Most of the victims had immigrant backgrounds, but chief prosecutor Solveig Wollstad said the motive wasn’t clear-cut.

In material seized on Mangs’ computer and smartphone, “there was a certain measure of xenophobia,” Wollstad told reporters in Malmo. “But there were also other things, for example an aggressiveness against people who had earlier been involved in crimes.”

The shootings spread jitters in Malmo, Sweden’s third largest city and one of its most diverse. Forty percent of the city’s 300,000 residents are first- or second-generation immigrants.

Swedish media drew parallels to a racist gunman who hunted down immigrants in Stockholm in the 1990s. After evading capture for nearly a year, John Ausonius was convicted of one murder and nine attempted murders and is now serving a life sentence.

Comparisons have also been made between the Malmo shootings and the bomb-and-shooting massacre that killed 77 people in Norway last July, including by the right-wing extremist who admitted those attacks, Anders Behring Breivik.

As his terror trial began in Norway three weeks ago, Breivik mentioned Mangs and a group of German neo-Nazis as examples of “patriots” taking up arms to fight multiculturalism in Europe.

Investigators say the cases are not linked.

Police said Mangs used a Glock pistol in the shootings, but with different barrels in an apparent attempt to make it harder for police to trace the bullets to the same gun. The victims were shot through widows of apartments and businesses, in parked cars or as they were walking on the street.

Police inspector Borje Sjoholm said the gunman was initially difficult to track down because the victims were not connected to each other or the suspect. Many were shot at a distance, often at night, and there were only vague descriptions of the gunman.

Mangs was arrested following a tip-off from the public. Prosecutors said their proof includes forensic evidence, witness accounts and material seized from Mangs’ home.

“This is the Norwegian way,” said Trond Henry Blattmann, whose 17-year-old son was among the 69 people killed in Breivik’s shooting massacre on Utoya island. “We need to carry this out in a dignified manner. If people were shouting and screaming this would be a circus and not a trial. We don’t want it to be a circus.”

Like other Scandinavians, Norwegians are not prone to express their emotions out loud. But the good behavior of the crowd inside courtroom 250 has surprised even some local observers.

Thomas Hylland Eriksen, a professor of social anthropology at Oslo University, said that by treating the trial with “respect and decency,” Norwegians are showing defiance against Breivik by standing up for values at the core of their national identity.

When he called Breivik “pudgy” in Norwegian media before the trial, Eriksen said some people took offense.

“I received mail from people who said ‘you shouldn’t say that about his appearance. He has a mother. We have to treat him with respect.’”

Breivik has admitted setting off a car bomb outside the government headquarters, killing eight, before unleashing a shooting massacre at the governing Labor Party’s youth camp on Utoya.

But he denies criminal guilt and rejects the authority of the court, saying it is a vehicle of a “multiculturalist” conspiracy to destroy Norway.

His testimony, which is set to end Monday, has been horrific. A hushed courtroom heard his macabre account of point-blank executions of shell-shocked youth on Utoya. The bereaved embraced and sobbed, but they let him finish, holding back the urge to scream out in agony.

“I think everybody has that urge. Even his lawyers have that urge. But will that help us?” asked Blattmann. “It would just give the terrorist more publicity.”

The “dignity” of the process has won praise in Norwegian media. But between breaks there is sometimes discussions in the corridors about whether Breivik deserves it.

“It puzzles me a little bit,” said Thomas Indreboe, a citizen judge who was dismissed from the case for an online comment that Breivik should get the death penalty, which is not applied in Europe, except for in Belarus.

“When you look at other countries, people shout and scream,” he told The Associated Press.

Indreboe said he “didn’t quite understand” why Breivik got to start his defense by reading an hour-long statement about his extremist political views. And he stands by his opinion that Breivik deserves to be put to death.

“Because what he did is so serious and horrible. There is no other justice,” Indreboe told the AP.

Most people here say it’s important that Breivik — like anybody accused of a crime — gets a chance to explain himself in an open court, despite the scale of the attacks.

That approach contrasts with how the U.S. has dealt with the five Guantanamo Bay prisoners charged in the Sept. 11 attacks.

President Barack Obama wanted to close the Guantanamo prison and try the men in civilian court but was rebuffed by Congress, and the administration moved the case back to the military’s war crimes tribunal at Guantanamo.

“I think it’s being handled in a good way,” Jannike Berger, a 25-year-old Oslo teacher said of the Breivik trial. “I think it’s important that it is as open as it is … and it is important that he gets to explain himself.”

To some foreign observers, Norway’s desire to do right has gone overboard, allowing the confessed mass killer just what he wants: a platform to promote his extreme political ideology. Print media can cover all parts of the trial. Norwegian TV broadcasts much of it live, including when he enters court, but isn’t allowed to show his testimony.

In Germany, particularly sensitive to right-wing extremism, the Sueddeutsche Zeitung criticized how the “the murderer is smiling, grinning gloatingly, clenching his fist” before a world audience.

“The murderer had the center stage, as if the court’s most pressing matter were how he stages himself,” the newspaper said in an editorial.

Others applauded the way Norway has handled the case.

“Norway announced last year that it would respond to the attacks with more openness and democracy and, amazingly, has lived up to that pledge,” Dutch daily De Volkskrant said. “The trial is a demonstration of the strength of democracy against a violent loner who is so weak he feels the need to take up arms.”

Breivik, himself, ridiculed Norway’s maximum prison sentence of 21 years, saying the only proper outcomes of the case would be death or acquittal.

If found sane — a key issue in the case — he would face 21 years in prison though he can be held longer if deemed a danger to society. If sentenced to psychiatric care, in theory he would be released once he’s no longer deemed psychotic and dangerous.

Norwegian legal experts say it’s crucial that every part of the proceedings is conducted by the book so that Breivik cannot claim he didn’t get a fair trial. Many say it’s also important that the gruesome details are documented to make sure that Breivik is kept away from society for a long time, maybe for the rest of his life.

“When Behring Breivik at some point in the future goes to court and demands to be released — whether from a prison or from a psychiatric hospital — the judgment will the be most central document in that evaluation,” Inge D. Hanssen, one of Norway’s most experienced crime reporters wrote in newspaper Aftenposten.

Following Norwegian custom, the prosecutors and even lawyers for the bereaved shook Breivik’s hand on the first day in court. Prosecutors maintain a polite tone, even when Breivik is being evasive or challenges the point of their questions.

The general impression in Norway is that all parties in the case, from the prosecutors to the defense lawyers, are doing a good job.

But Magnus Ranstorp, a terror researcher from the Swedish Defense College, said once they have extracted all the information they want from him, they should increase the pressure.

“He needs to have his world rocked a little bit,” Ranstorp said. “It should not go out this way. It should not be softy softy. It should switch to a different mode so that he understands what he did was pure evil.”

That’s not necessarily how Norway sees it. Outside the Oslo district court, the spirit of facing terror with tolerance that was so strong in Norway after the attacks has returned.

People are attaching roses to the fence surrounding the court, many with messages of support for victims’ families and survivors of the massacre.

The closest thing to anger was a short message scribbled on a card decorated with a ribbon in the red-white-and-blue colors of the Norwegian flag. “Apologize, Breivik,” it said.

___

Associated Press writers Bjoern H. Amland in Oslo, Juergen Baetz in Berlin, and Mike Corder in The Hague, Netherlands, contributed to this report.

“This is the Norwegian way,” said Trond Henry Blattmann, whose 17-year-old son was among the 69 people killed in Breivik’s shooting massacre on Utoya island. “We need to carry this out in a dignified manner. If people were shouting and screaming this would be a circus and not a trial. We don’t want it to be a circus.”

Like other Scandinavians, Norwegians are not prone to express their emotions out loud. But the good behavior of the crowd inside courtroom 250 has surprised even some local observers.

Thomas Hylland Eriksen, a professor of social anthropology at Oslo University, said that by treating the trial with “respect and decency,” Norwegians are showing defiance against Breivik by standing up for values at the core of their national identity.

When he called Breivik “pudgy” in Norwegian media before the trial, Eriksen said some people took offense.

“I received mail from people who said ‘you shouldn’t say that about his appearance. He has a mother. We have to treat him with respect.’”

Breivik has admitted setting off a car bomb outside the government headquarters, killing eight, before unleashing a shooting massacre at the governing Labor Party’s youth camp on Utoya.

But he denies criminal guilt and rejects the authority of the court, saying it is a vehicle of a “multiculturalist” conspiracy to destroy Norway.

His testimony, which is set to end Monday, has been horrific. A hushed courtroom heard his macabre account of point-blank executions of shell-shocked youth on Utoya. The bereaved embraced and sobbed, but they let him finish, holding back the urge to scream out in agony.

“I think everybody has that urge. Even his lawyers have that urge. But will that help us?” asked Blattmann. “It would just give the terrorist more publicity.”

The “dignity” of the process has won praise in Norwegian media. But between breaks there is sometimes discussions in the corridors about whether Breivik deserves it.

“It puzzles me a little bit,” said Thomas Indreboe, a citizen judge who was dismissed from the case for an online comment that Breivik should get the death penalty, which is not applied in Europe, except for in Belarus.

“When you look at other countries, people shout and scream,” he told The Associated Press.

Indreboe said he “didn’t quite understand” why Breivik got to start his defense by reading an hour-long statement about his extremist political views. And he stands by his opinion that Breivik deserves to be put to death.

“Because what he did is so serious and horrible. There is no other justice,” Indreboe told the AP.

Most people here say it’s important that Breivik — like anybody accused of a crime — gets a chance to explain himself in an open court, despite the scale of the attacks.

That approach contrasts with how the U.S. has dealt with the five Guantanamo Bay prisoners charged in the Sept. 11 attacks.

President Barack Obama wanted to close the Guantanamo prison and try the men in civilian court but was rebuffed by Congress, and the administration moved the case back to the military’s war crimes tribunal at Guantanamo.

“I think it’s being handled in a good way,” Jannike Berger, a 25-year-old Oslo teacher said of the Breivik trial. “I think it’s important that it is as open as it is … and it is important that he gets to explain himself.”

To some foreign observers, Norway’s desire to do right has gone overboard, allowing the confessed mass killer just what he wants: a platform to promote his extreme political ideology. Print media can cover all parts of the trial. Norwegian TV broadcasts much of it live, including when he enters court, but isn’t allowed to show his testimony.

In Germany, particularly sensitive to right-wing extremism, the Sueddeutsche Zeitung criticized how the “the murderer is smiling, grinning gloatingly, clenching his fist” before a world audience.

“The murderer had the center stage, as if the court’s most pressing matter were how he stages himself,” the newspaper said in an editorial.

Others applauded the way Norway has handled the case.

“Norway announced last year that it would respond to the attacks with more openness and democracy and, amazingly, has lived up to that pledge,” Dutch daily De Volkskrant said. “The trial is a demonstration of the strength of democracy against a violent loner who is so weak he feels the need to take up arms.”

Breivik, himself, ridiculed Norway’s maximum prison sentence of 21 years, saying the only proper outcomes of the case would be death or acquittal.

If found sane — a key issue in the case — he would face 21 years in prison though he can be held longer if deemed a danger to society. If sentenced to psychiatric care, in theory he would be released once he’s no longer deemed psychotic and dangerous.

Norwegian legal experts say it’s crucial that every part of the proceedings is conducted by the book so that Breivik cannot claim he didn’t get a fair trial. Many say it’s also important that the gruesome details are documented to make sure that Breivik is kept away from society for a long time, maybe for the rest of his life.

“When Behring Breivik at some point in the future goes to court and demands to be released — whether from a prison or from a psychiatric hospital — the judgment will the be most central document in that evaluation,” Inge D. Hanssen, one of Norway’s most experienced crime reporters wrote in newspaper Aftenposten.

Following Norwegian custom, the prosecutors and even lawyers for the bereaved shook Breivik’s hand on the first day in court. Prosecutors maintain a polite tone, even when Breivik is being evasive or challenges the point of their questions.

The general impression in Norway is that all parties in the case, from the prosecutors to the defense lawyers, are doing a good job.

But Magnus Ranstorp, a terror researcher from the Swedish Defense College, said once they have extracted all the information they want from him, they should increase the pressure.

“He needs to have his world rocked a little bit,” Ranstorp said. “It should not go out this way. It should not be softy softy. It should switch to a different mode so that he understands what he did was pure evil.”

That’s not necessarily how Norway sees it. Outside the Oslo district court, the spirit of facing terror with tolerance that was so strong in Norway after the attacks has returned.

People are attaching roses to the fence surrounding the court, many with messages of support for victims’ families and survivors of the massacre.

The closest thing to anger was a short message scribbled on a card decorated with a ribbon in the red-white-and-blue colors of the Norwegian flag. “Apologize, Breivik,” it said.

___

Associated Press writers Bjoern H. Amland in Oslo, Juergen Baetz in Berlin, and Mike Corder in The Hague, Netherlands, contributed to this report.

A total of 77 people were killed in the twin attacks.

On the fourth day of his trial, Breivik entered the Oslo district court without the clenched-fist salute he had used in previous hearings.

He told the court he had prepared for a firefight with police in Oslo by playing computer games, focusing on situations where he would be flanked by two commando teams.

“I estimated the chances of survival as less than 5 percent,” he said.

Breivik has confessed to the attacks but rejects criminal guilt, saying he was acting to protect Norway and Europe by targeting left-wing political forces he claims have betrayed the country by opening it up to immigration.

The key issue of the trial is to establish whether he is criminally insane.

In his testimony, the 33-year-old Norwegian said he played the computer game “Modern Warfare” for 16 months starting in January 2010, primarily to get a feel for how to use rifle sights.

Breivik said he decided already in 2006 to carry out what he expected to be a “suicide” operation. First he took a “sabbatical year” fully devoted to play another computer game, “World of Warcraft,” for 16 hours a day.

Cutting off social contact for a full year helped him prepare for the attacks, but said the game-playing was “pure entertainment. It doesn’t have anything to do with July 22.”

If found sane, Breivik could face a maximum 21-year prison sentence or an alternate custody arrangement that would keep him locked up as long as he is considered a menace to society. If declared insane, he would be committed to psychiatric care for as long as he’s considered ill.

The trial is expected to last 10 weeks.

____

Associated Press Writer Bjoern H. Amland in Oslo, Norway contributed to this report.

As the trial started Monday, Breivik claimed he acted in “self-defense” to protect Norway from Muslims by attacking the left-leaning political party he blamed for the country’s liberal immigration policies.

Breivik rejected the authority of the court, calling it a vehicle of the “multiculturalist” political parties in power in Norway. He confessed to the “acts” but pleaded not guilty, saying he was acting in self-defense.

Event his defense lawyers conceded that such a defense was unlikely to succeed, and said the main thing for them was to convince the court that Breivik is not insane.

One psychiatric examination found him legally insane while another reached the opposite conclusion. It is up to the five-judge panel to decide whether to send him to prison or compulsory psychiatric care.

Breivik could face a maximum 21-year prison sentence or an alternate custody arrangement that would keep him locked up as long as he is considered a menace to society.