Norway's legal system is grappling with a pivotal question of digital evidence in a high-profile rape trial: whether a man's porn search history, spanning from 2015 to the future date of 2025, is relevant to charges of sleep assault. Prosecutors argue it reveals a sexual interest in unconscious women, while the defense counters that viewing legal pornography proves nothing. This case centers on Marius Borg Høiby, a 29-year-old man accused of four sleep rapes, including an incident at a Skaugum afterparty.
The Prosecution's Digital Evidence
Prosecutor Sturla Henriksbø has presented extensive evidence from Høiby's computer and phone. "In a case where Høiby is charged with four sleep rapes, it is of course relevant to map out whether he has had a sexual interest in sleeping women," Henriksbø stated. The evidence includes web searches and visits to pornography sites that the prosecution believes are contextually significant. Police investigators compiled the data, noting searches conducted long before Høiby was formally charged in November 2024. The broad timeline aims to establish a pattern of interest.
Defense Challenges Relevance
Defense lawyers Ellen Holager Andenæs and Petar Sekulic firmly reject the evidence's relevance. "It was also emphasized that he has not viewed any illegal pornography. Fortunately for many, it is not illegal to search for pornography," Andenæs argued in court. This stance frames the issue as a matter of legal personal consumption versus criminal intent. The defense's position highlights a tension in Norwegian law between personal digital privacy and the state's investigatory powers in serious felony cases. They contend that viewing legal adult content cannot be construed as evidence of criminal behavior.
The Accused's Testimony
Facing direct questioning about his preferences, Høiby expressed deep embarrassment. "I think it's really embarrassing to talk about this here in front of a bunch of people. I am not someone who is really into pornography that is obviously staged," the 29-year-old explained. When prosecutor Henriksbø asked if he found videos concerning "rape" interesting, Høiby gave a nuanced response. "As I said yesterday, I have watched a lot of weird things. First of all, when I watch porn, I don't look at the text, but the picture next to the text. What I have clicked on... No, I have had no reference for that." This testimony attempts to separate incidental viewing from intentional seeking of specific thematic content.
The Central Skaugum Incident
A key alleged event involves an afterparty at Skaugum, where Høiby is accused of a sleep rape. Neither he nor the woman involved claims to remember the episode. The court has viewed photo and video material Høiby recorded on his mobile phone during the encounter. The woman involved states she is clearly not awake in the video. She believes she appears unconscious and has suggested she may have been drugged. Høiby contradicts this, insisting she was awake. He has explained his position by stating he "does not sleep with girls who are sleeping." The complainant's legal representative, Heidi Reisvang, declined to comment on the specific search history evidence but acknowledged its role. "The court has been presented with this evidence. It is natural that they emphasize it in the overall assessment that must be made about whether the evidence is sufficient for a possible conviction," Reisvang said.
Legal Precedent and Privacy
This case tests the boundaries of digital evidence in Norwegian sexual assault trials. The introduction of a decade-long search history, including prospective dates, is an unusual procedural step. It raises questions about how far back investigators can reach into a defendant's digital life to establish motive or propensity. Norwegian law protects personal data, but exceptions exist for criminal investigations of grave acts. The defense's argument that the searches were for legal material strikes at the heart of what constitutes relevant character evidence. A ruling accepting this evidence could set a precedent for future cases, expanding the scope of digital discovery.
The Path to Trial
Høiby was not formally charged until late 2024. The police investigation was reportedly spurred by extensive online discussion. "The reason why searches were conducted from long before was because so much was posted on social media forums," a source close to the investigation noted. This detail reveals how modern public discourse on digital platforms can influence official judicial processes. It creates a feedback loop where alleged crimes discussed online accelerate and shape formal inquiries. The court must now untangle this complex web of digital behavior, personal testimony, and conflicting accounts of a memory-lapse event.
A Verdict With Broader Implications
The Oslo District Court's eventual decision will resonate beyond this single case. It will provide guidance on the admissibility of legal but potentially prejudicial digital consumption records. Judges must weigh the probative value against the privacy intrusion and the risk of unfair character judgment. For the public, the case underscores the permanent digital footprint left by online activity and its potential future uses. For the legal community, it represents another challenge in applying old legal principles to new technological realities. The verdict will answer not only whether Høiby is guilty but also how Norwegian courts define relevant evidence in the digital age.