onday, 9th May 2005

When Chief Inspector Aronsson reported his findings to Prosecutor Conny Ranelid in Eskilstuna, the prosecutor immediately decided to issue a warrant for the arrest of Allan Karlsson, Julius Jonsson, Benny Ljungberg and Gunilla Björklund.

Aronsson and the prosecutor in charge of the case had been in close touch ever since the centenarian climbed out of the window and disappeared, and the prosecutor’s interest had continued to grow. Now he was reflecting upon the spectacular possibility of getting Allan Karlsson convicted for murder, or at least manslaughter, even though they hadn’t found any victims. There were one or two cases in Swedish legal history that showed it could be done. But you needed exceptionally good evidence and an extremely skilful prosecutor. The latter was no problem for Prosecutor Conny Ranelid, and as for the former he intended to construct a chain of circumstantial evidence, where the first link would be the strongest and no link would be really weak.

Chief Inspector Aronsson felt a little disappointed at the way things had developed. It would have been much more fun to save a geriatric from the clutches of a gang of criminals, rather than – as now — failing to save the criminals from the geriatric.

‘Can we really prove that Allan Karlsson and the others were involved in Bylund’s, Hultén’s and Gerdin’s deaths when we still don’t have any corpses?’ asked Aronsson, hoping that the answer would be ‘no’.

‘Don’t sound so downcast, Göran,’ said Prosecutor Conny Ranelid. ‘You’ll see, that old fool will spill the beans as soon as you catch him for me. And if he is too senile, I’m sure the others will contradict each other and that’ll give us all we need.’

And then the prosecutor went through the case again with his chief inspector. First he explained the strategy. He didn’t think they would be able to lock up all of them for murder, but there were still other charges – manslaughter, or assistance to commit this and that felony, or causing a death, or protecting a criminal. Even offences against the law concerning corpses could come into play, but the prosecutor would need a bit of time to think that through.

Since some of the suspects had become involved in the events later than others, and would be more difficult to convict, the prosecutor intended to focus on the man who had been in the thick of it all the whole time, the centenarian Allan Karlsson.

‘In his case, I think we will be able to manage a life sentence in the true meaning of the word,’ prosecutor Ranelid joked.

To start with, the old man had a motive for killing Bylund, Hultén and Gerdin. The motive was that otherwise he risked the opposite — that Bylund, Hultén and Gerdin would do away with him. The prosecutor had evidence that the three men from the Never Again organisation had a tendency to resort to violence.

But that didn’t mean that the old man could claim he acted in self-defence, because between Karlsson on the one side and the three victims on the other there was a suitcase with contents unknown to the prosecutor. From the very beginning the suitcase was clearly at the centre of events, so the old man actually had an alternative to killing the others – he could have refrained from stealing the suitcase, or at least given it back.

Furthermore, the prosecutor could point to several geographical connections between Mr Karlsson and the victims. The first victim had, just like Mr Karlsson, got off the bus at Byringe Station, even though it hadn’t been at the same time. And, unlike Mr Karlsson and his companion, victim number one had not been seen after the inspection trolley journey. However, ‘someone’ had become a corpse and left a trail behind him. It seemed obvious who this was. Both the old man and the petty thief Jonsson had demonstrably been alive later that same day.

The geographical connection between Karlsson and victim number two was not quite as strong. They had not been observed together. But a silver-coloured Mercedes on the one hand, and an abandoned revolver on the other told Prosecutor Ranelid – and would soon tell the court – that Mr Karlsson and victim Hultén, the one who was called Bucket, had both been at Lake Farm in Småland. Hultén’s fingerprints on the revolver were not yet confirmed, but the prosecutor felt that was purely a matter of time.

The sudden appearance of the revolver was a gift from above. Beside the fact that it would prove that Bucket Hultén had been at Lake Farm, it strengthened the motive for killing victim number two.

As far as Karlsson was concerned, they now had the fantastic discovery of DNA to make use of. The old man would of course have spread it around everywhere. So now he had the formula: Bucket + Karlsson = Lake Farm!

DNA would also be used to ascertain that the blood in the crashed BMW belonged to victim number three, Per-Gunnar Gerdin, also known as the Boss. They would soon be able to carry out a more thorough examination of the demolished car, and that would certainly reveal that Karlsson and his companions had been there too and put their fingers on everything. Otherwise, how would they have got the corpse out of the car?

So the prosecutor could show a motive and a connection in time and space between Allan Karlsson on the one hand and all three dead thugs on the other.

The chief inspector risked asking whether the prosecutor could be certain that all three victims really were victims, that is, were actually dead? Prosecutor Ranelid sniffed and said that as far as number one and number three were concerned, they hardly needed any further explanation. As for number two, Ranelid would have to put his faith in the court – because when they accepted that number one and number three had indeed passed on, then number two would end up as a link in the famous chain of circumstantial evidence.

‘Or are you suggesting, chief inspector, that number two quite voluntarily handed over his revolver to the people who had just killed his friend, before tenderly saying goodbye and leaving without waiting for the arrival of his boss a few hours later?’ asked Prosecutor Ranelid in an acid tone.

‘No, I guess not,’ said the chief inspector, defensively.

The prosecutor admitted to Chief Inspector Aronsson that the case might be a little thin, but what really held it together was the chain of events. The prosecutor didn’t have a murder weapon (except for the yellow bus). But the plan was to get Karlsson convicted for victim number one to begin with.

‘At the very least, I’ll get the old man locked up for manslaughter or for being an accessory. And once I’ve got him convicted, then the others will fall with him – to varying degrees, but they will fall!’

The prosecutor could not really arrest people on the grounds that during interrogation they would contradict each other so much that he would be able to hold them in custody. Nevertheless, that was plan B, because they were amateurs, the lot of them. A centenarian, a petty thief, a hot-dog-stand proprietor and a woman, how the hell would they be able to withstand the pressure in an interrogation room?

‘Make your way to Växjö, Aronsson, and check in at a decent hotel. I’ll leak the news this evening that the centenarian is a veritable murder machine and early tomorrow morning you’ll get so many tips about where he is that you’ll be able to pick him up before lunch, I promise.’