine until Jakob won the Olympics and got a windfall of money and elevation of status. When he got that money and elevated status, his ego got inflated and his mind got corrupted. That’s when he fired Gjert.
Check the timeline of events.
Proof? And even if that were true, that still is Gjert's fault for raising such egotistical children. It is a reflection of himself.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
It’s not that I’m requiring his innocence is proven, it’s that the OP is trolling by claiming that is what happened.
Anyway, feel free to celebrate this as a win for child abusers everywhere.
It’s not win for child abusers because Gjert isn’t a child abuser. He’s a loving and supportive father.
The court deemed there was no evidence that created a continuous fear in his children. The court has particularly emphasized that several close family members and outside witnesses have not seen or experienced abuse.
This is a win for justice. A win for the wrongfully accused.
It’s a win for child abusers because it shows that it is a hard charge to get verdicts against in court.
It’s not win for child abusers because Gjert isn’t a child abuser. He’s a loving and supportive father.
The court deemed there was no evidence that created a continuous fear in his children. The court has particularly emphasized that several close family members and outside witnesses have not seen or experienced abuse.
This is a win for justice. A win for the wrongfully accused.
It’s a win for child abusers because it shows that it is a hard charge to get verdicts against in court.
Abusers are convicted all the time. Gjert is not an abuser.
It’s a win for the wrongfully accused because it shows not everyone can make up false allegations about someone and get away with it.