In Oslo on Wednesday, 29-year-old Marius Borg Høiby — the son of Crown Princess Mette-Marit — gave a tearful, at times halting, statement as he faces trial on charges that include four counts of rape and more than 30 other alleged offences. The testimony followed a victim’s account that she believed she had been drugged after an “after-party” in the basement of Høiby’s parents’ home in December 2018. Høiby denied the rape allegations and other charges and described years of heavy drinking, drug use and a need for validation; the court has imposed reporting bans to protect the identities of alleged victims and barred photography of the defendant at court. The hearing adds pressure on the royal household amid separate criticism over the crown princess’s past exchanges with the late Jeffrey Epstein.
Key takeaways
- Marius Borg Høiby, 29, is on trial in Oslo accused of four rapes between December 2018 and November 2024 and more than 30 related offences; convictions could carry a sentence of at least 10 years.
- The first complainant told the court she believed she had been drugged after an “after-party” in December 2018; she has described memory gaps and said police later showed her videos she found shocking.
- Høiby gave an unsworn statement lasting about 30 minutes, at times visibly emotional; he denied the prosecution’s version of events and challenged media reporting of his case.
- He was arrested in August 2024 after a violent incident at his girlfriend’s flat and was remanded in custody for four weeks; he did not return to custody before his Wednesday statement.
- The court has a reporting ban to prevent identification of the four women and prohibits photographs of Høiby at the court building or during transit to and from the trial.
- Høiby’s mother, Crown Princess Mette-Marit, has faced criticism over past correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein; the palace has said she postponed a private trip and expressed regret over her judgement.
Background
The defendant, born in 1996, arrived at the Oslo courthouse under intense public scrutiny. Although not a member of the royal family by title, Høiby has been in the media spotlight since childhood because of his connection to Crown Princess Mette-Marit, who married Crown Prince Haakon in 2001. That long-running attention has been invoked repeatedly by the defendant as part of his testimony about personal pressures and intrusion.
Høiby’s legal troubles escalated after an August 2024 arrest following an alleged violent episode in the Frogner neighbourhood of western Oslo. He has previously acknowledged long-standing mental health struggles and substance misuse. After a protracted police inquiry he was charged with a wide array of offences: rape, assault, threats, property damage, drug offences and driving violations — a package of allegations that spans events from late 2018 through November 2024.
Main event
On the first day of his extended testimony Høiby appeared visibly shaken, pausing several times to remove his glasses and wipe his eyes. He told the three presiding judges it was difficult to speak and complained of being followed by the press since he was three years old. Wearing a dark-blue turtleneck and beige shirt, he spoke for roughly half an hour, at points acknowledging heavy use of alcohol and drugs and saying he had sought validation through sex and partying.
The prosecution focused its early questioning on the first alleged rape in December 2018. The complainant said she awoke with large gaps in her memory after an “after-party” in the basement of Høiby’s parents’ house and believed she had been drugged; she also testified that police later showed her videos she found distressing. In closed court she previously described a “black hole” in her recollection and told judges she could not remember what happened that night.
Høiby contested elements of the complainant’s account. He disputed that he had filmed the encounter and said he did not recall taking videos; he also said the pair had consensual sex in bed rather than a brief encounter in a basement toilet that the prosecution described. He further denied reports that his mother removed a sim card from his phone before it was handed to police, accusing the press of misrepresenting facts.
Analysis & implications
Legally, the case raises contested questions about consent and capacity: Norwegian courts recognise that sex with an incapacitated person can constitute rape, and prosecutors say the four accused incidents occurred after consensual sex but while the complainants were asleep or incapacitated. If convicted on the most serious counts, Høiby faces a significant custodial term; Norwegian sentencing for serious sexual offences can exceed a decade in aggravated cases.
Beyond the courtroom, the trial has reputational consequences for Norway’s royal household. The timing — coming as the crown princess faces scrutiny over archived correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein — intensifies public debate over accountability, privacy and the limits of media coverage of individuals tied to public figures. The palace’s decision to delay a private trip and to issue limited statements reflects a cautious approach to containing reputational fallout.
The trial also tests Norway’s media and privacy rules. Courts routinely impose reporting restrictions to protect alleged victims and to avoid prejudicing proceedings. The blanket ban on photographs of the defendant at court illustrates how the justice system balances open justice against protection of participants and the integrity of the process.
Comparison & data
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Alleged rape dates | December 2018 – November 2024 (four incidents) |
| Arrest | August 2024 (violent incident at girlfriend’s flat) |
| Remand | Remanded for four weeks after arrest |
| Potential sentence | At least 10 years if convicted on serious counts |
The table summarises the timeline that underpins the prosecution’s case: an initial alleged incident in 2018 and further charges extending to late 2024. The progression from arrest in August 2024 to this trial reflects a prolonged investigation, multiple charges and several procedural protections designed to balance transparency and victim safety.
Reactions & quotes
“I am known for being Mamma’s son. Nothing else.”
Marius Borg Høiby (defendant)
Høiby used this line to describe how media attention has shaped his identity and the pressures he says have accompanied his life in the public eye. The remark was delivered in a measured voice amid visible emotion in court.
“A lot of parties, alcohol, some drugs.”
Marius Borg Høiby (defendant)
The defendant acknowledged substance use and a party lifestyle while answering judges’ questions. He characterised those years as driven by a search for validation rather than malice, a point the prosecution challenged during cross-examination.
“[She] described betrayal and shock after police showed her videos allegedly of an assault.”
Complainant (as reported in court)
The complainant’s account, as relayed in open court, highlighted the emotional impact of reviewing evidence and the distress she said followed the alleged assault. The court has made specific orders preventing media from publishing identifying details of the complainants.
Unconfirmed
- Whether the videos described in court definitively show criminal conduct has not been adjudicated; their evidentiary weight remains for the trial to determine.
- The complainant’s assertion that she was drugged at the after-party is reported in court testimony but has not been independently medically established in public records disclosed to date.
- The claim that Mette-Marit removed a sim card from her son’s phone before police received it is disputed by Høiby and has not been verified by independent sources presented publicly in the case record.
Bottom line
This trial combines sensitive questions about consent and capacity, a high-profile family connection, and constrained public reporting. The court’s protections for complainants and the ban on photographs aim to shield victims and prevent prejudicing a complex legal process; nonetheless the case is likely to remain a focal point of public discussion because of the royal link and the crown princess’s separate controversy.
The outcome will hinge on how the court assesses memory gaps, video evidence and competing accounts of the encounters from 2018 to 2024. Observers should expect careful judicial fact-finding over weeks of testimony, and potential appeals thereafter; the verdict will carry legal consequences for the defendant and reputational consequences for the royal household.