The morning sun had just begun to rise over Sørum, a rural community northeast of Oslo, when Hans Orderud arrived at the family farm.
It was Sunday, the 23rd of May, 1999.
Hans walked up the gravel drive of his brother’s home, as he had done countless times before. The air was still. Quiet. But something was off.
The kårbolig — a modest house separate from the main farmhouse — should have been stirring with life. Hans knocked. No answer. He peered through the window. The curtain was out of place… and the glass on the veranda door was shattered.
Cautiously, he entered the house... What he found inside was a scene of unimaginable horror: Lying in pools of blood were the bodies of 84-year-old Kristian Orderud, his wife Marie, aged 81, and their daughter, 47-year-old Anne Orderud Paust. All three had been executed at close range — in their own home, in the dead of night.
Nothing had been stolen. The house was otherwise undisturbed. Whoever came to Orderud farm that night came to kill… What would follow was one of the most controversial murder investigations in Scandinavian legal history — one that led to convictions… but left the central question unanswered:
Who pulled the trigger?
You are listening to: The Evidence Locker.
Thanks for listening to our podcast. This episode is made possible by our sponsors—be sure to check them out for exclusive deals. For an ad-free experience, join us on Patreon, starting at just $2 a month, with 25% of proceeds supporting The Doe Network, helping to bring closure to international cold cases. Links are in the show notes.
Our episodes cover true crimes involving real people, and some content may be graphic in nature. Listener discretion is advised. We produce each episode with the utmost respect for the victims, their families, and loved ones.
The case:
The Orderud family had deep roots in the farming community outside Oslo. Kristian Magnus Orderud, born in 1918, had spent his entire life working the land. His wife Marie, born in 1915, had been by his side through decades of marriage. Together they had built a life on the farm, raising their children and maintaining the property that represented their life's work.
Their daughter Anne was the eldest child, born in 1952. She had moved away from farm life, marrying Per Paust, a Norwegian diplomat. The couple lived primarily in Oslo, where Per's career took them into different social circles than the rural community where Anne had grown up. Despite the distance, Anne remained connected to her parents and visited regularly.
The couple's son, Per Kristian Orderud, had taken a different path. While Anne had left for the city, Per Kristian stayed behind. For years, he had been running the day-to-day operations of the farm, even though his parents remained the legal owners of the property. This arrangement would later become central to understanding what happened on that fatal night.
But beneath the surface of this farming family, tensions had been building for years. The question of who would inherit the farm, who had rights to the property, and who deserved to control the estate created fractures that went deeper than anyone outside the family realized.
But in 1998, a series of threats drew Anne’s attention away from the family drama, as fear for her and her husband’s safety escalated.
Anne’s husband, Per Paust, was a senior official in Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. At their Oslo home they could not escape a sense of being watched. Anonymous phone calls. Cars idling outside their apartment. Subtle but persistent signs that someone had them under surveillance.
Then the intimidation became physical. Early in 1998, Anne and Per were attacked one night outside their building. It was not a robbery — nothing was stolen. The couple was shaken. Within weeks, Per accepted a temporary posting in New York, and the couple left Norway for several months.
When they returned later that year, the sense of danger was still there. In July 1998, an employee at the Ministry of Defence discovered a package attached to the underside of Anne’s government-owned car: half a kilo of dynamite wired as an explosive device. It was defused before it could detonate.
Barely a month later, in August, building staff found a petrol canister fitted with an ignition device in the stairwell of Anne and Per’s Oslo apartment block. Two serious incidents, only weeks apart. No arrests were ever made.
Anne and Per lived with constant anxiety. Additional security measures were arranged through government channels, but the perpetrators remained unknown.
Then, on May 6th, 1999, in a cruel twist of fate, Per Paust died of cancer. The timing would later fuel speculation, but there is no evidence his death was anything other than natural causes. Widowed and grieving, Anne spent more time with her parents at the farm.
On May 15th, only a week before the murders, Oslo police received an anonymous call warning that Anne and her parents would soon be killed. The warning could not be traced. Anne was never told.
That weekend, she travelled out to Sørum, seeking the comfort of her childhood home. By Sunday morning she and her parents would be dead.
On the evening of Saturday, May 22nd, Anne arrived at Orderud farm. Instead of staying in the main farmhouse where her brother and sister-in-law lived, she joined her elderly parents in the modest, separate house further down the property.
That night, the three of them shared a quiet meal. The air was cool for late spring. At some point, they each retired for the night. Anne remained in her nightclothes. Kristian and Marie went to bed in their shared bedroom.
The house fell silent… Sometime during the early hours of Sunday, May 23rd, an intruder — or more than one — entered the home.
They didn’t break in through the front door. Instead, they accessed the veranda on the second floor, breaking the glass in the door to get inside. The move was deliberate. Calculated. The rest of the house showed no signs of forced entry.
Inside, the killer moved with precision: Marie Orderud was shot first. One bullet — fired at close range — struck her in the chest while she was still in bed. Somehow, she managed to get up and stagger into the living room. There, a second bullet struck her from behind. She collapsed and died near the television.
Anne, who may have heard the gunshots, was found lying in the hallway. She had sustained six gunshot wounds — to her chest, back, shoulder, and neck. Investigators believed she had tried to escape, or possibly confronted the intruder. The close-range nature of several wounds indicated that she, too, was executed at point-blank range.
Kristian was killed last. He was found slumped beside his bed, still in his pyjamas. One bullet struck him in the chest, the other in the neck. The contact burn on his skin suggested the second shot was fired from almost no distance at all.
The killer — or killers — exited the way they came: through the veranda.
Nothing had been stolen. Valuables in plain sight were untouched. There were no defensive wounds. No cries for help. This wasn’t a robbery. It was an execution.
Police sealed off the property by mid-morning. Officers secured both the secondary house and the main farmhouse, where Per Kristian and Veronica Orderud lived.
Inside the smaller house, crime scene investigators began documenting everything.
They noted two sets of shell casings — indicating that two different firearms had been used: a .22 caliber pistol, and a .38 caliber revolver. Ballistics later confirmed that these were two separate weapons, likely fired by two individuals.
A partial shoe print was found in the broken glass on the veranda. It was smeared — possibly obscured by something. Nearby, in the garden, police recovered a single wool sock, orange/yellow in colour. It had no apparent match.
Theories began to form. Investigators believed the sock had been used to cover a shoe — a primitive attempt to disguise tread patterns. It may have slipped off during the escape.
The gunshot residue suggested the shots had been fired at extremely close range. But there were no fingerprints. No DNA. No hair. No fibres. The killer — or killers — had left almost nothing behind.
But there was something else… Forensic teams later discovered pine needles embedded in another sock and a wig seized during the investigation. The pine was consistent with trees found around the Orderud property, though this would later be disputed.
Still, it wasn’t enough to tie any suspect directly to the scene. And crucially, the murder weapons were never recovered. Despite the lack of forensic evidence, police were convinced this was not the work of strangers.
The killer knew the victims. They had known where Anne would be — even though she hadn’t planned the trip in advance. Only a small number of people had known she’d be staying with her parents that weekend.
The list of potential suspects quickly narrowed to those closest to the family. At the centre of it all was the question no one could ignore: Who stood to benefit from three members of the Orderud family being dead?
In the weeks that followed the murders, police turned their attention to the inner workings of the Orderud family. While there was little in the way of forensic evidence — no DNA, no fingerprints, and no murder weapon — the nature of the killings suggested an insider’s knowledge. Anne’s visit to the farm that weekend had not been publicly known. Whoever had come to the house that night knew she would be there.
Investigators quickly zeroed in on the fractured family dynamic at the heart of the Orderud farm. Anne had recently taken legal steps to secure her share of the inheritance, and their parents had supported her. For Per Kristian, who had run the farm for years, the move felt like betrayal. What he saw as his future was now being divided, legally and emotionally, by those closest to him. Police considered this internal conflict — particularly the growing tension over ownership of the land — a potential motive for murder.
As they widened their investigation, attention turned to the people surrounding Per and his wife, Veronica.
A new lead came when neighbours reported hearing gunfire in the woods behind the Orderud farm in the weeks after the murders. When police followed up, they found Kristin alone, claiming to be doing target practice. The handgun she was using matched the .38 calibre of one of the murder weapons. Although forensic analysis later confirmed it wasn’t the same gun, investigators were struck by the timing and proximity. The woman was Vernoica’s half-sister, Kristin Kirkemo, well known to law enforcement. She had a history of unstable behaviour and had been in a volatile relationship with Lars Grønnerød, a man with a weapons conviction and criminal connections. The ties between the four of them — Per, Veronica, Kristin, and Lars — began to reveal more than just strained relationships. It looked increasingly like a network shaped by loyalty, resentment, and secrets.
Why was Veronica’s estranged half-sister firing that kind of weapon so close to the crime scene? The encounter raised red flags — and Kristin Kirkemo quickly became a person of interest.
Over time, the group began turning on each other. Kristin alleged that Veronica had spoken openly about “getting rid of the old ones.” Lars claimed Per Kristian had provided him with ammunition and hinted at a broader plan. No one admitted to pulling the trigger, but their stories were full of contradictions and mutual accusations. Police believed the murders had been premeditated — not carried out in a moment of rage, but carefully planned by people close to the victims.
In June 1999, Per Kristian, Veronica, Kristin, and Lars were all arrested and charged with complicity in premeditated murder.
The case went to trial in 2000 and captured the attention of the entire country. It was one of the most highly publicised trials in modern Norwegian history. Cameras lined the courthouse steps. Journalists dissected every statement. The public, captivated by the idea of a family murder plot, followed the case with morbid fascination.
The prosecution’s case was largely circumstantial. With no eyewitnesses, no physical evidence linking the accused to the crime scene, and no murder weapons recovered, the burden fell on testimony and motive. Prosecutors argued that each of the four played a role. Per Kristian had the strongest motive: to secure ownership of the farm. Veronica had allegedly discussed the killings with her half-sister. Kristin and Lars were believed to have helped acquire the weapons and carry out the murders.
The court heard testimony about long-standing resentment, conversations overheard, and hints of manipulation. The prosecution painted a picture of shared guilt — a murder facilitated by four people, each playing a part. The defence, in turn, claimed there was no direct evidence and pointed to the unreliability of statements made by co-accused individuals trying to shift blame.
In the end, the court agreed with the prosecution. All four were found guilty of complicity in premeditated murder.
Per Kristian, Veronica, and Kristin were each sentenced to 21 years in prison — the maximum sentence under Norwegian law at the time. Lars, initially convicted only on weapons charges, received two and a half years. The public response was divided. While many accepted the verdict, others questioned how such harsh sentences could be handed down when the identity of the shooter — or shooters — remained unknown.
In 2002, the case returned to court on appeal. The Eidsivating Court of Appeal upheld the convictions but adjusted the sentences. Kristin’s sentence was reduced to 16 years, citing her lower level of involvement. Lars’s sentence, on the other hand, was increased to 18 years after the court accepted that his role had been greater than initially determined. The 21-year sentences for Per Kristian and Veronica remained unchanged.
The court reiterated that while none of the accused could be proven to have fired the fatal shots, they had each contributed to the planning or execution of the murders. Still, the judges acknowledged the limitations of the case. The crime scene had yielded almost nothing in terms of trace evidence. The entire verdict rested on motive, association, and mutual accusation.
Despite the legal finality, public interest in the case never waned. Many continued to believe the full truth had not been uncovered. How could such a brutal crime be committed without any forensic evidence? Who had actually fired the shots that night? And why had no one been charged with the murders themselves?
All four convicted individuals were eventually released under Norway’s parole system. Kristin was released in 2011. Lars followed in 2013. Per Kristian and Veronica completed over 15 years of their 21-year sentence and were released in early 2015.
But they did not quietly fade from public view. In 2018, Per Kristian and Veronica applied to have the case reopened. They enlisted the help of private investigator Tore Sandberg, who spent years compiling over a thousand pages of new material. The application included video interviews, expert reports, and alleged evidence that had not been adequately considered during the original trial.
One of the key elements presented was forensic evidence from the 1998 attempted bombing of Anne’s car. Tape fragments used to attach dynamite under the vehicle had been tested for DNA. The results matched Kristin Kirkemo. For the defence, this was proof that threats against Anne had come from Kristin, not from Per and Veronica.
The application was submitted to the Norwegian Criminal Cases Review Commission. The Commission began an extensive review, described as the most comprehensive in its history.
In June 2024, the Commission announced its decision. The request to reopen the case was denied. The panel was unanimous. They found that the new evidence, while potentially interesting, was not sufficient to overturn the original conviction or change the established facts of the case.
Today, the Orderud case is a closed chapter in Norwegian legal history, but it remains one of its most unsettling. The four individuals convicted of complicity have served their time. The appeals have been exhausted. The case will not be reopened.
And yet, the central mystery persists.
No one has ever been convicted of actually committing the murders. The crime scene remains devoid of conclusive evidence. The weapons were never found. The identity of the person — or persons — who entered the house, crept up to the veranda, and shot Kristian, Marie, and Anne remains unknown.
Was it a calculated conspiracy among family members and close associates? Or did the investigation settle on the wrong suspects, guided by motive but lacking proof?
For the surviving members of the Orderud family, for the wider public, and for those who followed the case for decades, one thing is clear: justice may have been served, but resolution remains out of reach.
If you'd like to dive deeper into this case, check out the resources we used for this episode in the show notes.
Don’t forget to follow us on social media for more updates on today's case – you can find us on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and X. We also have a channel on YouTube where you can watch more content.
If you enjoy what we do here at Evidence Locker, please subscribe on Apple Podcasts or wherever you're listening right now and consider leaving us a 5-star review.
This was The Evidence Locker. Thank you for listening!
©2025 Evidence Locker Podcast
All rights reserved. This podcast or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the publisher except for the use of brief quotations in a podcast review.