Full Analysis Summary
Trial of Marius Borg Høiby
A high-profile criminal trial opened in Oslo this month for 29-year-old Marius Borg Høiby.
He is the eldest son of Norway’s Crown Princess Mette-Marit from a relationship before her marriage.
Prosecutors have brought 38 charges against Høiby, including four counts of rape, multiple counts of assault and threats, drug offenses and other charges.
Several outlets report the proceedings are scheduled to run for weeks, with some citing a March 19 end date.
The courtroom has drawn intense public and media attention because of Høiby’s family ties, even though he holds no royal title or official duties.
Coverage Differences
Tone and emphasis / sentencing detail
Different outlets emphasize varying potential sentences and legal descriptions: Le Monde and RadarOnline cite a possible maximum of 16 years in prison on the most serious counts, while Al Jazeera, BBC and CBC describe the potential sentence commonly as around 10 years (sometimes phrased as a minimum 10 years for the most serious rape charge). This shows divergence in how the severity of punishment is reported across sources.
Allegations of drugging and assault
An alleged victim testified in court that she believes she was drugged and photographed while unconscious.
She told the judge the images show her "totally unconscious" and said she "100 percent" thinks she ingested something without her knowledge.
Prosecutors say some alleged rapes occurred after encounters that began consensually but where women were later asleep or heavily intoxicated.
Several outlets reported that images or footage were shown in the courtroom but were not released to media.
Identities of alleged victims are subject to publication restrictions.
Coverage Differences
Detail on evidence and media access
Digital Journal highlights the victim’s direct claim of being drugged and that images were shown in court but not released; BBC and Le Monde relay the broader allegation that several assaults followed consensual sex and occurred while victims were incapacitated, while BBC also notes the defendant disputed that videos existed. The sources therefore differ on emphasis—Digital Journal foregrounds the drugging claim and withheld images, BBC and Le Monde focus on legal categorization and courtroom dynamics.
Rape trial summary
Høiby has pleaded not guilty to the rape counts.
The defence argues he perceived the encounters as consensual and in some instances says he does not remember the nights in question.
Prosecutors say the assaults followed consensual sex but left women unable to defend themselves.
Defence lawyers pointed to earlier statements to police, for example that a woman did not think she had been drugged, to challenge some testimony.
The prosecution has shown images and footage in court that it says support victims’ accounts, though those materials have not been released to the public.
Coverage Differences
Defense portrayal and evidentiary claims
Digital Journal reports the defence highlighted that a witness earlier told police she did not think she had been drugged, and that the defendant 'insists the sexual encounters were consensual'; BBC and Le Monde stress the defendant’s courtroom demeanor and denials, while RadarOnline and New York Post note admissions to some lesser offenses (e.g., drug transport) alongside denials of the most serious charges. These differences show some outlets focus more on legal strategy, others on admissions to lesser crimes.
Norwegian royal controversy
The trial has intensified scrutiny on the Norwegian royal household.
Crown Princess Mette‑Marit’s earlier acknowledged contacts with Jeffrey Epstein and newly public U.S. documents that reportedly mention her have added to the controversy.
Senior royals, including Crown Prince Haakon and Mette‑Marit, said they will not attend the trial.
Several outlets report the scandal has dented the monarchy’s image even as public support remains relatively high in some polls.
Parliament in Norway moved to publicly reaffirm the monarchy amid the fallout, according to reporting.
Coverage Differences
Narrative focus on monarchy fallout
Al Jazeera and Le Monde foreground the Epstein documents and parliamentary response — Al Jazeera reports the parliament vote to retain the monarchy — while RadarOnline and New York Post stress the reputational damage and that senior royals will not attend. Some outlets emphasize continued public support (RadarOnline), others the embarrassment and political questions (Le Monde, Al Jazeera).
Variations in news coverage
Coverage differs in notable ways.
Outlets disagree on sentencing figures, with reports ranging from 'at least 10 years' to 'up to 16 years', and on the reported amount of drugs, with some saying 3.5 kg of marijuana while another converted that to 'roughly 7.7 pounds'.
Some reports even misname the defendant or get other small factual details wrong.
Some media outlets emphasize courtroom details and victims' testimony (for example Digital Journal, BBC, Le Monde), while others foreground royal family implications and public opinion (for example Al Jazeera, RadarOnline, New York Post).
Readers should note these variations and that some evidence shown in court has been restricted from public release.
Coverage Differences
Contradiction / factual inconsistency
There are direct factual discrepancies across reports: the maximum or minimum jail term is variously reported as 10 years or 16 years; the amount of marijuana is reported as 3.5 kg in several sources while another outlet gave the equivalent in pounds (7.7); and one outlet uses an incorrect or different personal name in a brief (NBC4 used 'Emilie' in a headline/summary). These inconsistencies reflect differences in reporting style, units used, and occasional errors.
Tone / narrative emphasis
Some outlets present the story as a legal process with careful attention to courtroom evidence and procedural details (BBC, Le Monde, Digital Journal), while others amplify the scandal element and potential political fallout for the monarchy (RadarOnline, New York Post, Al Jazeera).