A Danish appeals court has sentenced Alexander Toro Møllmann to life imprisonment for the 2016 murder of pregnant Louise Borglit. The Eastern High Court delivered its verdict on Tuesday, overturning a previous lower court decision that had imposed preventive detention instead of life imprisonment.
Prosecutor Bo Bjerregaard, who handled the case in both court instances, stated that authorities view the life sentence as a stricter punishment. Both life imprisonment and preventive detention involve indefinite custody, but life sentences require serving at least 12 years before parole consideration. Preventive detention allows for earlier release if psychiatric experts and judges approve.
Louise Borglit died from 11 knife wounds while walking her sister's dog in Elverparken in Herlev during November 2016. Police struggled for years without leads until 2022, when they placed an undercover officer in prison using the alias Frank. Møllmann confessed details to this officer that only the killer could know, despite no physical evidence, witnesses, or surveillance footage linking him to the crime scene.
The life sentence resulted from multiple crimes committed after the initial murder. Most seriously, Møllmann attempted to murder his girlfriend approximately one year after killing Borglit. The appeals court applied a principle requiring a combined sentence covering all offenses as if tried together.
Danish courts typically reserve life sentences for murders involving gang conflicts, sexual violence, or multiple victims. This case demonstrates how subsequent serious crimes can elevate sentencing for earlier offenses. The court's decision reflects the cumulative severity of Møllmann's actions over several years.
Møllmann wasn't present for the sentencing announcement. His defense attorney explained he felt unwell after the guilt determination and received permission to skip the remainder of the hearing. The defendant had instructed his lawyer not to challenge the sentencing procedure and only request the court's mildest possible punishment.
This verdict is final and cannot normally be appealed. Any Supreme Court review would require special permission, and even then, the evidence assessment regarding guilt cannot be reconsidered. The case highlights how Danish justice handles repeat offenders and the strategic use of undercover operations in difficult investigations.
The outcome brings some closure to a case that troubled Danish authorities for years. It shows the legal system's approach when dealing with violent offenders who commit multiple serious crimes over extended periods. The sentence also reflects societal expectations for severe punishment in cases involving vulnerable victims and repeated violence.