

Sweden's 'Hannibal Lecter' cleared of all charges - brandonhsiao
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/sweden-europe-news

======
runarb
The article is misleading. He was not drugged by the police, and there was no
force involved if my memory serves me correctly.

Thomas Quick as his name was at the time, was a man convicted for child
molesting and armed robbery. The police then wanted to question him about
other crimes.

He did confess to some crimes, and the investigators then started to press his
doctors to give him more and more benzodiazepine (Valium and/or Xanax i think)
when he asked for it. Presumably because they wanted to keep him happy, and
the confessions to keep coming.

This so becomes a bad circle where he was "rewarded" wit more benzodiazepine
for each confessions. Benzodiazepine are highly addictive, and some has
claimed this got so bad that even other patients observing this practise
wanted to confess crimes so they could get thus drugs to.

~~~
runarb
Bdw, I am not at all saying that dire mistakes were not made. However in my
view it is more a case of incompetence, then there is a case of corruption,
malice or deliberate misuse of force by the police.

------
eksith
Sweden isn't alone in this; even Japan has issues with forced/false
confessions.

I look forward to a day when confessions, and all eyewitness testimony for
that matter, are inadmissible without corroborating, strong, forensic evidence
in the courts of any modern democracy. They're all ripe for abuse.

We never admit eyewitness testimony (of which confessions are a variant) in
science, why is it allowed in justice systems? If something happened, there
should be evidence to that fact. The end!

~~~
na85
If confessions were rendered inadmissible, what of Guilty pleas? They're a
foundation of the western justice system

~~~
jlgreco
Without any strong collaborating evidence, they _probably should_ be
inadmissible. Plenty of people confess to crimes they had nothing to do with;
there are a lot of crazies out there.

 _" In 1666, Robert Hubert confessed to starting the Great Fire of London by
throwing a fire bomb through a bakery window. It was proven during his trial
that he had not been in the country until two days after the start of the
fire, he was never at any point near the bakery in question, the bakery did
not actually have windows, and he was crippled and unable to throw a bomb.
Nevertheless, as a foreigner, a Frenchman, and a Catholic, Hubert was a
perfect scapegoat. Ever maintaining his guilt, Hubert was brought to trial,
found guilty, and duly executed by hanging."_

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession#Voluntary_fals...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession#Voluntary_false_confessions)

~~~
rtkwe
There's a fine line there to be sure. As a society we'd like to find the true
culprit in every crime. Yet we'd also like to allow those caught and truly to
be able to confess and save on the resources that requiring a full forensic
case as well.

~~~
moocowduckquack
If you are happy to rely on a guilty plea, then the whole thing is ripe for
abuse by those with money to just pay/threaten someone to do time for them
knowing that the chance of investigation is then minimal. Which happens.

~~~
rtkwe
It's a balance between preventing that and not wasting resources preparing a
full forensic etc. case for EVERY plea which could be used on other more
questionable/difficult cases.

------
msandford
Issues like this are one of the reasons that (some) people get really worked
up about giving the government more power. If there were literally no abuses
like this, ever, many wouldn't care so much. But given that things like this
do happen people are right to be skittish.

You have to wonder how many abuses go unreported and unresolved. It's scary to
think about.

------
vilhelm_s
There is a long article from GQ which gives a clearer picture of what
happened:

[http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201308/thomas-
qui...](http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201308/thomas-quick-serial-
killer-august-2013?printable=true)

------
Symmetry
Good for them admitting their mistake like that. Certainly better than a
certain case in my state.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fells_Acres_Day_Care_Center_pr...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fells_Acres_Day_Care_Center_preschool_trial)

------
s_q_b
Miranda should attach immediately upon any interaction with the police. You
shouldn't be able to confess until you've had the benefit of legal counsel,
regardless of whether you assert the right.

I recognize that sounds extreme, but I have seen so many force/falsified
confessions during police investigations that I believe it has become the norm
rather than the exception in many jurisdictions.

~~~
mongol
Swede here.

The problem in this case is not that Bergwall didn't have legal counsel. He
had, and a "star" one at that. (Actually, the same lawyer that represents the
women that Assange had sex with).

The problem is that his lawyer represented his intent rather than his
innocence. When Bergwall stated that he did this or that to kill these people,
and the lawyer represented this statement in court, there was no one in legal
system with the intent to shoot down the claim that Bergwall was the murderer.
It was not the prosecution's job; Bergwall himself argued that he was guilty;
and his lawyer providing extenuating circumstances - more representing
Bergwall's statements in legal language, than doing his utmost in getting him
acquitted.

After all, Bergwall _wanted_ to take on these murders. They made him special,
a target of much attention, and with that he got the drugs that he was after.
It was not until a new head physician at the mental hospital were he was
treated prevented prescription of the drugs Bergwall craved that he stopped
confessing more and more murders.

Souce: [http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Quick-Making-Serial-
ebook/dp/B0...](http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Quick-Making-Serial-
ebook/dp/B00CD49LKQ/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1375472499&sr=8-1&keywords=hannes+r%C3%A5stam)

This is the book that turned the tide. The author is a journalist that really
made a difference for how this all ended.

~~~
s_q_b
Wow, that's a very unusual case. I suppose the lesson is that confessions
should always be investigated thoroughly for corroborating evidence. If a
person committed a crime, they should be able to give details that only the
criminal would know, or point in the direction of physical evidence.

Obviously the police don't like to do that, because it negatively affects
their ability to close the case.

I've been thinking a lot about how many of the problems with abuse by some
police and prosecutors, (many are good honorable people), result from
optimization on the wrong metrics.

Police are measured by clearing cases, and prosecutors by convictions and
guilty pleas. Surely there's got to be a better way to score their performance
that encourages more just outcomes.

~~~
mongol
> If a person committed a crime, they should be able to give details that only
> the criminal would know, or point in the direction of physical evidence.

Yes! And Bergwall's testimony was often wrong. He guessed for example what was
the weapon he must have used. But when he was wrong, he got to "think harder",
make another guess, and over time (months or years) he could piece together
hints from his interrogators and eventually come up with a somewhat "correct"
story vs what secret evidence the police knew. Such as if murderer was using a
blunt weapon in the head vs a knife in the abdomen.

It is surreal to read about it.

------
rohansingh
Cases like this are why I stand against capital punishment.

------
rip747
the real question is what now happens to all the people who were responsible
in getting the false confessions?

I hate to say it, but if history repeats itself, the people responsible will
either never face persecution or get a slap on the wrist.

~~~
olofsj
Unfortunately, too long has passed and any misconduct in the investigations
has been prescribed so noone will be prosecuted or even get a slap on the
wrist. Most people involved have already retired as well after building their
careers on the case.

However, on the bright side there will be investigations to see how the
current system can be improved to reduce the chances of repeating it in the
future. For example, in important cases there may be appointed a secondary
prosecutor whose role is to be critical of the investigation.

------
bjourne
That's an incredibly hyperbolic and slanted headline. Believing any of that
article will make you dumber not smarter.

~~~
Dylan16807
How so? Let's go part by part.

>Swedish man drugged into confessing declared innocent

Swedish man: yes

drugged: yes

into: arguable

confessing: yes

declared innocent: well technically he was declared not guilty

How will the 'entire article' make me dumb?

