[ad_1]
The mother-of-two, who is herself a defendant and married to another defendant in the hunt, finds herself between different interests before the next trial.
In the spring of 2018, she crossed the threshold and contacted a prosecutor investigating hunting crimes and was then quickly connected with law enforcement investigators from the National Operations Department, NOA, who are more advanced poaching crime experts in protected animals.
The 49-year-old mother of two was a dream witness for the police.
Suddenly, a person appeared with a direct vision of the illegal hunting that the police suspect has been carrying out for a short time in the forests of Västmanland on the border with Dalarna.
He pointed to Karl Hedin and her husband
The woman pointed out both her husband and Karl Hedin in several secret meetings with the police of the National Operations Department, NOA in Stockholm. The low-key meetings took place at various locations in Västmanland, including at ICA Maxi in Västerås and inside the police station.
The four accused in the hunt
• Karl Hedin, 71, industrial owner and one of the largest private forest owners in Sweden. Suspect of a serious hunting crime and preparation for a serious hunting crime: He is accused of having intended to shoot a wolf on October 26, 2018 on the outskirts of Virsbo, in the municipality of Surahammar, and having given the Carbofuran poisoned the mother of two children and her husband. According to the prosecutor, the poison would be mixed with the meat and placed as poison bait for wolves in the wild.
Deny the crime.
• Mother of two, 49 years old, ex-police source and main witness. Suspected of assisting and inciting preparation for a serious hunting offense. The woman is suspected of having weighed and packed carbufora poison.
Deny all accusations.
• Entrepreneur, 51 years old and married to a mother of two. Suspected of assisting and inciting preparation for a serious hunting offense. It is suspected that he received the poisoned carbofuran with the intention of killing wolves and other protected predators. He must have weighed the poison in doses.
Deny the crime.
• Man, 30 years old, employee. Suspect of a felony hunting crime. Accused of dating Karl Hedin to attempt to shoot a wolf on Friday, October 26, 2018.
Deny the crime.
The prosecutor took the central point of the woman’s information as a point in the indictment against Karl Hedin.
It was that he would have delivered the poisoned carbofuran to the couple.
The venom could be used to prepare meat and minced meat and then released into the wild to kill wolves that ate the prepared bait. The offense was classified as preparation for a felony hunting offense.
The woman turned around and withdrew the designation.
The two-year-old, who felt severely pressured from a distance, later withdrew all his designations against her husband and Karl Hedin. She claimed that she made everything up because she was depressed.
After the revocation, the prosecutor decided that the woman would suddenly be suspected of helping and inciting the preparation for a serious hunting crime. The crime concerned the manipulation of poisoned carbofuran, which she claimed she had received from Karl Hedin, herself and her husband.
Police and prosecutors believe there is support for the information he provided prior to the full reversal and this is what the Las Magnusson courtroom prosecutor intends to use at trial.
But defenders are protesting and Karl Hedin’s defender, lawyer Sven Severin, is demanding that the Västmanland District Court stop the prosecutor’s ability to use the woman’s witness information in the process.
– They demand that I not be allowed to read the interrogations aloud or to read aloud what she has said, says the district attorney Lars Magnusson to Expressen.
Is it important for you to be able to invoke what I said?
– Yes.
What if the district court prevents you from using your testimony?
– Yeah, it’s not that good.
Can you continue to prosecute on that point if the district court refuses to use your testimony?
– It will be difficult.
The mother-of-two’s defender, lawyer Thomas Jönsson, believes that the police mishandled his client’s entire handling and pressured her because the real “target” was Karl Hedin.
– She did not realize that she is part of this legal process until very late. The pressure she’s been exposed to is obvious. But you’re really not interested in my client, he says.
“The police exploited her”
Several of the defenders suspect that the police were willing to look through their fingers when it came to the woman’s crime.
– The police used and prosecuted it. It is so obvious that if she had not withdrawn as a witness, she would never have been prosecuted. Only when he no longer wants to be with her do you suspect something that he already said in the first interrogation. I think it is a blatant trampling, it is an obvious circumvention of existing regulations. She should have been notified immediately of a suspected crime if her rights had been blocked, says Karl Hedin’s defender Sven Severin.
Do you think the police have pressured her?
– Yes.
Do you fully request that the district court end the prosecutor’s opportunities to play testimony with the woman or read what she said during interrogations?
– Yes, it is obvious. It is information that you have provided as a witness and nothing else and as a family member. The reason it is being processed is so that your information is presented at the beginning of the investigation.
In his letter to the Västmanland District Court, Sven Severin writes:
Karl Hedin suspects that when X (the woman’s name) during the preliminary investigation ‘jumps’ as a witness for the crown against, among others, Karl Hedin, she is ‘punished’ by prosecuting her in an attempt to allow the exploitation of some of the information that she provided during the preliminary investigation, when she was heard as a witness ”.
The Västmanland District Court is expected to announce in November whether or not the information of the mother of two can be used. The trial is tentatively scheduled for early next year.
