[ad_1]
published:
Updated:
Anyone who stores a part of a person’s body at home should have a good explanation.
Otherwise, it is easy to suspect if a murder occurs.
Prosecutor Jim Westerberg today filed charges against a young man suspected of murdering young Wilma in Uddevalla.
The press conference during which the accusation was presented became an odd story, and then I don’t think primarily that it took place at the time of the virus without journalists present, but rather a link from the police house in Gothenburg .
What is really peculiar is that the police technician was playing in the suspect’s apartment for more than a week before the girl’s head was found.
How is that possible?
I understand that square centimeters by square centimeters should be investigated and that the technical search for clues should take time.
But you don’t have to be curious about Sherlock Holmes to ask at an early stage what might be in a tightly closed suitcase in a closet.
Now, this flaw doesn’t seem to have made the investigation more meaningful, but neither the slowness nor the attempted explanation during the press conference impressed.
“We weren’t looking for anything specific, so it was delayed.”
Excuse? Do you really have to have an idea that body parts are hidden in the home for this crucial find to be a little earlier than after ten days?
That said, the prosecution appears stable. The suspect is the last person to appear to have seen Wilma alive, neighbors have heard women scream the day she was allegedly killed, traces of blood indicate violence, to name just a few indications.
The story did not suspect a problem for the prosecutor
Significant in this context is that the technical examination of the house has not resulted in any trace of an alternative perpetrator. Something that makes it difficult for defense attorneys to cast doubt and create uncertainty.
However, the most problematic is the contents of the suitcase.
It is the prosecutor who will prove the crime. Basically, the defendant has no obligation to explain himself.
But if the head of a missing person is found in the apartment of a person who rejects a crime, there is no doubt that the suspect has a problem.
It is so troublesome that it would be a good idea to have a credible history of what happened.
In the interrogation, the young man did not want to comment on the finding first, but then changed his mind and said that someone had put his head in the closet to take him there.
Whatever the imaginative story may be, it is up to the prosecutor to try to refute it, but the defendant may be happy to provide details on how the real killer should have entered the apartment and sneakily plant the road to rest.
The alternative perpetrator story, I think, will not prepare Prosecutor Westerberg for the main problems.
The worst thing is that basically the whole body is missing. This means that the one hundred percent cause of death has not been determined.
This weakness is reflected in demand. The murder charge is secured with an alternate claim for serious misconduct and deliberately causing the death of another.
So prosecutors only hold up when their material is not waterproof. Recall the trial of the alleged runaway man for Lind Chen in Falun 2010. He was charged with murder or involuntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter for the death of another and was ultimately convicted only of crimes against tort.
On the other hand, Swedish criminal history lacks examples of murder convictions despite the missing body.
I would be surprised if even this horrible case ends with a murderer’s sentence.
published:
