VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED CONTAINS GRAPHIC IMAGES
Suzanne and I were due to play the women's doubles final at 10 a.m.
That morning, I was watching TV with a cup of coffee.
I got a text that she had a stomach bug.
We'd played together for 2.5 years. She'd never missed a game.
I looked at the conversation. The text was notably short.
Something wasn't right. She didn't usually write like that.
She used a lot of emojis and smileys.
There was also an unusual spelling mistake.
I called her every day after that, but nobody picked up.
I knew something was very wrong, so I called the police.
THE TORTURE MURDERS IN VALLENTUNA
It's a cold afternoon, January 15, 2020.
The police receive a call from a worried woman in Vallentuna.
She's tried to get hold of her friend Suzanne for several days,
but there's been no response.
She's also tried to get hold of Suzanne's husband Lars.
But she hasn't managed to get hold of him either.
Police constable Mikaela and two of her colleagues
are sent to check on the couple.
We had a police cadet with us who we communicated with.
They'd probably gone away somewhere.
The worst-case scenario was a case of mental illness
where one had killed the other and then committed suicide.
But that was the least likely scenario.
On that basis, we drove to the house.
When we arrive, we see an Advent light in the kitchen.
Other than that, it's dark.
We approach the house and knock on the door.
Nobody answers. We look inside and see the living room.
The rest of the windows are covered with blankets or thick curtains.
We can't see in, which is very odd.
We drive up to the house and turn on the blue lights.
If someone's home, they'll react.
But there's no reaction.
The situation becomes more chilling when we find out
that the neighbors had seen the couple's car leave the day prior.
They speak to another neighbor and become more suspicious.
Something might've happened to Lars and Suzanne.
We open the mailbox and find mail from the past week.
It hasn't been picked up for a few days.
Witnesses had seen the couple's car leave the property,
but the mail hadn't been picked up. This makes the police suspicious.
They get in touch with the woman's workplace.
She hasn't been at work for the past few days.
They speak to the woman's brother who is very worried.
Mikaela and her colleagues decide to take action.
We kick in the door. My colleagues enter first, then me
and finally the police cadet.
There's a smell when the door opens.
It's a smell you recognize when you work for the police.
It smells like someone's died there. It smells of blood.
We see a body on the kitchen floor.
The face points the other way. The body is covered with a blanket.
It's covered in a way that isn't possible if you commit suicide.
Has one of them murdered the other?
The door in front of me is shut. It's a risk area.
We open and it's pitch black. The windows are covered.
Then, below me, I see someone facing me.
The face is covered with many layers of plastic.
I tell the police cadet, "You don't need to see this."
To see how someone has suffered like that, nobody should see that
more than what's necessary.
We go outside, close the door and call for back-up.
We say that we've found two dead people.
The couple they've found is 61-year-old Lars Bystedt
and 52-year-old Suzanne Dunå.
The crime scene suggests that they've been murdered.
A preliminary investigation begins. Jonas from forensics is called out.
The house was quiet when we got there.
It was very dark, just one light on.
Someone seemed to have searched through the house.
Drawers and boxes were open. Things had been pulled out.
The kitchen windows were covered with cloth, so you couldn't see in.
There was blood on the kitchen table.
The man was on the kitchen floor, under a blanket, in his own blood.
There was a chair over his head to try and hide the body.
The police are baffled.
The culprit seems to have been in the house several times.
There was a lot of blood on the table and it had streamed down
towards the blanket below.
But the blood hadn't dripped onto the blanket.
The blanket was placed there after the blood had stopped dripping
and had dried on the table.
We turned the man's body around and saw a serious cut to his throat.
There was an empty knife sheath on the stove.
The murder weapon could have been kept in the sheath.
The forensics team secure the evidence in the kitchen
and continue to the bedroom, where the second body is.
Just inside the door there's a woman.
Her head is wrapped in plastic and there's a belt round her neck.
Both the belt and the plastic could've been used to kill her.
We found marks around her wrists.
Two, thin, parallel marks, which looked like handcuffs.
When we looked for things, handcuffs became interesting.
There's a striped mark from a shoe between her shoulder blades.
There's also a striped shoe mark on the floor.
Could somebody have stepped on her back?
There's a similar, striped footprint in the kitchen.
They also find an oval footprint in the kitchen.
They suspect that the culprits left the footprints.
The National Forensic Centre analyze the prints
along with the rest of the evidence from the house.
The methods used stood out.
Two victims had been murdered in two different ways.
Several people could be involved.
One victim's throat had been cut, which is a brutal, sudden murder.
The second victim was strangled and her face was wrapped in plastic.
That resembles torture. It's a slower process.
All the windows were covered,
which could indicate that the victims were kept alive
in order to get information or money from them.
The police begin to investigate Lars and Suzanne
to see if anybody wanted to hurt the couple.
They want to find a reason why they've been murdered.
You can't imagine what happened.
That it really happened... It's hard to process.
It makes you upset and angry.
It's unbelievable that they're no longer alive.
Lars was like a brother to me. Neither of us had siblings.
He's tinkered with a guitar for as long as I can remember.
He played with friends. They had various bands.
They played and recorded music.
He loved animals and nature.
We could talk in the woods for hours.
You could talk about anything with him.
Suzanne was one of the kindest people ever.
Happy, nice, always laughing...
She made people around her feel good.
Lars brightened up when he met her. They had a nice relationship.
Nobody said anything mean about Lars or Suzanne.
The couple weren't at risk, so focus is put on the crime scene
and the observation of their car, which is missing without a trace.
We spoke to neighbors and found out that there had been some traffic
around the crime scene.
It's very likely that the culprits who murdered them
also used their car. The car became a priority.
There had also been another car, an American car, at the site.
A Jeep Cherokee, or something similar.
One theory was that the culprit had been
at the crime scene several times, even after the murders.
The theory is that the culprits were looking for something.
The police take a closer look at Lars and Suzanne's finances.
They'd lived a frugal life.
But in the summer of 2019 Lars sold a family farm.
The land and the woods required a lot of work.
He wanted to move on.
He sold the farm about six months before the murders.
It was a large sum of money, about 14 million kronor.
It catches our eye.
The police continue to search for clues
in the couple's bank statements.
They were economical. No extravagant expenditures.
However, there was a large transaction
around the time of the murders.
It was 60,000 from his account and 160,000 from her account.
Evidently, this became one of the leads
that was most important.
The police contact the bank. They want to find out
what account has received the money, but it takes time.
While they wait for the bank, they make another breakthrough.
On January 17, their Skoda is found on a parking lot in Norrtälje.
Ferries depart close to Norrtälje.
Perhaps the culprits had left the country.
Why would they dump the car in Norrtälje?
That was baffling.
Perhaps the culprits had left the country.
They dumped the car and got on a ferry.
That could both complicate and simplify the case.
There could be digital evidence from the surveillance cameras.
We got lists of the passengers and looked for clues.
The police scrutinize all they find from the ferry terminal.
But their search is fruitless. When the leads seem cold,
they finally hear from the bank with regards to the transactions.
On the night of the murder there's been a transaction
that can be traced to the home of a 28-year-old man in Vallentuna.
Who is the 28-year-old? Is he a murderer?
Is he a robber? Has he been forced
to receive the transaction by a potential murderer?
It's risky to act directly and detain a person
based on the weak information we had in the beginning.
We had to keep our cool and build the case.
The 28-year-old guy lives in Vallentuna
in a shed on his mother's property.
He seemed to have been involved in some criminal activity.
He might have sold some cars.
But he was a pretty normal guy. He didn't have a criminal record.
It's strange to commit crimes like these
without a criminal record.
The police try to connect the 28-year-old and the couple.
He lives near the couple, but the only other connection is
a childhood friend of the guy who lived on the farm that was sold.
Could the friend have told him about the 14 million?
Knowledge about the crime scene could be a reason
why the culprit returned several times.
Observations of a Jeep Cherokee in the area had been reported.
The 28-year-old owned a Jeep Cherokee.
That made it more interesting. The leads aligned.
While the investigation of the 28-year-old intensifies,
they notice something that complicates the case.
After the murders, the 28-year-old went to Barcelona.
We're virtually blind abroad.
But we saw that he was with a girl in Barcelona.
He bought Gucci bags, perhaps for his girlfriend.
He's spending cash quickly.
The 28-year-old is not only spending a lot of money.
He's also frequently in touch with a person in Sweden.
He communicates a lot with a man. It's intense.
They talk about what it's like to be in prison.
What kind of crime could they have committed?
Their conversation could be about the double murder.
Although the 28-year-old is in Barcelona,
the police continue to gather surveillance footage,
which could indicate what the 28-year-old did
before and after the crime.
The 28-year-old had been to several pawn shops.
One time, it's one of the victim's belongings
that he sold to the pawn shop.
That is strong proof that he's been inside the property.
It's highly probable that he's been involved with the robbery.
More surveillance footage is found,
which is of particular interest to the police.
It's from a grocery store near the crime scene.
It's from the same day that Lars and Suzanne were murdered.
But the 28-year-old isn't alone. He's with a man.
Is he the second culprit, or who is he?
They find more surveillance footage of the men together.
The 28-year-old and the man were in Norrtälje.
The victim's Skoda was dumped in Norrtälje.
Theoretically, they could've driven the car there.
The other man is slightly younger than the 28-year-old.
When they investigate him they find out
that he's the man the 28-year-old has been in touch with.
The younger man worked with construction.
He communicates a lot with the 28-year-old.
The younger man's life was more normal.
He had a girlfriend, lived in Vallentuna, a job
and he wanted to start a family. He lived a normal life.
The police gather more surveillance footage
and begin to look for the younger man.
The younger man bought a balaclava.
From the surveillance footage we also saw
that someone tried to withdraw money using the victim's card.
That man was also wearing a balaclava.
It looks the same as the balaclava he purchased just before the murders.
Now the younger man can also be connected to the crime.
Suddenly, the police see a text message conversation
between the 28-year-old and the younger man.
It reveals that the 28-year-old is coming back to Sweden.
It's an opportunity for us to survey them better.
Who are they? Were they involved with the murders?
The police have to act fast.
They need enough evidence to arrest the men
before they destroy evidence, or commit more crimes.
When the 28-year-old returns, the younger man picks him up.
That was also interesting.
While they keep an eye on the men, the forensics team keeps working
to analyze objects from the crime scene and the car.
Several forensic technicians investigate the Skoda.
Other forensic technicians examined the inside of the car.
DNA from the younger man was found inside the car.
We're beyond reasonable doubt with the financial transaction.
They were in the area when the crime was committed.
They were together. Preparations had been made.
They've talked about long prison sentences.
It all added up and we needed to take action.
Three weeks after the murders the police arrest the men.
Their homes are searched.
We searched the 28-year-old's home and found a watch.
He'd tried to sell the watch at a pawn shop in Stockholm.
The watch is analyzed and DNA from the woman is found.
Finally, the police can interrogate the men individually
and see what they say about the accusations.
At first, the 28-year-old only said, "No comment."
He didn't answer any questions.
We assumed that he'd keep saying "no comment".
We had to continue to work just as hard anyway.
The younger man was also asked about the accusations.
In the first interrogation, he said, "Oh."
Then he explained why they'd been there.
They were there to try a car and had coffee in the kitchen after.
It could be the younger man's alibi.
An explanation as to why he'd been in the car and the house.
That he had nothing to do with it.
Both men deny the crime, so the police need more evidence.
Either to prove their involvement or to free them from the charges.
The younger man's cell phone data was analyzed.
On January 16 he deviates from his regular movement pattern
and goes to the woods.
Perhaps he dumped something on that trip.
One of the police's analysts becomes obsessed with the idea
of going to look for clues along the route.
But it's a huge area of woods.
I didn't think that it was a good idea.
But I also thought, why not?
We'll try. They'll get some fresh air.
The survey of the younger man
uncovered that in the morning, January 16, on his way to work,
he contacted the 28-year-old. He'd read in a newspaper
that two people had been found dead.
Then, he called in sick to work.
He told his employer that he was ill and didn't feel well.
Then, he went towards Norrtälje.
In Norrtälje, he gets in touch with the 28-year-old.
Straight after the phone call, he goes to a gas station.
The younger man purchased a 5-liter jerry can.
Then, he bought 5 liters of petrol at a different gas station.
After his purchases in Norrtälje, the younger man
drives in an unusual direction.
He ends up in the middle of the woods.
The police search the area, hoping to find something
that the younger man has dumped.
We'd been there for an hour or two, searching paths in the woods.
The analyst who'd suggested the search called.
Over here, away from the big road, he'd found
a seat of fire, on the left side.
It looked like a burnt computer and possibly a bank card reader.
When I heard, I immediately thought
that it must be items from the victims' house.
A computer and a bank card reader were missing from the house.
It's a large area. The likelihood of being on the countryside and finding
evidence of a fire, several months later, is very small.
That kind of commitment is powerful.
It enriches an investigation.
It was fun to find a needle in a haystack.
The items from the fire are so damaged
that evidence can't be secured.
But the head of the investigation still find them significant.
We can't claim that it's the murder weapon, but we found a knife.
We found handcuffs. The autopsy concluded
that the woman had marks that could be from handcuffs.
We also found a car key, which matched the Skoda
that was found in Norrtälje.
The forensic analysis of evidence from the crime scene is also ready.
Unfortunately, there are few results.
But some finds are interesting.
Who placed the blanket on the man?
The tests find a DNA profile,
which matches the 28-year-old. He's handled the blanket.
Another important question is,
who left the footprint on Suzanne's back?
We put a lot of effort into finding the right shoe.
We bought shoes in many different sizes and types.
We thought that we'd found the right shoe.
It's a large size. The younger man is tall.
He has large feet, so it could've been his shoe.
Someone could've strangled her, while bracing on her back.
Very interesting clues are found in the men's cars.
A Jeep Cherokee was seized for examination.
Strands of hair were found in the car.
Closer examination showed
that one of the hairs matched the deceased woman's hair.
We examined more cars.
We examined the younger man's Volvo.
We found a bag in his car.
There was a wad of paper with blood on it in the bag.
There was blood from two people on the paper.
It was from the deceased man and from the 28-year-old.
When the 28-year-old is confronted with the new evidence
he starts to talk, after four months of silence.
The 28-year-old admitted that he'd been there to rob them.
They go to the house in Sursta.
They step into the house and then the 28-year-old leaves.
When the younger man comes out, Lars and Suzanne are dead.
He wasn't in the house at the time of murder.
When the younger man hears the new allegations
he also changes his story.
The younger man blames the 28-year-old.
He claims that the 28-year-old committed both murders.
We did a reconstruction with both men at the crime scene.
They got to describe what had happened.
Supposedly, he was pushed by the 28-year-old.
He tripped and stepped on Suzanne by accident.
That was his explanation of the footprint on her back.
At the time of the interrogations, an interesting clue is revealed.
On the day of the murders, both men received an email
from a third party, with a detailed plan for the crimes.
The sender is called Theo Arkas.
Is Theo Arkas a culprit? Did he commit the murders?
On the day of the murders, both men receive an email.
Theo Arkas has described how the robbery should happen.
Who should do what, how to act and that they'll be millionaires.
Emails and chat conversations show that it's been going on for a while.
It's not just before the murders. Theo Arkas has ordered,
or written that the younger man will get recognition
if he does certain things.
The emails also explain how the money is going to be split.
The younger man claimed that he did what the 28-year-old wanted,
but the 28-year-old claimed that he was under pressure.
After the murders, the police see that the suspects
are still in touch with Theo Arkas.
The 28-year-old sent Theo Arkas an email.
He said that the younger man did it.
The police search for Theo Arkas in their records, but there's no match.
They need do find him some other way.
Are there email accounts, or financial transactions?
When they dig deeper, they find something very surprising.
They're sent from the same person. It's the same sender.
The 28-year-old sent the various emails,
but he claims that they're from different people.
We began to understand that he was a made-up person.
We asked the 28-year-old about it in the interrogations.
He continued to insist.
The 28-year-old had created a fictional world.
There were several people.
They were partially fictional and partially real.
The point was to alter them, make them more dangerous
in order to threaten people.
The police decide to reveal to the younger man
that Theo Arkas doesn't exist.
He finds it hard to understand what they tell him.
The police have to repeat that Theo Arkas is the 28-year-old.
He started to understand that they weren't real people.
It was really tough for him.
He reacted physically in the interrogation room.
He asked for a break.
When he came back, he talked for an hour.
We didn't interrupt him.
My colleague and I held our breath and just listened
to what he told us.
The men's cell phones had been confiscated.
Finally, they manage to download the information and get access
to their conversation about the murders.
The tone of the conversation was scary. It was heartless.
The 28-year-old was the agitator. He urged more.
He only got short answers from the younger man.
But the younger man's replies were sometimes offensive.
Yet, the 28-year-old seemed to be the driving force.
The ruthless chat
is a good source of motivation in an investigation.
Our commitment to try our hardest with the investigation
started around there. The tone of banter stood out.
On November 16, 2020, the trial against both men begins
in Attunda District Court.
The younger man sat at this table.
The 28-year-old sat down here when his handcuffs were removed.
An abyss opened between the previous friends.
For three years they'd had a great deal of contact.
They'd chatted, called, hung out.
When the older man was summoned, the younger man let go of everything.
They didn't even look at each other.
The only time the younger man stared at the 28-year-old
was when the 28-year-old pointed him out as the sole murderer.
Notably, both suspects
agree about a lot, such as the planning and the chats.
They're in agreement up to the instance of the murders.
Early in the morning, January 11, 2020,
the 28-year-old sends the younger man a text message.
It says, "Rise and shine."
They have breakfast at a McDonald's in Hägernäs.
Then they go to the house in Sursta, but park one kilometer away.
They walk the last bit to the house.
Then, they sit outside the house and wait.
The younger man claimed that they had an agreement.
If Suzanne was home, they wouldn't go inside.
Then the porch light turns on.
The younger man is sent over.
I went to the door. I crept there.
I was so nervous. My heart almost jumped out of my chest.
Then there's a bang. The younger man kicked in the door.
He stepped in and I heard a bang.
I ran over to the entrance.
He stood in front of Lars. Lars sat on a chair in the kitchen.
There was a bread knife on the table.
Lars asked, "Do you want money? We don't have money."
I panicked. I recognized Lars and Suzanne.
I told them to sit down. She could calm down.
If everyone was calm, nobody would get hurt. It was just a robbery.
Now the two men's stories start to differ.
I heard them talking in the kitchen, then I just heard a bang.
Lars was on the kitchen floor.
The pool of blood under his head got bigger.
Christoffer stood over him, telling him off.
He looked over, took out the plastic and went into the bedroom.
I heard commotion from in there.
I heard the rustle of plastic being pulled from a roll.
Christoffer bounded out of the bedroom.
He grabbed my jacket and pulled me into the bedroom.
I tried not to step on her.
But I lost my balance and stepped on her.
I stepped on her back somewhere.
I handcuffed Suzanne and went out. She sat on the bed.
He was meant to tie up Lars somehow.
We needed a head start towards the car.
After a while I heard a thud, as if something hit the floor.
He was bleeding through his glove. I asked what had happened.
I understood quite quickly
that Lars and Suzanne were no longer alive.
It's difficult for the prosecutor.
Only two people know exactly what happened.
The two men know, but they blame each other.
One year after the murders the men are sentenced.
The 28-year-old, Christoffer Öhman, is sentenced to life imprisonment
for killing Suzanne together with the younger man.
The younger man is also sentenced to life imprisonment.
But nobody is sentenced for the murder of Lars.
It doesn't take long for an appeal to be lodged.
The case goes to the Court of Appeal.
You'd think, well two men go in. When they come out, two people are dead.
And Bob's your uncle.
But legally, you have to find out who has done what.
The evidence requirements in a murder case should be high.
It must be beyond reasonable doubt
that the person has done what the prosecutor claims.
The District Court took the footprint on Suzanne into account.
It matched the younger man's shoes.
The Court of Appeal disagreed. His explanation of being pushed
and stepping on her by accident couldn't be dismissed.
The Court of Appeal emphasized Christoffer's grudge against Lars.
Lars owned a family farm where a man was a tenant.
That man was important to the 28-year-old.
The Court of Appeal argued that the younger man didn't have a motive
or a grudge against Lars or Suzanne.
He wanted to rob them, but nothing more.
The Court of Appeal sentence Christoffer Öhman
to life imprisonment
for robbing and murdering both Suzanne and Lars.
The younger man is only found guilty of robbery.
He's sentenced to four years in prison.
Double murders when the suspects blame each other are hard cases.
I know that it's odd that one person was sentenced for both murders
and one was only sentenced for robbery, but that's how it went.
In comparison to what I've seen in my career,
it's one of the most brutal crime scenes I've ever seen.
It's so obvious that she was wrapped in plastic.
I think about it every time I use cling film at home.
The anxiety she must have felt.
Why? That's what I keep asking. Why?
How could you be so stupid that you think
that he had 14 million stuffed in his mattress?
Or that he could transfer it without anyone noticing?
No, it's completely mad.
It's incomprehensible.
I miss him a lot.
Subtitles: Hannah Jerming-Havill Iyuno-SDI Group