Kim Wall: Headless body identified as missing journalist

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41021223

by noncoml • 9 years ago

109 86 9 years ago

emerongi2• 9 years ago

"The torso was mutilated in an apparent attempt to ensure that decomposition gases passed out of the body, and there was also metal attached to it to make it sink, he added."

I have a hard time believing anyone would commit a murder on a submarine in Denmark. I feel like it's almost impossible to cover that up. But if it was an accident... who mutilates the body like that? If I wanted to cover it up, mutilating the body would be too much for me.

The case is pretty bizarre, although I'm pretty sure law enforcement has it mostly cracked already.

falsedan2• 9 years ago

I have a hard time believing anyone would commit a murder on a submarine in Denmark. I feel like it's almost impossible to cover that up.

The 'perfect crime' doesn't have to leave you above suspicion; but it has to deny sufficient evidence to convict you. You might believe your plan avoided incriminating you to the point that you can plausibly claim that you didn't commit the murder or tried to conceal the evidence.

Basically, a psychopath would think they could cover it up.

coldtea2• 9 years ago

I have a hard time believing anyone would commit a murder on a submarine in Denmark. I feel like it's almost impossible to cover that up.

You mean "premeditated murder". Because it's too easy to commit a murder or manslaughter anywhere on the heat of the moment (e.g. makes a pass, she refuses, argument, pushes him, pushes her, she falls and dies, etc).

emerongi2• 9 years ago

Yes.

Basically I can't see Madsen straight up stabbing her with the clear intention of murdering her. Unless he is crazy or did something else before that, like rape her.

The mutilating part is just what throws me off. If he didn't kill her intentionally, how could he go that far? I can see him dumping her body in fear or shock or whatever, but he took his sweet time on the body before doing that.

pluma5• 9 years ago

Not sure where they're from but it may be a language thing.

For example in Germany "Mord" ("murder") always requires intent. Unintentional killing is called "Totschlag" (manslaughter), if it was an accident it would be called "fahrlässige Tötung" (reckless killing).

US law seems to make similar distinctions but groups all of them as "murder": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_(United_States_law)

So I'm guessing the strong implication of intent present in e.g. German "Mord" is not present in the English word for most native speakers?

marvin2• 9 years ago

The article doesn't mention it, but the suspect Peter Madsen is the cofounder of Copenhagen Suborbitals. This is an absolutely crazy story which just gets more insane by the day. Starting with a missing journalist and seemingly accidental sinking of a private submarine, getting more and more weird and inconsistent until now a decapitated, limbless corpse shows up.

With the corpse cut in pieces, it's hard to reach any other conclusion than that this was a murder. Or just almost in the region of the semi-plausably concievable, an accident followed by a gruesome attempt to cover it up. The repeated change of stories certainly doesn't help his credibility, and the explanation doesn't stand to reason in any way.

colde• 9 years ago

Worth noting here that he haven't had anything to do with Copenhagen Suborbitals for a few years, as he split away to do his own thing (RML Spacelab).

jacquesm17• 9 years ago

Or just almost in the region of the semi-plausably concievable, an accident followed by a gruesome attempt to cover it up.

The accident theory is being stretched beyond the breaking point by now, I find it hard to come up with even a remotely plausible theory of what kind of accident it would have to be to justify the subsequent events. Such an accident would have to look so suspiciously close to murder that he responded just as if it actually was a murder.

marvin2• 9 years ago

My comment came out a little more ambiguously than intended, so just for the sake of clarity: I was pointing out that there is not much room for doubt here. There is certainly no reasonable probability that he's innocent with the evidence that's shown up by now.

ladbye5• 9 years ago

One theory I've seen was that PM is a highly eccentric person, that's always had problems fitting in and dealing with other people - when working on co-projects. The submarine project was his own, and he was his own boss. If in fact it was an accident that happened down there, it could be hypothesised that PM was afraid that he would loose everything he cared about if the police did not believe it was an accident. Imagine that everything you hold dear is in risk of being taken away from you - that everything you've worked on for so many years may disappear due to something that wasn't your fault? If you have a derailed mindset and think your odds of not loosing everything will improve if you dispose of the body instead of contacting the police immediately? If you have no faith in other people and their judgements?

I am not defending PM, as I think his reasoning and action in any case were completely psychotic in itself, but I can imagine a scenario that - with everything we know up until now - has not been disproven ... although I'm of the firm belief that he did kill that poor girl.

quickthrower22• 9 years ago

Yeah I can't see how a jury would not convict on murder unless there is some technicality or excluded evidence.

rangibaby• 9 years ago

There's always something. Look at the OJ Simpson case. Bizzare to say the least, especially the whole Mark Furhman saga.

iClaudiusX• 9 years ago

Robert Durst got away with killing and dismembering his victim because his defense claimed self-defense while shifting the jury's attention and anger toward the prosecutor for being an ambitious woman. If you haven't seen HBO's The Jinx it's well worth the time and absolutely terrifying to see how easily manipulated a jury can be.

jacquesm17• 9 years ago

Only an extremely small fraction of the trials in Denmark are jury trials.

kuschku• 9 years ago

Denmark doesn't really have jury trials, all trials are judged purely by a judge.

This is to ensure the facts matter more than how they are represented.

jacquesm17• 9 years ago

So, now we know why the sub was sunk. I'm curious what implausible rabbit of an explanation Madsen will pull out of his hat to explain this away, and I hope that instead he will now simply confess to what actually happened. What an idiot. Poor family and spouse.

gribbly• 9 years ago

Yes I expect this to play out as it usually does, as more evidence is gathered, the story he is telling changes accordingly while he is trying to paint himself as good as possible given the proven circumstances, with a full confession once there is no more room for anything but the actual truth.

jondubois• 9 years ago

Yeah I don't think the evidence leaves much to the imagination. It sounds like he probably raped her, killed her and then disposed of the body to protect his reputation.

It must be be extremely painful for the partner of the victim who was probably feeling paranoid before she even stepped on the submarine.

wlkr• 9 years ago

My heart goes out to the family and friends of Kim Wall, I cannot begin to imagine what they're going through. I hope the truth of what happened comes to light and the family at least have some answers. Given Mr Madsen's evasiveness and his unwillingness to answer questions honestly I wonder if we'll ever know for sure?

ladbye5• 9 years ago

What evasiveness and unwillingness are you referring to? He changed his statement once, and that was within 24 hours of his arrested. Ever since he has remained silent, most likely by order of the court.

I actually believe that he told them "everything" at the first hearing (like the admission that she died on board the vessel and was "buried at sea") and as we've seen up until now, the court only releases a part of it once that part no longer has influence on the ongoing investigation. For instance, I think he also admitted to dismembering the body but that part hasn't been disclosed as the police would risk people sailing up and down the coast looking for body parts, and thus risk ruining evidence. The reason why I put 'everything' in quotation earlier, is that I don't personally believe the accident-story until I see evidence that proves it.

However, it puzzles me that the prosecutor is still going for the indictment with involuntary manslaughter. I think they know something that the public doesn't - perhaps something that in fact supports the accident-story.

jacquesm17• 9 years ago

First saying he dropped her off which was a flat out lie, then saying she was buried at sea. On a technicality you could argue the second was true but I think that is stretching things more than just a bit. Getting rid of the evidence would be a better description.

Now we are in full fledged crazy butcher and/or killer territory. I think that pretty much covers evasiveness and unwillingness.

js8• 9 years ago

I don't understand it. If he was rescued from the sunken submarine, how did he smuggle the body with him?

danso3• 9 years ago

The allegation is that he did something to the body before the submarine had its accident.

jacquesm17• 9 years ago

The timeline is that the body was dismembered and dumped hours before he sank the submarine and his subsequent rescue.

styren• 9 years ago

Here's a timeline of the events https://www.flashback.org/sp61479549 (swedish)

https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&u=https%3A... (google translate)

dnaas• 9 years ago

This is like an episode from Bron/The Bridge, but for realz

kowdermeister2• 9 years ago

The key thing here is that he claims to dropped her off at this location[1] at 22:30. The article mentions cameras around but no info about is she was seen there or not. At that time, the area is probably busy with people wants to chill, so there could be eye witnesses seeing her.

It's still not proof that he's innocent, but that would raise lots of doubts.

https://www.google.hu/maps/@55.6958462,12.609141,3a,75y,197....

wodenokoto• 9 years ago

No, he has changed his explanation and told police she died aboard the submarine in an accident and that he buried her at sea.

joncrocks• 9 years ago

From the article:

"He initially said he had dropped her off safely near Copenhagen, but has since said she died in an accident and that he had "buried" her at sea."

kowdermeister2• 9 years ago

Thanks, I forgot that by skimming the article. This makes it rather simple. A flat out lie and an unreasonable way to treat an "accident" leaves not much room for the defense.

wreath• 9 years ago

How can he just bury her without informing her family and/or authority? This alone sounds strange.

interfixus• 9 years ago

So exceedingly strange for me to be commenting on this. I was once a member of the support group around Copenhagen Suborbitals, Peter Madsen's first space rocket venture, which also had the submarine in hand, and from which he was later ejected for erratic behaviour, vile explosions of temper, and general pain-in-the-ass-ness.

Around Christmas 2010, in the rocket assembly hangar - inevitable known as the HAB - I had a long talk with a leading support group member. Two things I very clearly remember from tat conversation: I was directed towards Hacker News as a serious forum (have been here ever since), and much more to the present point was told "With all his energy and dynamics and creativity, Peter must have a dark side that we know nothing about".

We were not to know that the dark side was a terrifying psychopathic personality, now exposed in all its gore. Danish police is now reopening various old macabre murder cases. I shall be unsurprised if the charming, charismatic Peter Madsen I have met on several occasions turn out to be the craziest serial killer in Danish history.

My rage is barely containable.

[Written on phone in noisy, unconducive environment. Please excuse typos, clumsiness, and errors]

nuclx• 9 years ago

"With all his energy and dynamics and creativity, Peter must have a dark side that we know nothing about" - no idea what else the person who said that knew. However if I read this as a conclusion, it appears unsubstantial.

jacquesm17• 9 years ago

However if I read this as a conclusion, it appears unsubstantial.

Until about two weeks ago it probably was.

Bromskloss• 9 years ago

Wait! No! I never made the connection to Copenhagen Suborbitals! I read now that Madsen left it a few years ago. Does that mean that the work will go on? I hope so!

mariusmg• 9 years ago

I'm guessing he made a pass at her, she told him to fuck off, started arguing, he killed her, disposed of the body and then sunk the submarine. Crazy.

Expect the Hollywood version in 2024.

_Codemonkeyism• 9 years ago

The surreality of this all remindes me of John McAfee.

tptacek• 9 years ago

The charges against McAfee are a lot less funny and a lot more serious than you'd guess from message board discussions about him.

Voyage_wanderer• 9 years ago

Is there any pics of the boat propulsion system? Mutilation can be explained by the body going through a propeller. It is a meat grounder.

It is just another possible explanation.

Worst marine accidents happen when person falls aboard and gets sucked into propulsion system.

Not guilty until proven....

tyingq• 9 years ago

Here: http://www.dw.com/image/40075604_304.jpg

As you suggest, it's all speculation, but the police are saying it does look like deliberate mutilation. Trying to imagine the scenario where all 4 limbs and a head get cut off by a prop, and it's quite a stretch. There's also blood in the submarine, and the accused's statement that he "buried her" at sea.

pvaldes• 9 years ago

Would not explain the presence of a metallic piece attached to the corpse.

alexozer• 9 years ago

Maybe she found something in the submarine that he did not intend for her to disclose?

Kim Wall: Headless body identified as missing journalist

Related Stories