Smartwatch data cited as evidence in rape case against Norwegian Crown Princess’s son

OSLO — A second woman testified Tuesday in the trial of Marius Borg Høiby, accusing the son of Norway’s Crown Princess Mette-Marit of raping her while she was asleep.

Høiby, 29, faces 38 charges in Oslo, including the rape of four women and the assault of a former girlfriend. He has pleaded not guilty to the most serious counts.

The victim testified that she met Høiby through the dating app Tinder and was assaulted in October 2023 following a party. She described the incident to the court as her "worst nightmare."

Prosecutors presented a five-second video filmed by Høiby that allegedly shows the woman sleeping during the encounter. They also introduced data from the victim’s fitness watch, arguing that changes in her heart rate proved she was asleep at the time.

The proceedings follow testimony last week from another woman regarding a separate rape allegation from 2018. Høiby is also charged with filming sexual encounters without consent.

Defense attorneys have rejected the allegations, maintaining that the sexual acts were consensual. If convicted, Høiby faces a maximum sentence of 16 years in prison.

The Norwegian Royal Family has stated they will not attend the trial.

The trial of Marius Borg Høiby has transcended its origins as a personal criminal matter to become a fundamental stress test for the Norwegian Monarchy. For a dynasty that has meticulously curated a brand of modern, accessible royalty, this crisis necessitates a high-stakes balancing act between familial solidarity and constitutional accountability. Crown Prince Haakon’s public insistence that Høiby be treated as an ordinary citizen—bound by the same legal obligations as any other—is a calculated strategic move designed to insulate the crown as an institution from the fallout of individual misconduct.

Beyond the palace optics, the case is poised to set a significant legal precedent regarding the admissibility of digital forensics. The prosecution’s reliance on biometric data, specifically heart-rate telemetry from a smartwatch alongside the defendant’s own video recordings, marks a sophisticated evolution in the adjudication of sexual assault. This shift toward objective digital evidence offers a potential breakthrough in resolving the "he said, she said" stalemates that have historically plagued such proceedings.

Furthermore, the trial highlights the tightening legal definitions of "consent" within modern jurisprudence. By leveraging technology to establish a victim’s lack of capacity or non-consensual state, the case establishes a new evidentiary benchmark. It signals a broader shift in how courts interpret clear authorization, particularly in complex scenarios where a party may be unable to provide explicit consent, potentially reshaping the landscape for future sex-crime litigation.

While this development doesn't directly affect the Vietnamese-American community, it serves as a clear illustration of how Western legal systems prosecute serious criminal charges against well-connected individuals. It reinforces the principle that family status and elite ties do not grant immunity under the law.