The appeal case will involve nine witnesses over two days, including a new neurologist to address whether a head injury can cause false memories. Prosecutor Jan-Inge Wensell Raanes said the central question is false memory or confabulation, which started with head trauma. In the district court, prosecutor Per Øyvind Valland could not rule out false memory due to high alcohol intake and head trauma, and recommended acquittal. The prosecution appealed because neuropsychologist Knut Dalen's testimony was not quality-assured by the Norwegian Forensic Medicine Commission, as required by law. Dalen had quality-assured his own written statement but said more in court than what was in the written declaration, requiring a supplementary statement.
In the appeal court, neurologist Halvor Øygarden concluded that Ali had sustained a minimal or mild head injury and that no research shows such a small injury can cause false memories. Øygarden also found no link between Ali's alcohol level and memory loss or false memories. Ali maintains his earlier account that he was attacked by six men who made racist remarks, but police believe the assault never happened and that his injuries were caused by a fall from an electric scooter. Ali has acknowledged that his memories may not be correct after seeing pictures of himself on an electric scooter elsewhere in the city.
It is surprising, given that the prosecution itself requested acquittal after the case was well-illuminated in court.
Prosecutor Raanes requested a sentence of 45 days unconditional imprisonment, arguing that Ali gave a deliberately adapted explanation to hide the real cause of his mouth injuries in order to get treatment costs covered. According to NRK Vestland, defense lawyer Anette Vangsnes Askevold described the appeal as surprising, given that the prosecution itself had requested acquittal after the case was well-illuminated in court. The penalty for false testimony under Section 221 of the Penal Code ranges from a fine to up to two years in prison, and the prosecution considers this case in the lower end of that range.