A woman in her 30s is on trial for attempting to smuggle a GPS tracker with a microphone to convicted murderer Philip Westh during a prison visit in November 2023. Prosecutors seek a prison sentence, while the woman denies the charges. The court will deliver its verdict on February 25.
Security Breach at High-Security Prison
The case unfolded at Storstrøm Prison, where the woman arrived for a scheduled visit with Philip Patrick Westh, known as the Korsør Man. Prison staff discovered the electronic device during routine security screening before she could enter the visiting area. The GPS tracker, equipped with audio recording capabilities, was found concealed in a jacket pocket.
Discovery During Visitor Screening
A prison officer testified that security monitors detected electronics in the woman’s jacket during the standard screening process. The officer questioned the woman twice about the device. According to testimony, the visitor immediately asked the officer to throw it away without explaining what it was. When pressed further, she again insisted the officer simply discard it.
The prison officer explained that visitors must pass through multiple security checkpoints before reaching the visiting area. If the device had not been detected during screening, it would have entered the meeting room with the inmate. Following the discovery, staff denied the woman entry and handed the tracker to a security coordinator.
The Accused Woman’s Account
The defendant told the court the GPS tracker was not hers but belonged to her boyfriend. She claimed she had purchased the jacket for her partner, but he never wore it. On the day of the prison visit, she said she grabbed the jacket from her car because she did not want to carry her heavier coat inside. She insisted she was unaware the device was in the jacket pocket.
When her defense attorney asked whether she intended to smuggle anything into the prison, she answered she had no such intention. She stated she was familiar with prison security protocols and did not consider having the device in her pocket an attempt at smuggling. She expressed surprise when police later contacted her, saying she had expected only to receive a visitation ban.
Legal Arguments and Evidence
Prosecutors and defense attorneys presented sharply contrasting interpretations of the evidence during proceedings at the court.
Prosecution’s Case for Intent
The prosecutor argued the woman’s explanation was too convenient to be credible. He questioned why she would choose to wear a jacket that was not hers on precisely the day she visited a high-security prison. He suggested the timing was deliberate rather than accidental.
The prosecutor emphasized that the GPS tracker could record audio, making it more than a simple location device. He referenced the product manual, which indicated the model had voice recording functions and could automatically capture sound. The prosecutor maintained this capability made the device particularly concerning in a prison context. He characterized the attempt as an effort to circumvent strict rules governing communication with inmates.
According to the prosecutor, the woman tried to establish unauthorized contact with Westh, who was detained pending trial at the time for serious violent crimes. The prosecutor noted Westh was being held in connection with the case that would eventually lead to his life sentence. He argued the device would have enabled private communication outside official prison channels.
Defense Challenges on Evidence
The defense attorney countered that prosecutors had failed to prove the GPS tracker could actually facilitate communication between two people. She questioned how the device would enable contact between the woman and the inmate, noting the product manual showed location tracking features but not clear communication capabilities.
The defense lawyer criticized the lack of technical examination of the device. She pointed out that investigators had three years to conduct a proper forensic analysis but never did so. Without such testing, she argued, the court could not definitively conclude the tracker functioned as a communication tool.
She also questioned the credibility of the prosecution’s narrative. If her client truly intended to smuggle contraband, the attorney asked, why would she do so knowing she would pass through extensive security screening with police and guards present? The defense maintained the woman would gain nothing from such a reckless act.
The Philip Westh Case Background
The attempted smuggling occurred while Westh was awaiting trial for crimes that would ultimately result in one of Denmark’s most severe criminal sentences.
Crimes and Conviction
Philip Patrick Westh received a life sentence on June 28, 2024, from the Court in Næstved. The conviction covered three separate attacks on young women. He murdered 17-year-old Emilie Meng in 2016. He also raped and attempted to kill a 13-year-old girl whom he held captive for 27 hours in April 2023. Additionally, he attempted to detain a 15-year-old girl for an extended period in 2022.
Emilie Meng disappeared on the night of July 10, 2016, while walking from Korsør Station. Her body was discovered on Christmas Eve 2016 in Regnemarks Bakke, approximately 60 kilometers from where she was last seen. For years, the case remained unsolved. The court determined Westh attempted but did not complete rape and prolonged detention in Meng’s case.
Arrest and Investigation
Westh’s crimes came to light after the 2023 kidnapping near Kirkerup outside Slagelse. Police raided his home in Svenstrup near Korsør following the incident. The investigation eventually connected him to the cold case involving Emilie Meng. Westh initially appealed his life sentence but withdrew the appeal in October 2025.
Authorities seized Westh’s villa in Svenstrup in early January 2026. The property, where the 2023 victim was held captive, was confiscated by the National Unit for Special Crime to support victim compensation payments. The court ordered Westh to pay 575,711 kroner plus costs to his victims. Multiple creditors also placed liens on his assets, including insurance companies and banks seeking payment for outstanding debts.
Prison Communication Laws and Penalties
The prosecution of the woman rests on specific provisions in Danish criminal law governing contact with prisoners.
The Legal Framework
Prosecutors charged the woman under section 124, subsection 4, of the Danish Penal Code. This provision makes it illegal to establish unauthorized contact with someone who is imprisoned or involuntarily committed. Violations carry penalties of fines or imprisonment up to three months. The prosecution explicitly seeks a prison sentence rather than a fine in this case.
The prosecutor referenced a previous case where someone repeatedly contacted an incarcerated partner by phone and text messages. That defendant received a 14-day suspended prison sentence. The prosecutor suggested this precedent should guide the court’s decision. However, he noted the current defendant has no prior criminal record. He indicated the court might consider making any sentence conditional based on her clean background.
Defense Position on the Law
The defense attorney argued prosecutors failed to prove her client violated the statute. She maintained the evidence did not establish that the woman intended to use the GPS tracker for communication. She questioned whether the device could even function as a communication tool without additional explanation from technical experts.
The defense lawyer also challenged the prosecutor’s attempt to compare this case to previous convictions. She argued the circumstances differed too greatly for the earlier case to serve as a meaningful reference point. She formally requested the court acquit her client of all charges.
During closing arguments, the prosecutor added that the rules exist precisely because people do attempt such violations. He emphasized that the tracker’s manual indicated voice recording capability. He argued the court should not discount the device’s potential simply because investigators never tested it. The defense responded that doubt remained about whether the tracker could actually connect two people in communication.
Broader Context of Prison Security
This case highlights ongoing challenges Danish prison authorities face in maintaining security at facilities holding high-profile inmates.
Visitation Protocols
Prison officers described multiple layers of security for visitor screening at Storstrøm Prison. Visitors must pass through detection equipment that scans for electronics and other prohibited items. Staff review each person and their belongings before allowing entry to visiting areas. The system aims to prevent contraband from reaching inmates.
Despite these measures, attempts to smuggle items persist. Electronic devices pose particular concerns because they can enable unmonitored communication that bypasses official prison telephone and mail systems. Such devices potentially allow inmates to coordinate illegal activities, intimidate witnesses, or interfere with ongoing investigations.
No Comment from Authorities
Prison service officials have not publicly commented on this specific case. The trial proceeded under standard court procedures, with a name ban protecting the defendant’s identity until at least the verdict. Court records indicate the judge will announce the decision on February 25, 2026, one week after the trial concluded.
The case has received limited media attention compared to the extensive coverage of Westh’s original crimes and trial. However, it underscores the practical difficulties of securing prisons while allowing visitation rights that maintain family and social connections for inmates. Danish corrections policy balances these competing interests through strict screening procedures, though no system eliminates all security risks.
The attempted smuggling occurred more than two years before the trial, highlighting the time required to investigate and prosecute even relatively straightforward cases. The prosecutor acknowledged this delay as a potential mitigating factor should the court find the woman guilty. The defense attorney made no statement about whether her client would appeal if convicted.
Sources and References
TV2: Kvinde tiltalt for at smugle gps ind til Philip Westh
