The case drew widespread attention after Ali claimed he was attacked by six men making racist remarks, which turned out to be untrue. Evidence suggested he had fallen from an electric scooter. Ali was charged with false testimony.
In the district court, the case turned when expert neurologist Knut Dalen testified. Prosecutor Per Øyvind Valland could not rule out false memory due to high alcohol intake and head trauma, and recommended acquittal. Senior Public Prosecutor Jan-Inge Wensell Raanes appealed, arguing Dalen's testimony was not quality-assured by the Norwegian Forensic Medicine Commission, a legal requirement.
It is surprising, given that the prosecution itself requested acquittal after the case was well illuminated in court.
Dalen had quality-assured his own statements but said more in court than in his written statement; Raanes said a supplementary statement should have been prepared. Responsibility for quality assurance lies with the expert, the court, and the prosecution. The appeal will fully retry the case over two days with nine witnesses and two expert witnesses.
Central questions include false memory or confabulation starting with head trauma; a neurologist has been appointed to inform the court. The court will review telecommunications data and technical traces showing Ali's scooter stopped abruptly from 25 km/h within one second, which the district court found consistent with a fall. Raanes said some new information will emerge but mainly the same evidence will be presented.
The starting point for one of the central questions that has arisen in the case, this about false memories or confabulation, is that it started with a head trauma. There it has been necessary to bring in a neurologist, who is the one who can give the court the information they need about that head injury and what consequences it may have had.
He declined to comment on specific new evidence. The penalty for false testimony under Section 221 ranges from a fine to two years' imprisonment; Raanes stated they are in the lower end of that range. According to NRK Vestland, defense attorney Anette Vangsnes Askevold described the appeal as surprising given the prosecution's own request for acquittal.
Some new information will come out, but mainly it is the same witnesses and documentary evidence that will be presented in the Court of Appeal as in the district court.
Section 221 of the Penal Code on false testimony has a penalty range from a fine to imprisonment of up to two years. We are in the lower end of that penalty range in this case.