This program contains scenes of a graphic nature.
SOS Alarm, what's happened?
A knife attack. Two people are on the ground.
A young boy, who looks dead.
And a lady, who's badly injured.
A doctor comes in and says,
"I must inform you that Anna-Lena has died."
So many stab wounds, it was crazy.
This was the first case outside the US to try this method.
Could it actually be right this time?
Now perhaps they can find a motive for why this happened.
It's unnatural for a mother to hug her son in the morning
and then never see him again.
On October 19, 2004,
8-year-old Mohamad and 56-year-old Anna-Lena
are brutally murdered on a street in Linköping.
The killer's DNA is found at the scene
and a hunt for the culprit starts.
Police follow up on thousands of tips,
take hundreds of DNA swabs, release a composite picture,
and test mothers of dead young men,
thinking that the killer may no longer be alive.
But the murders are still unsolved fifteen years later.
and is an open wound for residents of Linköping.
Will the case ever be solved?
And will their families ever know why this happened?
Despite setbacks, investigators carry on
with a team cut from sixty people to only three,
hunting the killer using all allowable methods.
In 2019, they get a new shot when the law changes.
They are now allowed to use DNA found at the crime scene
using genetic genealogy.
In genetic genealogy, the Forensic Center searches its DNA registry
looking for a family member of the perpetrator.
In order to find the right person,
a close relative must have given a DNA sample in an investigation
and been convicted of a crime.
The method was first used successfully in Billdal.
A young girl was attacked by a rapist.
Many years later,
they managed to find the rapist through genetic genealogy.
We tried this as well in our case, in 2019.
Multiple people were made to give DNA samples,
but we didn't find the killer.
We were a little disappointed we didn't find him
through this extended DNA search.
We felt quite frustrated.
In the US, another DNA search method has been used.
They've not only searched for close family in police registries,
but also distant relatives in commercial DNA registries.
That's where it's given results.
In April, 2019,
the serial murderer called Golden State Killer is arrested.
In the 70s and 80s,
he committed at least thirteen murders and fifty rapes.
The breakthrough makes Jan Staaf see the possibilities
for his own investigation.
Why can't we do that in Sweden?
Just like the US police find culprits using genealogy,
commercial genealogical databases.
A judicial review is done in Sweden.
It is decided to run a test case,
and that the Linköping case is a good one to use.
You've done everything possible, but haven't found the killer.
We work with the National Forensics Center (NFC)
on the first case outside the US to try this methodology
and search for our killer using genetic genealogy.
But it's not certain the DNA they have from the killer
can be used for searches in ancestry databases.
The original DNA profile we have from NFC
that we've used forensically,
is something completely different from the DNA data
that you need for ancestry databases.
A DNA profile consists of fifteen SDR markers.
In the ancestry databases, the goal is to enter
up till 7-800,000 of these markers.
In June, 2019, police start work on this.
Using advanced analytical instruments,
they reanalyze the fifteen-year-old DNA sample.
We extracted between 1-2 billion puzzle pieces of data.
That's where my work starts, putting together the puzzle.
I need to find, in this unknown person's total DNA molecules,
where they come from, and reconstruct it.
We managed to find maybe 10% of the DNA molecules.
Will that be enough to find a relative in the databases?
After the Board of Forensic Medicine (RMV)
worked with the data,
we uploaded it to the ancestry databases.
The work depends on relatives of this DNA sample
being in the database we're using.
Otherwise, we'll get nothing from this search.
We of course hope that after we've uploaded the DNA data
we'll get a result that moves the investigation forward.
After one week, NFC finally receives a DNA match in the databases
and gets a list of potential relatives.
Ancestry researcher Peter Sjölund is brought in
to work with investigator Anders Bergmark.
They will, for the first time in Sweden,
hunt for a culprit using genealogy.
We quickly see
that these people who are closest matches to the killer
are pretty far removed from him.
We're talking about Germany.
We worked on this for four or five months
to see what we could find.
But realized we need to improve the DNA sample to get anywhere.
It turns out that our DNA profile is too weak.
The information in it is not sufficient to give us
a good answer from the US.
So, it was back to the drawing board to find alternatives.
The next search has the goal of building a greater share
of this unknown individual's DNA molecules.
As they work to build up a stronger DNA profile,
a tip comes in to investigator Henry Jansén.
A tip that can change the entire investigation.
The 13th of January, 2020,
I receive a phone call.
A person says that a childhood friend
has said that he wanted to hurt a child.
This friend also had a hat similar to the killer's
and the informant thought he resembled the composite,
the one shown in the media early in the investigation.
He wrote to the friend
saying I wanted to see him on January 27th.
for an interview and a DNA test.
But he never came in for the interview.
Thousands of similar tips had come in over the years,
and the tip and the unanswered summons were put to the side.
The genealogy research project continued
in conjunction with NFC and the Forensic Medicine Board (RMV).
They managed to further strengthen the killer's DNA profile
And reenter it into the ancestry database.
In May, 2020, they received a new list of relatives.
Will these relatives be a closer match to the killer?
We got in some very good leads.
The results showed
individuals with close matches to the perpetrator.
We start with the individual who comes up as a match
and build up that person's family tree.
We look for parents, their parents, their parents.
We get information from church books and other good archives.
We did this for the first individuals on the hit list.
We build this family tree long enough back in time where they meet up.
When that's done, you go forward again
and see what other descendants of these relatives there are
who aren't in the database.
With genealogy research like this,
what's in the database is often an alias or a name
of the individual who entered the DNA and an email address.
If your name is a common one, Anders Andersson,
we won't know which Anders Andersson we have.
So, it's not just a matter of getting a match, you also need
to find a unique identity for them
in order to create the person's family tree going back.
Peter and I worked on this together. He looked in his registers
and I took care of the police register.
To get closer to the perpetrator, you are looking for people
who meet sometime at the beginning of the 1800s, or end of the 1700s.
If you find them, you turn around and go back.
We could see that the killer must be somewhere around Linköping.
That was a clear trail.
Fifteen years and eight months after the brutal murders
of Anna-Lena Svensson and Mohamad Ammouri,
lead investigator Jan Staaf receives a phone call
he'll never forget.
On Friday, the 5th of June, I am at a graduation party.
It's a nice party, good food, congratulating the graduate.
Suddenly, around 9 pm, I get a call.
I see it's Peter Sjölund.
Our ancestry-research consultant on the investigation.
Peter apologizes for calling so late, but says he couldn't wait.
"So what is it?" I say.
Peter says, "I think I found our killer."
I'm completely silent, thinking, you found our killer?!
Genetic genealogist Peter Sjölund says that, with 99% certainty,
he has found the killer.
He also calls investigator Henry Jansén
to tell him of the discovery.
He says, "Henry, we've found our man."
I said to him, "Are you kidding around here, on a Friday evening?"
He says, "No, I'm not.
It's one of two brothers in Linköping."
The investigators worked over the weekend.
They looked in the police registers to see who these people were.
Had the names come up before?
That is a detective's worst fear.
That you've looked for a killer for so many years
and he was named early in the investigation
but you chose not to prioritize this person.
One of the brothers was, in fact, named in the investigation.
It was the tip that Henry Jansén got several months before.
The tip had described a childhood friend who resembled the composite
and who said he had thoughts of killing a child.
It was one of thousands of tips I'd got over the years.
Many people had three or four summons but never showed up.
Nothing unusual in it.
We put that summons to the suspect
in our "Linköping folder of summons with no response".
We likely would have taken action on that file
in the fall of 2020.
When we realized this person came up only a few months before,
we felt some relief.
Also relief he had not killed again. There was a high risk of recurrence.
We cataloged these brothers.
Where they're from, how they live.
One lived in a small apartment. He lived on social welfare.
He had a history of illness.
He'd never really worked, just short periods for the county.
The other brother, however,
was married with two children. Had a regular job.
It looks like the younger brother has much in common
with the profile of the killer drawn up sixteen years before.
His name is Daniel Nyqvist. He is 37 years old.
This means he was 21 when the crime occurred.
This matches Anna-Lena's witness account.
We knew I had received this tip on Daniel
in mid January.
There was much to point to Daniel as the suspect.
According to the genealogy researcher, the culprit
must be either Daniel or his brother.
The way that he lived made him the more likely suspect.
So I decided to arrest him in absentia.
At dawn the next day,
the SWAT team raided two addresses in Linköping.
Both brothers were brought to the police station.
My colleague, Anders, and I had prepared an interview room.
I met the suspect in the corridor.
I got the impression that he was...
a quiet and calm person. He didn't say much.
We said hello and I explained who I was,
Anders said who he was. And we went into the interview room.
I informed him he was a suspect in the murders
on Åsgatan, October 19th, 2004.
I didn't get a chance to ask him
his response to the suspicions.
He leans slowly back in the chair and says,
"I need a lawyer now."
During this interview, I took a DNA swab.
The prosecutor ordered this be done in the first interview, and it was.
We are so close to the Forensics Center, NFC,
that we can walk the samples over to them.
They had been told to prioritize this.
So, it was just a matter of waiting for the answer.
I sat and tried to work on other things
I was so wired that when I tried to write, my hands were shaking.
I couldn't even write.
Could it be right this time?
I didn't dare believe it.
While police are awaiting the answer of the DNA test from NFC,
Lawyer Johan Ritzer gets a call.
My secretary called and sounded shook up.
She said, "they want you on the double murder case."
I was taken aback, actually.
My first thought, was "Good god, should I take this case?"
I knew this would be big. It would be really big.
My first meeting with Daniel took place
in the detention center in Linköping.
There's a room where lawyers and clients
can meet before a questioning.
I go in, and he's sitting across from me.
We say hello. He seems a bit odd in his interactions.
But also very polite, and nice.
The first thing I ask him is his response to the suspicions,
He answers with one word: Guilty.
Daniel's attorney prepares him for further police interrogations.
But before that starts,
the results of the DNA test finally come back from NFC.
After a few hours, a forensic tech and someone from NFC
turned up at my door, looking very serious.
I thought, "Oh no, it was wrong."
We were so sure. 100%.
It was him.
That feeling, for my colleagues and me,
it was almost an emptiness.
At the same time, it was a relief.
Now we'll be able to solve this 16-year-old case.
Jan Staaf is interviewing the other brother a few rooms away.
During the questioning, a colleague comes in
and tells me,
"We have a hit."
It's Daniel Nyqvist.
He's in an interview room down the hall. He's the killer.
During the interview, I tell his brother, we've had a hit.
It's your brother who is our suspect, the one I've hunted so long.
He goes pale. I see it hits him hard.
He could never have thought that it was his brother who did this.
I've been fooled many times in my career,
but this time felt genuine and real.
The killer's brother had no idea that
it was his brother who was the killer on Åsgatan in 2004.
I thought immediately of the two families.
Now perhaps they can find an ending to this tragic event.
And perhaps they can know the motive for why it happened.
In the questioning that follows, Daniel confesses to police
that he murdered Mohamad and Anna-Lena in 2004.
But there's still no answer to the important question.
Why did a young man murder two strangers completely unprovoked?
It was hard to talk to him.
He took a long time to answer questions.
So it was a very...
strange interview compared to others I've had in my career.
He doesn't say much, and is very withdrawn.
It is...
quite difficult to get information from him,
He's quite limited in what he can express.
If you ask a question that's too complicated,
or too abstract, for example,
you get no answer. He can't handle it.
The biggest difference between Daniel and others I've questioned,
first, he committed a very serious crime.
Also, this is a person that you immediately understand
is in some way, not right, for some reason.
In this case, he has a diagnosis that means
you must conduct the questioning carefully.
It emerges that Daniel is on the autism spectrum.
Investigators see that he was diagnosed with Asperger's in 2011.
There are good Swedish studies on the Asperger syndrome.
It does not carry an increased risk for committing serious crimes.
But it doesn't prevent it, either.
So if there are other risk factors,
for example, psychosis, addiction, or another psychiatric condition,
it can still mean this person can commit a crime.
But it's not directly connected to autism, which is important.
When looking into Daniel's background, police see
that he was around Linköping all these years.
At the time of the murders, he lived with his parents in Sturefors.
But he's lived alone since 2009, in an apartment in Linköping.
Daniel moved out of his parents' home
to live by himself in a very small apartment.
He's lived there... for eleven years.
Until we found him there.
He's very much alone, and lives an isolated life.
Daniel's family situation now...
His parents are dead.
He has a brother.
Otherwise, I'd say that his social contacts are nonexistent.
It's been that way a long time.
He has his apartment.
He has a computer and plays computer games
and watches movies.
He goes to the closest shopping center to buy beer,
then goes back to his apartment.
He doesn't have much contact with any other adults.
Except for his brother, who he sees a few times a year.
That Daniel managed to stay under the radar for sixteen years
is likely because of the life he's led.
He is very isolated.
No social contacts, no one to notice him.
Another reason why police didn't find him,
according to Niklas Långström, researcher in violent crime,
is that Daniel is a very unusual perpetrator.
He grew up in an intact family. His parents were employed.
He did not have an early addiction or criminal friends.
He didn't act out, he was not aggressive,
Factors that we know increase the risk for criminal behavior.
A person like that is much more likely to commit violent crimes
than someone who seems nice, and socially withdrawn.
Like Daniel.
What scares us most about violence in society
is the kind of violence that is hard to understand.
His case is a little hard to understand,
that this can happen once in his life then never again.
With no signs beforehand.
This is the frustrating part,
but it's also comforting that it's so unusual.
Detectives must take Daniel's personality into account
to get clarity on necessary details.
Otherwise, the families may never get an answer
to what made a 21-year-old, previously unknown to the police,
brutally murder Anna-Lena and Mohamad, sixteen years ago.
Regarding the motive for these crimes,
Daniel eventually says in the interrogation
that he has been plagued by a mental image
that he interprets as instructions to kill two people.
When Daniel awakens the morning of October 19, 2004,
he has had a picture in his mind of two dots and a dash.
The dots mean two people and himself.
He had to kill these people
in order to move on and erase the image.
When that is done, he'll enter paradise.
In his understanding, this means
that he has to kill two people in order to find peace.
When he talks about this, even though the signs are subtle,
I can see that this was the source of a lot of anxiety for him.
Daniel told investigators about the day of the murders.
He got up and took a bus straight to Linköping from his suburb.
He set out on a walk over to Åsgatan.
He's decided it had to be two smaller people
who wouldn't resist so he'd have to fight them.
He says that he walked around like in a daze.
That's a word he uses.
Everything is on auto-pilot.
He knows what's happening, but is being compelled, somehow.
The first person he sees as a suitable victim,
is the boy, Mohamad Ammouri.
He stabs him with the knife.
Then a woman comes, and he stabs her with the knife, too.
So he's done what he needed to find peace and enter paradise.
So he goes back to the suburb, comes home.
and lives his life, since now it's done.
The image he had in his head is gone,
and never came back, he tells me. Days, weeks, years go by.
The memory of the attack fades, more and more.
On September 1st, 2020, Daniel Nyqvist is charged
with the murders of Anna-Lena Svensson
and Mohamad Ammouri, sixteen years before.
Speaking for the police, we say, finally, finally, finally.
The investigation of the 2004 double murder is over.
This is a special day. The investigators are satisfied,
a little proud, and most of all, relieved.
Relieved that the killer has not deprived more people of their lives.
There was a risk of recurrence.
September 15, the trial starts in the Linköping courthouse.
But the question is if Daniel Nyqvist will give the families
sitting in the courtroom the answers they want.
When we go into the courtroom for Daniel to be questioned,
I have a strong feeling that he won't be able to handle this.
We sit down. I'm observing him.
After a little while, he leans over to me and whispers,
"I can't do this."
So that Daniel can get through the trial,
and tell the families his story,
Lawyer Ritzer, in consultation with a psychiatrist,
prepared different measures.
Since Daniel was so uncomfortable,
we had a partition in place ready to go,
just in case something would happen.
It was lucky, since if we hadn't had that,
we probably wouldn't have got his testimony.
I knew before we went into the courtroom
that he had some issues.
We had to be extra prepared and think it all through
so he'd even be able to talk in court.
It doesn't help to scream at people and be unkind to them.
Unlike in some American TV shows where they're yelling at the suspect.
You have to create an atmosphere
where they can manage to find the strength to speak.
This is important for the trial so the court has what it needs,
and also to give answers and explanations to society,
and to the families.
The prosecutor and defense must approach Daniel with caution
to get as much information as possible from him.
Will he be able to give answers to the families
on what happened the morning of October 4, 2004?
And why he chose Anna-Lena and Mohamad as his victims.
Why did you choose to attack him?
Was he the first person you saw when you were walking
from Köpmansgränd to Åsgatan?
It...
Uhhhh...
I don't think so, but...
the others were much too big for me.
Okay. Why were they too big for you?
They could... hit back and...fail.
Okay.
You wanted to be sure to kill people? Is that right?
Yeah. I had to get it done.
Okay. So you thought that a child wouldn't fight back.
You understood that it was a child?
Yeah.
Yes, some...
It was easier to kill.
Mmm hmmm.
Since he was much smaller than you, right?
-Yeah. -Mmm.
Did you see ever see his face, before you attacked him?
-No. -Oh.
Why was it Mohamad and Anna-Lena?
They... were there then.
Mmmm.
Since Daniel has a limited ability to explain it,
this is all we'll get.
He did as well as he could do.
But this is as detailed as it will be.
New information comes out at the trial
that could have solved the murder ten years before.
Did you ever feel, after 2004, that you wanted to tell anyone this?
I did.
Once...
Can you tell me about that?
I was going to be evicted.
I thought, prison is better than sleeping on the street.
I thought then...
Did you think about who you would tell?
-The police. -Hmmm. I understand.
And why did you not make yourself known during these sixteen years?
-Why? -Yes, why?
I'd rather be free.
It would of course have eased the pain, I think,
for the families if they had an earlier answer
to the question of why this happened to our family members.
During the hearing in the courtroom, both Anna-Lena Svensson's
Mohamad Ammouri's families were present.
They have a chance to tell how the murders affected them.
October 19, 2004 was a terrible morning that has...
changed our lives entirely.
The whole family's. I've had anxiety and phobias.
I didn't go outside, at first.
And the worry... worry about going outside.
About being attacked myself.
We don't know where the killer is.
How many years have you felt this bad?
-I can't say that I feel good now. -No...
My mother has had a really hard time since 2004.
She has been very depressed, has a lot of anxiety.
I remember being worried about leaving her to go to school
when I went back.
I was scared to come home and not find her there.
Mamma has never accepted what happened.
It's unnatural for a mother...
to hug her son in the morning,
say goodbye, and never see him again.
No.
Anna-Lena's husband speaks of their life before the attack.
When we moved to Åsgatan in 2002...
She was very...
grateful to be so close to work.
We had more time, that way. We ate breakfast together.
She knew she had exactly an eight-minute walk
to the school, to her classroom.
There was always a lot of
praise, tributes, lots of good things.
She liked her students so much so it was...
My daughter had just got engaged.
Anna-Lena was organizing...
an engagement dinner for Saturday.
She was happy as a lark, I could say.
-No dark clouds on her horizon. -No.
Lead investigator, Jan Staaf,
and investigators Henry Jansén and Anders Bergmark,
are there to follow the resolution of the case
to which they dedicated sixteen years of their careers.
It's moving. I've had contact with the families over all these years
but it's very emotional in a courtroom when they give details
of how it's affected their lives. Emotions run high.
Daniel found it difficult
to be in a room with lots of other people
but it was hard to hear the families of Mohamad and Anna-Lena
tell of how the event has affected them. It has been hard for him.
I have one last thing to bring up with you, Daniel.
Is there anything you want to say to the families here in the room?
I...
I'm sorry that this was the only...
Well...
Before the trial, a psychiatric assessment of Daniel was done.
It shows he suffers from a serious mental disorder,
and did so at the time of the crime, as well.
This is the basis for the verdict that comes October 1, 2020.
The police investigation is now
the second largest in Sweden, after the Palme murder.
The court has expressed that this is a matter of two murders.
The sentence is for the convicted to be remanded
to a mental health facility with special discharge review.
It's not a big surprise. The court makes the judgment.
I thought the court would follow the prosecutor's demand,
convict Daniel Nyqvist of two homicides,
and give this sentence,
since both the prosecution and defense
asked that he be sentenced to a state psychiatric hospital.
This means that for many years to come,
he will be imprisoned in a psychiatric hospital.
"Special discharge review" means
that the head physician cannot decide
when Daniel is ready to be released.
It must be tried in the courts. Is this correct?
This means there is a process around it that will go on for years.
Before he can come out into society again.
Daniel really wants treatment.
He has sought help for a long time, I'd say.
That he's not sought help himself, I think is because
he has anxiety about meeting people.
Now he's getting proper treatment
instead of sitting alone and dampening his anxiety
with alcohol, as he's done for sixteen years.
So I think he's...
at peace with how it is now.
You can't overlook the fact that he committed a bestial double murder
here in Linköping, sixteen years ago.
I think about the families of Anna-Lena and Mohamad.
After everything we did,
one of us stayed optimistic the whole time, and that was Jan Staaf.
His optimism
lifted the entire team, and kept us going.
During the sixteen years of the investigation,
I had close contact with the families of the victims.
I longed for the day I'd call them and say, we've arrested him.
I made that call, in the end. Sixteen years after the murders.
It was a very emotional experience.
The double murder in Linköping is the first case in Europe to be solved
using commercial genealogy databases.
Police hope that more cold cases will now be solved
using this ground-breaking method.
Subtitles: Stephanie Lindqvist www.sdimedia.com