Uncertain Outcome E-Book

Ulla Bolinder

• Herausgeber: Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Krimi
• Serie: Frida
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 279

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2023

Beschreibung

Frida Ekberg is contacted by a man who is in prison for the murder of his ex-partner. He was convicted in spite of his denial and wants her to write a book about his case. Frida is hesitant but agrees to meet him and then she undertakes the task. Their recurring conversation, and the work on the book, bring painful memories from Frida´s past to life. At the same time, she tries to come to an important decision in the present. Should she get vaccinated against the coronavirus covid-19 or not? And is the man with whom she is collaborating, and who will soon be released, guilty of murder or not?

Leseprobe

It is done. Nothing can undo it; nothing can make it otherwise than as it was. Charles Dickens: David Copperfield

Table of Contents

FRIDA

FACEBOOK

FRIDA

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

FRIDA

ÅKE AXBERG

THE INTERROGATION

THE JUDGEMENT

FRIDA

THE GROUP

FRIDA

MAJA BROLIN

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

BIRGITTA OLSSON

FRIDA

FACEBOOK

SIW BROLIN

FRIDA

TINA TAYLOR

THE DIALOGUE

THE GROUP

CAROLINE SOHLBERG

FRIDA

THE DIALOGUE

FACEBOOK

THE DIARY

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

FINN ENGWALL

THE GROUP

TILDE HELLBOM

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

FACEBOOK

TINA TAYLOR

THE JUDGEMENT

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

THE GROUP

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

FRIDA

THE GROUP

FRIDA

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE

FACEBOOK

FRIDA

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

THE DIALOGUE

THE GROUP

FRIDA

FRIDA

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

FACEBOOK

FRIDA

FRIDA

THE ACCOUNT

FRIDA

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA

THE INTERROGATION

FRIDA

FACEBOOK

FRIDA

FRIDA

I have received a letter. An ordinary letter, in an ordinary envelope with a stamp on it. Mats Wiklund, who has served a long prison sentence for the murder of his ex-partner, wants to meet me to discuss a book project. He has read my book on abuse of women and has got the idea that I am the right person for the task of writing about his case. I don’t know why he wants a book to be written about it. If I agree to meet him he will explain, he writes.

The murder didn’t receive much media attention. It was considered a so-called family tragedy that isn’t regarded to have such a great public interest. At the time of the murder, Mats Wiklund and Sandra Brolin had separated and lived in different places. Their six-year-old daughter had stayed with her mother, and Wiklund, who is a licensed psychiatrist – or was, because he had his license revoked – had moved to a flat near the hospital where he worked. All this he writes in the letter to me, and I don’t know more, except that he was convicted of the murder in spite of his denial.

Why did he choose me? Why do I get a strange feeling that I don’t want to get involved with him? What causes that feeling? How he expresses himself in the letter? That I don’t know what he is after?

When I googled, I didn’t find much. No photo of either him or her and no details about the murder. I simply have to listen to what he has to say, if I want to know more. And I am a little curious, at the same time as I feel resistance and discomfort.

How much has he found out about me? What does he know? I am not a well-known, established author. I am not really a writer at all. The book on abuse of women is the only one I have written and published. It isn’t enough to form an opinion about me.

And what is he after? Being released prematurely it can’t be. He will soon have served his entire sentence. Is it perhaps to be granted a new trial and be cleansed and obtain redress and damages he hopes for? In that case, he needs a lawyer or a digging journalist. I don’t understand his motives, and that irritates me.

He was convicted in spite of his denial, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he is innocent. According to the maxim of Ockham’s razor, you should, if faced with two possible explanations, choose the least complicated one. That choice is supported by the general theory of probability, which states that a hypothesis chain becomes more and more unlikely the more unknown factors are introduced into it. And the simplest explanation in Mats Wiklund’s case is that he was the one who did it.

Would I be able to be open to a person who may have murdered? It’s one thing to listen unreservedly to victims, like the women I interviewed for my book, and quite another to listen to perpetrators. When you know what it might look like after their ravages, it’s difficult to feel anything but disgust and contempt. If it turns out that the murder of Sandra Brolin is the end of a long period of repeated beatings, I am not going to help Wiklund. Not if his appearance or behaviour arouses disgust in me either.

As for the question of guilt, I assume that he is guilty. I take for granted that there was strong evidence against him that caused him to be convicted. But the crucial thing is whether I get a positive or negative impression of him.

I haven’t decided yet if I will meet him. He sent me his contact information, so the only thing I have to do is answer yes or no. I don’t really understand why I hesitate.

I have talked to Wiklund on the phone. His voice was low and warm. Was it his professional voice he used, or is that how he sounds in private?

He wants us to meet. The possibility for inmates to receive visits and obtain leave from prisons and institutions has been limited during the pandemic, but now that the vaccination rate has increased, new conditions apply. After the first of June, leave on their own is granted for inmates who have been vaccinated with the first dose at least three weeks earlier, or after undergoing covid-19, diagnosed with a PCR test or with an antigen test. I didn’t ask which category he belongs to because that’s none of my business.

The leaves of absence that he receives are part of the transition and reintegration into society. It isn’t a right, and those on leave must call the institution at certain times or report to, for example, a prison, a police station, or a probation office.

We have decided the day, time, and place. Because of the coronavirus, he suggested that we meet outdoors to reduce the risk of infection, but if he has been vaccinated or has had the disease, I am not worried.

At work, we have been instructed to use hand sanitizer and keep our distance and not stay too many people in the same room. No one uses a face mask. At all meetings we follow the instructions, but then everyone sits close together in the coffee room as usual and doesn’t seem to have a thought about the risk of infection, so I don’t understand how it should work. Not everyone has been vaccinated yet, and some may have to refrain from it for health reasons, so the danger is definitely not over.

FACEBOOK

Eva Andersson

Yeeezzz! Now I have finally got a vax appointment!

Karolin Östberg

Congratulations!

Linn Jorgensen

Wonderful!

Fred Adler

Welcome to the club!

Kerstin Sundgren

Great! I get the first shot on Monday. The Lord be praised!

Ove Jansson

I'm already fully vaxed. It feels safe.

Lennart Lindh

Took the second one yesterday and feel as strong as superman.

Astrid Nyström

Good for you, Eva, hope everyone takes their responsibility. Also got 2 shots. I also had covid in March last year with fever, cough, pressure over the chest, difficulty breathing, loss of taste and smell and extreme fatigue. Still having problems. So this is not a game.

Margareta Södergren

My heart warms every time someone uploads a picture with the patch on the arm.

Mans Pettersson

Good, Eva! If we don't take our responsibility in solidarity, we will never get rid of this pandemic!

Mimmi Gustafsson

The shots feel like a godsend that everyone should receive with joy and gratitude.

Linda Palmqvist

The vaccines haven't been fully tested and the studies won't be completed until 2022, 2023.

Ylva Borén

How many of those who choose to take these injections know that they are part of the world’s largest medical experiment on mankind? How many people know that there should be an informed consent to this with all information about side effects? How many people know that a natural immune system is important, which is better than what you get from this "vaccine"?

Fred Adler

Who are you listening to? Established scientists who have worked with vaccines for years or people who sit and google on the couch at home?

Berit Schedin

Yes, keep your opinions to yourself Ylva, and don't destroy something that society has built on science.

Tomas Bergman

A thing that can't be questioned isn't worth believing.

Linda Palmqvist

Note that it is the VACCINE we are questioning, we who refrain, not those who choose to be vaccinated, while the vaccinated attack US. That says a lot, I think!

Mimmi Gustafsson

Vaccine is the best we have invented for public health. Nothing else is so good, says Anders Tegnell.

Ylva Borén

Johan Giesecke, who was Sweden’s state epidemiologist 95-05, said in an interview in May 2020 that when it comes to diseases, it's always better to have had the disease than the vaccine. The infection provides a more complete immunity than the vaccine.

Fred Adler

Block the trolls, Eva!

Måns Pettersson

Yes, but then when the vaccine came, he changed his mind and started collaborating with the public health authority.

Tomas Bergman

"I have my principles, but if they don't fit, I have others." (Groucho Marx)

Fred Adler

Just take the damn vaccine so we can start living normally again sometime!

FRIDA

We met in the park and sat down on one of the benches near the fountain with as far distance as possible between us. Neither of us wore a mask. The vaccination has been going on for quite a while now, but it hasn’t been my turn yet. I need to find out more before I decide what to do. I know far too little about both the virus and the vaccines to be able to make a well-grounded decision.

But finding information isn’t easy. Google doesn’t work, I have realized, with the enormous amount of both factual and dubious information available online. I have found a discussion group that seems serious, and I continue to follow my friends on Facebook and read their posts when the question comes up. I hope that will be enough because I don’t have time for more than that right now.

I don’t know for sure, because I was never tested, but I think I had covid-19 last spring. I was home from work for five weeks, until I felt better and had no clear breathing problems anymore. I didn’t have a fever, but I was extremely tired and had strange symptoms that I didn’t recognize. The most unpleasant was the pressure over my chest and the smarting pain in my lungs, which came and went, and that I lost all strength. So, my starting point for a possible vaccination is that I may have become immune then and don’t need to be vaccinated. But I don’t know if this is how it works, or what alternative the experts recommend when you have already had the disease.

THE DIALOGUE

FRIDA: Is it okay if I record our conversation? If I decide to accept the assignment, it’s good to have everything carefully documented from the beginning.

MATS: Yes, of course. First, I want to say that it isn’t easy for me to ask for this. But I have had plenty of time to think, both about what happened and about my current situation, and I have come to the conclusion that I need to do this to help myself.

FRIDA: Okay.

MATS: I’m not saying you should trust me. You can take part in all the material and talk to whoever you want and form your own opinion. If you are willing to try, I’ll give you access to all the documents you want.

FRIDA: Okay. But then I first want to ask you why you chose me. What do you know about me?

MATS: Not much more than that I have read your book.

FRIDA: And what did you think the book said about me?

MATS: Yes, what should I say... That you can listen, I think. If all these poor women wanted to tell you their story, it must be that way. And that you write well. Another reason is that you live here in town so that we can easily meet.

FRIDA: Okay.

MATS: Why did you choose to write about abuse of women?

Have you been abused yourself?

FRIDA: No, I haven’t. But I have a workmate who has experienced it, and that’s how I became interested. She’s one of the women in my book.

MATS: What do you do when you’re not writing?

FRIDA: I work at the Social Insurance Agency as an administrator. Writing isn’t my main occupation.

MATS: So that book you wrote in your spare time?

FRIDA: Yes, and so it must be with this one as well if it comes off. So you can expect it to take some time.

MATS: Yes, that’s okay.

FRIDA: You were convicted in spite of your denial. Are you hoping for a new trial now?

MATS: No, I haven’t thought that far.

FRIDA: Because you probably know... There are many murder convicts who claim their innocence, but the cases are difficult to take up for review without sufficient reason. In that case, it must be possible to point out serious and obvious deficiencies.

MATS: Yes, I understand that.

FRIDA: According to the so-called principle of steadfastness, a judgment that has gained legal force should in principle be impossible to tear up. But according to another principle, the principle of truth, it should be possible to correct erroneous judgments, and if it is to the advantage of the convicted person, the principle of truth should weigh more heavily.

MATS: Mm.

FRIDA: If there are important circumstances or new evidence that is so strong that it would probably have led to a different outcome if the evidence had been known when the case was decided, the court can grant a new trial so that the case is tried again.

MATS: Yes, I know.

FRIDA: But not many people have succeeded in doing so, and everyone who has got ahead with it has been helped by digging journalists. But I’m not a digging journalist.

MATS: No, I know that.

FRIDA: Why didn’t you turn to a journalist instead? Or to a lawyer?

MATS: Because it isn’t a new trial that I’m primarily out for. FRIDA: Yes, sorry, I know you said that. What are you out for then?

MATS: To create an overall picture of all the circumstances so that everyone is free to draw their own conclusions.

FRIDA: Why?

MATS: For my daughter’s sake. And for my own.

FRIDA: How are you thinking?

MATS: I want her to know the truth about Sandra and me. Not by me, but by what others have to say about us. I want her to know how we were, and that it wasn’t me who killed her mum. Or that she can at least imagine the possibility that it wasn’t me. She thought she saw me do it, and at that time, when she was little, I didn’t want to question and rebuke her. In any case, her testimony wasn’t decisive for the outcome. I didn’t want her to start doubting herself. I told her it wasn’t me who had done it, but I didn’t try to convince her when I noticed that she didn’t believe me. I don’t know what she still remembers, or what others have said to her, but when I come out, I want her to have the opportunity to form her own, and perhaps new, opinion of me. And she can’t do as I ask you to do now. She can’t look up people who were present at the time and ask to hear their views on the matter. But she can read about it in a book, if and when she wants, only that book exists. Do you understand?

FRIDA: Yes.

MATS: Have you read the preliminary investigation?

FRIDA: No, not yet.

MATS: There you’ll find the names of people you can contact. I can probably suggest others as well. But it isn’t certain that everyone wants to be interviewed or remembers very well how it was like.

FRIDA: No. Do you want me to look up your daughter too?

MATS: Yes, if you want to and she agrees.

FRIDA: Have you had contact with her over the years?

MATS: No, not at all. I think she was first forbidden and then advised against meeting me.

FRIDA: By whom?

MATS: By her grandmother, who has taken care of her since Sandra and I disappeared.

FRIDA: What about your own parents then?

MATS: Both have lived in Spain for many years and don’t know much about what happened.

FRIDA: Okay. Now I’ll go home and think about what I want to do, and you’ll be notified as soon as I have decided.

FRIDA

How did he look? How did he act? What feelings did he send out? What impression did he make on me?

He was dark-haired and quite tall. Had thin face and greyblue eyes. Looked sympathetic. And his voice was like the first time I heard it, when we were talking on the phone.

A murderer can look sympathetic and have a warm and confidence-inspiring voice. A murderer can look good and have a friendly and accommodating manner. A murderer can very likely sound vulnerable and loving when talking about his children. There are very nice women abusers and very nice murderers. I know this from personal experience.

I was a little nervous and started quite uncalled-for rattling off a lot of facts about the judicial system. I regretted it afterwards. It’s not a new trial he is out for. But now I know and understand his purpose.

I understand what he wants, but I don’t know who he is. He has been convicted of murder, and you won’t be that without cause. It happens that people are convicted on only circumstantial evidence when there is no conclusive technical proof, but how it was in his case I don’t know yet.

In the Swedish judicial system, it’s the so-called principle of objectivity that applies, which means that the prosecutor must take into account facts that speak both for and against the suspect’s guilt before prosecution. During the trial itself, the principle of immediacy applies, which means that the only thing the members of the court have to decide on is what’s presented during the main hearing. Since it is the prosecutor who chooses what’s to be presented to the court, it’s in principle only his or her conscience that decides what’s to be included and what’s to be omitted, and it’s up to the defendant’s defence councel, who has considerably less resources to make use of, to find flaws in the arguments and to discover circumstances that the prosecutor has chosen to withhold.

I don’t know on what grounds Mats Wiklund was convicted. The examination of evidence in Swedish law is as good as free, that is that anything may be used as evidence, and the value of evidence isn’t regulated by law. If there is no clear technical evidence against a person, but the court considers that the only possible explanation is that the defendant is guilty of the crime, he can be convicted anyway. I have to read the judgement to find out how they reasoned in Wiklund’s case. He made a positive impression on me, so I guess I will agree to what he asks, now that my curiosity is aroused, and I would like to write a book again.

I have informed Wiklund that I agree to undertake the task. I have requested the preliminary investigation report and the judgement and received both. When I have read the interrogations with witnesses, experts and Wiklund himself, and studied the technical investigation, which hopefully gives a detailed description of the crime scene in words and pictures and of all the findings that were made, such as murder weapon, fingerprints, shoe prints, fibres, DNA, and other things. I will try to get hold of the responsible investigator and ask for a meeting. I hope he hasn’t forgotten the case and can give me information about his personal impressions and thoughts about it all.

THE GROUP

Hans Thorén

Here is some information. Last year, Sweden had a clear excess mortality according to the National Board of Health and Welfare’s report on causes of death in 2020. A total of just over 98,000 people died, which can be compared with the average in 2015-2019, which was just over 91,000 deceased. So that the coronavirus has left its mark is quite clear.

Per Eriksson

If you count correctly, we definitely had no excess mortality in Sweden in 2020. Firstly, unusually few people died in 2019, which always means that more people will die the following year. Secondly, the population hasn’t been taken into account, which you absolutely must do if you are to prove excess mortality. Thirdly, one should have gone back much further than to 2015. Then it had been seen that in the years 98-03 the mortality rate was 1.1 %, and 1993, which was a severe flu year, 1.12 %, while 2020 was “only” 0.95 %. All according to the National Board of Health and Welfare’s own report. So why they go out in the media and report the number of dead individuals instead of deaths as a percentage of the population and claim that we had excess mortality in 2020 (which isn’t true), is difficult to understand.

Susanna Hong

They want to scare us so we will go and take the injections. They use the statistics to manipulate us.

Per Eriksson

Anyone who dies within 30 days after testing positive for covid-19 is reported. Those who have died in traffic accidents or other accidents, from assault, suicide, drug abuse or anything else, are also included in the statistics on covid-19 deaths. However, those who die for the same reasons within 30 days from the time of vaccination are NOT included in the statistics on deaths due to the vaccine. On the one hand, the number of deaths in connection with covid-19 is exaggerated, on the other hand, the number of deaths in connection with covid-19 vaccinations is underestimated. One can really wonder why the authorities choose to do so.

Susanna Hong

They want to influence us so we will take the shots.

Mats Oman

There are also a lot of false positive tests due to unreliable PCR tests, which then are to form the basis for the statistics and vaccination propaganda. Biochemist and Nobel laureate Kary Mullis, who invented the technology, said himself in several interviews that PCR technology isn’t a reliable test for viruses.

Alice Back

FHM: “The PCR technology used in tests to detect viruses cannot distinguish between viruses capable of infecting cells and viruses that have been neutralized by the immune system and therefore these tests cannot be used to determine whether someone is contagious or not.”

Eva Broman

If people start dying because of the vaccinations to a greater extent, they will only blame it on a new mutation or that not everyone follows the restrictions.

Alice Back

During a typical flu season, hundreds of thousands of people die from the flu around the world. Mainly old and sick with weakened immune system and underlying diseases, such as diabetes, hypertension, and COPD. The flu virus becomes what tips them over the edge, so to speak, because their weak bodies can’t cope with another strain. The same goes for covid-19.

Anna Westin

It isn’t out of concern for “the elderly and fragile” this happens. If that will existed, healthcare would have received increased resources a long time ago. More beds, more staff, higher salaries, more education, more preventive health care, more time for the elderly, more focus on how each individual strengthens their immune system and stays as healthy as possible, feels meaningfulness, security, joy of life, community. Instead, enormous resources are now being invested in everyone being injected with emergency-approved, experimental preparations, of which no one knows the long-term effects. Who can even imagine that this is about the well-being of the elderly?

FRIDA

One of the risk factors for covid-19 is the chronic lung disease COPD. It was in the after-effects of this disease that Mum died. Mainly, it’s smoking that is behind the condition, and Mum smoked for almost her whole life. The doctors explained that if you stop smoking, the disease doesn’t develop in the same way. The damage that already is in the lungs in COPD can’t be repaired, but the future prospects at least look better, and there are medications that can help.

But Mum never stopped smoking but took basically her last drag on her deathbed. She had probably had COPD for a long time before she was diagnosed. At first the cough, which she had had for several years, became more persistent, then she often felt out of breath and didn’t have as much strength as before. She had various medications that she had to take every day, including a kind of asthma medication to facilitate breathing.

But she found it increasingly difficult to breathe, and in the end her lung capacity was so poor that she was in constant need of oxygen, and so powerless that she was nourished by tube. She lay like a little nestling in the hospital bed, gasping for air. I was so angry with her that she hadn’t stopped smoking in time, even though I had appealed to her so many times, and I was completely appalled at how sick she had become. I understood that she soon would die.

Mum in the hospital bed. Mum in the coffin. The funeral. Mum’s home with smoke stinking walls, furniture, carpets, curtains. Mum’s belongings. The bin bags. The general cleaning. The empty apartment. The grief. The loss. The relief.

ÅKE AXBERG

Yes, I remember that case. He was convicted in spite of his denial, wasn’t he? Yes, exactly. And now he wants you to write a book about it? Yes, I don’t begrudge him that. But I don’t think he is innocent. If you have read the preliminary investigation, you will understand what I mean. I skimmed through it myself last week to refresh my memory a bit before the meeting with you here today. There were no circumstances whatsoever that indicated that it could be another perpetrator.

To start from the beginning, the police and an ambulance arrived at the crime scene late in the evening or early at night after a phone call from Wiklund himself to the emergency service centre. When the patrol arrived, he was standing in the gate waiting. He took the lead up to the flat where the door was ajar. One police officer, who was a woman, first became suspicious. She thought that Wiklund seemed unnaturally unaffected by the situation. But when he explained that he was a doctor, she thought that he possibly automatically took on a calm attitude and hid his feelings behind his professional role.

The situation at a crime scene can be quite chaotic when the first police patrol arrives. For example, there may be so much blood that it’s difficult to endure the sight. But regardless of all the circumstances, the first patrol must secure the place. You should check if the victim is alive or not. If there is a suspected perpetrator nearby, he must be arrested immediately. You must block up and collect information and secure any traces and evidence. Of course, the responsibility should be handed over to colleagues with a higher rank as soon as possible, but in the initial stage, a heavy responsibility may rest on young, inexperienced police officers.

In the long run, no police officer can claim that he has never made a mistake at a crime scene. Making mistakes is part of human nature. But there is a difference between unintentionally breaking the rules and doing it on purpose. By this I don’t mean to say that there were any serious mistakes or irregularities in this particular case, but one should be aware that the risk always exists.

The dead woman was lying on the floor in the kitchen. You saw right away that she was seriously injured and probably dead. While the paramedics and the policewoman were examining her, the policeman initiated a first interrogation with Wiklund, who then stated that he had received a phone call about twenty minutes earlier from his ex-partner, who had asked him to come to her home because she felt threatened. When he arrived at the flat, he claimed that the front door was ajar and that he found her dead on the floor in the kitchen.

Before the body was moved and transported to the institute of forensic medicine where the autopsy was to take place, forensics studied the crime scene. A forensic technician is used to entering often messy environments to secure evidence and mostly works under heavy pressure. A crime scene is time sensitive and can be damaged at any time. Every person who gets there can contaminate the tracks that could be found there.

A forensic technician is also good at reading people, and in this case, he listened together with the summoned medical examiner and a detective inspector to Wiklund’s own version of the matter. I talked to my colleague later and asked for his impression of Wiklund.

Due to the further preliminary investigation, I had the opportunity to discuss the circumstances surrounding the death with the medical examiner on several occasions. I also had the opportunity to attend when the reconstruction was carried out with the ambulance personnel who were called to the scene. In connection with reviews and discussions, we also examined a number of photographs from the technical investigation.

The murder weapon was a knife, such as a bread knife, which was found in the sink. It was cleaned, and no fingerprints could be found on it, but it bore microscopic traces of the victim’s blood.

The arrest hearing with Wiklund was meagre. I informed him that he was suspected of murder, and he accepted it without a word. He then had the opportunity to meet his defence councel. He didn’t seem particularly frightened by the situation and didn’t seem to worry about what it would mean to him in the future.

At the next interrogation, he seemed tired and dejected. My tactic is usually to start with questions about the suspect’s lifestyle to get an idea of what his life looked like before the crime. What important events have occurred, what his professional and social situation looks like, what he expects from the future and so on. Then I let him reel off his story without confronting him with what we have, in order to find out how much he is willing to tell himself. In this case, I remember thinking: How is this guy going to react and act? He deviated markedly from the criminal stereotype. This was a well-educated, professional guy with a previous long-term stable relationship that also included children. He had no criminal record, and no signs of addiction or mental health problems were seen.

He had no experience of interrogation and wasn’t “sit practised”, as I usually say. He also had no experience of being locked up. The arrest may come as a severe shock and cause the suspect to remain silent at first, but many of the normally law-abiding type often break down within hours or days in custody and start talking.

I have investigated hundreds of serious violent crimes and only on a few occasions failed to obtain a confession. Murder is commonplace to me, but the vast majority of these murders have been committed by professional criminals or by people who have given in to greed or reckless rage.

This wasn’t the case here. This guy didn’t belong to the loud and aggressive type I have encountered so many times. Guys with a tendency to lean forward over the table and underline their words with their fists or wander around the room and swear or push the chair back and forth across the floor to make as much noise as possible. No, there I sat with a proper, intelligent, and dutiful type, who didn’t seem the least aggressive, impulsive, or violent, and would make him talk about his feelings. There I sat, alone with him in a naked room, and would make him open up and admit a murder or manslaughter.

What strategy would I use to get emotional contact with him, and how would I set about maintaining it? How would I gain his trust and confidence? How would I demolish his defensive walls? How do you manipulate a person into doing what he wants least of all – namely, admitting to a crime that can cost him his freedom?

Everyone wants to tell their story, but not for just anyone. The listener should tolerate what he hears and not show any negative feelings, such as condemnation or distancing. Encouraging nods and a clearly shown interest usually clinch the matter when it comes to elicit confessions.

Another effective interrogation technique for eliciting revelations is to create gaps in the conversation. Almost reflexively, the suspect then fills out the void with words to break the silence.