"So, during the police investigation in the case against her husband, and before any suspicions had emerged against herself, Helena has stated that she had seen that Oswald had locked in himself together with Elvira in her bedroom [!], and that Elvira had had a strange look on her face afterwards. As can be seen from the account above [in this judgment], Helena has repeated this information when she testified during the new trial, while Oswald has completely denied that he had ever locked in himself together with his daughter. [] On the basis of what the court of appeal has recounted above, it can be taken for sure that Oswald sexually abused Elvira on those occasions when he has locked himself and her in her room. The fact that Oswald has not tried to conceal his actions, does not agree very well with the alternative that he had performed a single assault or a small number of assaults. Instead, this pattern is highly compatible with Elviras statements that she had been exposed to many assaults over a long period, and that Helena was not unaware of what happened." [Judgment by the court of appeal in Stockholm (five unanimous judges, no jury), 1994-05-03, pp. 42 and 44, bold type, italics and explanatory parentheses added by MS] [Q-6:1]

By now the reader may have understood why I specifically searched for the words "-lock-" , "-close-" and "-door-" .

When checking the facts, the first surprise is that the mother nowhere in the police investigations says that Oswald has ever been together with Elvira in her room behind a locked door. What she does say is that they were alone; that the door was closed; that she does not know whether the door was locked; and that she does not know whether it was Oswald or Elvira who had closed the door.

The second surprise is that nowhere in any of the 40 police interrogations does Elvira state that her father had ever performed a sexual assault in her room, when the family was awake and at home, and behind a locked or closed door. The police officer brings up this topic in three separate dialogue interrogations. But Elvira has no memory of ever having been alone together with her father in her room, regardless of whether any criminal acts were performed or not.

When the father was interrogated by the police, he remembered no more than Elvira. If such events had occurred, he could imagine that they had watched television or listened to music. The door might have been closed to prevent the dog from dropping hairs all over the house.

The third surprise is the account of the mothers testimony in the court of appeal. The judges own account is found on p. 22 of the judgment. Just like Helena said during the police interrogations, she testified in court that the door was closed, but not that it was locked.

Whether the door was locked or closed is not unimportant because in none of the interrogations can Elvira recall any form of assault taking place in her room behind a closed or locked door, at a time when the other members of the family would normally be awake.

It could be argued that the fourth surprise is the greatest. All five judges have signed the judgment. And this means, inter alia, that they have given their assent to the account of Helenas testimony on p. 22 in the same judgement. The words attributed to the mother by the judges themselves are that Elvira after having been alone with Oswald in her room Elvira had a strange look on her face, as if the father had been angry.

Since the mother is deaf she would not be able to hear anything, if the father had given Elvira a thorough scolding. It was said above that all family members agree that the father had never physically punished the daughters since they were very young. Hence he could not have beaten her.

In other words, when the five judges constructed the justificatory reason for the verdict and the sentence, all of them managed to forget both the testimony they had listened to, and their own written account of the very same testimony. And after they had lost the important information about the fathers anger, they re-interpreted Elviras "strange look" as an indication of sexual assault; a reconstruction that would have been impossible, if the judges had bothered to check whether their own text was free from contradictions.

In turn, their conclusion about the very large number of assaults is likewise based on their fictive memory.

Moreover, it is strange to talk of the daughters bedrooms. Does this terminology reveal a bias on the part of the judges







Next chapter

Uppdaterad: 2009-11-19

Yakida