PALMEMORDET | Lena Löhr förhör vittnet Björkman

I den här filmen analyserar jag det första förhöret som gjordes av Lena Löhr med vittnet Björkman redan på mordplatsen.
Vill du se mer?
Stöd kanalen via Swish: 070-2947884
eller privatkontonummer: 5624 03 720 64
Bli medlem i kanalen för att få åtkomst till flera förmåner:
/ @jeremiahkarlsson1
Glöm inte att dela och prenumerera.
Min hemsida:
jeremiahkarlss...
Följ mig på Facebook:
/ jeremiahkarlssonwriter
#palmemordet #truecrime #stockholm

[@jeremiahkarlsson1]

Vänligen stötta kanalen ekonomiskt via Swish på nummer: 070-294 78 84

[@MarleanSweden]

Är det bara jag som tycker det är intressant hur lik gärningsmannen är med just AB? Han beskriver ju typ sig själv OCH stod närmast?

[@JJones-en5px]

Han beskriver Nicola Fauzzis Tensonman, Blå Jacka.

[@MarleanSweden]

@@JJones-en5px men visst hade även AB en blå jacka? Tänk om han "bara" var ett fyllo, fast med ett vapen?

[@pontusjonsson3846]

AB var vapenkonstruktör vid Bofors. Pang pang

[@MarleanSweden]

Var han? Det har jag missat helt. Gör ju honom än mer intressant i så fall. @@pontusjonsson3846

[@herrmandarin4717]

Inte omöjligt att Björkman är gärningsmannen

[@CHAN-wt2yi]

I don't think Björkman was outside Dekorima for 3 minutes.
The presence of Mårelius(IM) and Björkman (AB) relative to the time of the first shot can deductively be established by the Bankomat time-recordings.
IM arrives at the Tunnelgatan Bankomat at the earliest 133 seconds prior to the first shot (we know that because a saldo check was ongoing, when he offloaded his passengers, and because Helena L pin-code error signal coincided with the first shot, which combined provides the overall maximum timespan). He then did a U-turn to face Sveavagan, which has been timed to 20 seconds. Therefore, he was in position to observe at the earliest 113 seconds prior to the first shot.
IM initially observed a group walking north passing Dekorima and another group 10-20 seconds prior to first shot. Both observations are probably AB’s group as no other has been identified during that time.
According to the Banking time-registration the AB group spent 70 seconds doing their banking and probable 20 seconds entering and exiting the Bank - a total of 90 seconds. Therefore, AB was waiting outside the Bank for circa 90 seconds.
When we then combine the Bankomat time-registrations from both sides of Sveavagan, it fits nicely together, but the duration is more compressed than IM’s recollection.
IM first possible observation: -113 s
AB waiting outside: 90 s
Which would leave AB a maximum of 23 seconds to walk the 16m from the Göta-bank to the Dekorima shop-entrance, where he was at the time of the first shot.

[@nihlify]

What do you mean both observations are AB's group? So he sees two groups that are the same? And why does no one in that group hear the shots if they are just 10-20 seonds away from the first shot? Makes no sense.

[@CHAN-wt2yi]

@@nihlify Yes. you are right. That is an issue with this theory. However, all the witness statements cannot be 100% accurate as they are partially contradictory. So, making sense of it, requires us to find the path of least resistance.
The witness IM framed his observations by noticing two groups passing the scene in a northern direction - the first immediately after parking and the second 10-20 seconds prior to the first shot. If we believe there was a different group there within 20m of the murder scene, they are yet to be identified and have not come forward? Only the Bofors-group has been identified.
We are left with the same problem:
Why did the witness Nicola hear the shots 150m further North, when neither Klas N, nor Åsa G of the Bofors group did? (I have been unable to find a witness statement from third member of the group, Niklas F).
I am no acoustics expert, but I assume you would expect them to have been able to hear the shots if Nicola did.
However, there are different circumstances that might go some way towards an explanation - distraction and localized background noise:
• The group of three were under the influence of alcohol, whereas Nicola was sober.
• The group walked in a “rask” tempo away from the source of the sound whilst engaging in loud conversation, whereas Nicola was alone, and therefore probably more tuned in to observing his surroundings.
• A moving car driven by Bengt P, had just cleared the TG/SV intersection heading North as the first shot happened, and it would, if there was a 1-4 second pause between the first and second shot, be between the group and the murder scene during both shots. This would have produced distracting background noise.
• Additional localized background noise leveraged by Leif's big American car arriving at the intersection heading South, 2 cars idling within 20m and another two cars idling about 30 meters away.
• Reliability of sound witnessing - a parallel can be drawn to the JFK-assassination, where a survey of 242 witness statements from the scene shows a high/low difference of heard shots of 7 (20% heard fewer and 7% more shots than the Warren commissions official tally of 3). In the Palme case discrepancies in number of shots heard are also present.

[@urbanhedberg4184]

Björkman är ett viktigt vittne.....

[@tgjutarenafve]

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@peteraxelson8466]

Nog tycker iallafall jag att det går att få ett intryck huruvida någon är robust eller kraftigt byggd bakifrån.
Tex en gymmad person eller en grov brottare.
Alltså en grov person utan att vara fet ,tycker dessutom att det är lite för många som rent spontant säger så.
Dock ingen som säger att det var en typisk kontorsgubbe😉

[@nihlify]

Exakt, det är relativt lätt på t.ex. axlarna, hur man håller armarna efter kroppen, gåstil etc. Dock så kan t.ex. en kraftig byggd människor OCKSÅ vara lite tjock (tänk typ gammal boxare som fortfarande är stark men med lite större mage etc).

[@NJ-wf6mv]

”Detta skedde rakt framifrån”. Är detta tolkningsbart?

[@nihlify]

Framifrån vad? Klart det är tolkningsbart... Framför vem? Gärningsmannen? Offren? Sig själv? Byggnaden?

[@bowassell1043]

den där polisen verkar ju heeelt snurrig