[ad_1]
On Friday came the ruling of the Court of Appeals on the notorious double murder. A 28-year-old was sentenced to life in prison for both murders, while a 26-year-old was acquitted of murder and convicted only of robbery.
Appeal Court in disagreement acquits double homicide in Vallentuna
Preliminary investigation revealed that the 28-year-old misled the 26-year-old that he knew several serious offenders, who did not actually exist. In an intercepted phone call, he described the 26-year-old as a “loyal stupid.”.
The 26-year-old, in turn, said during interrogation that he was told that the fictitious people were looking for him and his family, but that the 28-year-old was holding him from behind. Therefore, the 26-year-old must have been careful to keep his older friend friendly.
The driving force of 28 years
According to the Court of Appeal, the 28-year-old seems to be the engine of the aggravated robbery against the couple in Vallentuna. It was he who planned how he would go to rob the man, who in the summer of 2019 sold his family’s farm for a large sum of money.
But when the 28-year-old sent the plan to his partner, it was from an email account he created for one of the fictitious people. The money would be distributed so that two fictional men would also receive part of the loot.
Together, they would get more than the 26 year old. The 28-year-old would thus take over, without the 26-year-old’s understanding, four of the 5.5 million he hoped to overcome in the robbery.
No technical evidence
In a multi-page argument, the Court of Appeal describes why they concluded that the 28-year-old should be convicted of the man’s murder alone.
They cannot rely on any technical evidence, but must claim that it speaks neither for nor against the fact that it was the 28-year-old who threw a mortar at the man’s neck.
Instead, they list a number of reasons for their decision. This includes that the defendants’ friendship was “distinctive” and that the 28-year-old “to some extent controlled and manipulated” the 26-year-old and that he was the one who planned the robbery.
According to the Court of Appeal, the 26-year-old had no motive to kill the man. “It doesn’t seem … to be rational” to him, according to the Court of Appeal. But the 28-year-old was familiar with the man and harbored personal resentment towards him. Because they knew each other, he risked being recognized after the robbery.
The reasoning leads to the conclusion that it is “very likely” that the 28-year-old murdered the man alone.
The Court of Appeal believes in the 26-year-old
With regard to the murder of the woman, the Court of Appeal reaches the same conclusion as the district court. The murder was committed only to remove a witness to the man’s murder.
It is true that the technical investigation cannot determine whether it was one or two people who murdered her. But the Court of Appeals believes in the 26-year-old version of what happened, where he describes how the 28-year-old took the woman’s life.
The 28-year-old’s version was poor in detail and, according to the Court of Appeal, not as credible. Both men deny the murders and blame the other.
Prosecutor Jenny Karlsson would have preferred to see that the 26-year-old had also been convicted of the murders.
– I can affirm that the majority of the Court of Appeal I followed my line in trying one for both murders. My opinion during the process was that the other should also be condemned, where I share the different opinion of the two Councils of Courts of Appeal.
Do you think the case can go to the Supreme Court?
– Of course I have to look at it. But the conditions for that are very limited. This is only done if the objective is considered of interest in principle. Spontaneously, I don’t see that this is a target. This case is about questions of evidence and the Supreme Court does not usually address it, says Jenny Karlsson.
In the middle he has looked for the 28-year-old defender.
