Anders Behring Breivik has compared the pain he caused the families of his victims to his own situation, saying he lost contact with his friends and family after the 22 July attacks.
The 33-year-old rightwing extremist, who has admitted killing 77 people last summer, showed no remorse on Monday as he continued his shocking testimony about the massacre at the annual youth camp of the governing Labour party.
Calling the rampage "necessary", Breivik compared being shunned by those close to him to the grief of the bereaved. "The only difference was that for my part it was a choice," he said.
Breivik has confessed to the bombing and shootings but rejects criminal guilt, saying the victims had betrayed their country by embracing immigration. Even the defence admits there is virtually no chance of an acquittal, so the key issue to be determined in the trial is whether Breivik is criminally insane.
On what is expected to be the last day he gives evidence, the self-styled crusader apologised to the family of a pub owner who was among the eight people killed in the blast outside government offices in Oslo, saying it was not his intention to kill "civilians".
Prosecutor Stein Holden asked him if he wanted to express a similar apology to the families of the other victims, including the 69 killed at the youth camp on Utøya island.
"No, I don't," Breivik said. "Utøya is a political indoctrination camp."
Speaking calmly, Breivik said he used a handgun to kill victims if the distance was less than 10 metres. Otherwise he used his rifle.
Asked why he spared one man who survived the shooting spree, Breivik said he thought it was because the man's appearance made him look "rightwing-oriented". "When I looked at him I saw myself," Breivik said. "I think that was the reason that I didn't fire shots at him."
If he is found to be sane, Breivik would face 21 years in prison, although he can be held longer if deemed a danger to society. If sentenced to psychiatric care, in theory he could be released once he is no longer deemed psychotic and dangerous.
Reader Comments
Well apparently he's had two psyche tests and in one, the result was that he was insane and in the other it was that he was not insane. The court has said that they are going to take both test results under consideration in the trial. But I honestly don't understand how he could be pronounced not insane by one of those tests. Dare I say there is some sort of 'conspiracy' going on here?