A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma

Hmmmm. From After 34 Years, Sweden Says It Knows the Killer of Olof Palme by Thomas Erdbrink and Christina Anderson.

Another case of a mismatch between the headline and the article. The headline says we know. The sub headline immediatley modifies the headline and only claims

A prosecutor said there was “reasonable evidence” that the man who shot the Swedish prime minister was Stig Engstrom, a graphic designer, who took his own life in 2000.

From "we know" to "there is reasonable evidence" is a pretty large leap.

And then you read the article it get even muddier.

I lived in Sweden for several years in the seventies at the height of Olof Palme's prime ministership. He was not necessarily a firebrand but he could be very divisive, both domestically and internationally. He exemplified some wonderful Swedish traits. I especially admired his eschewing the trappings of power, a trait that almost certainly contributed to his death. He was returning, without a bodyguard, from a normal public viewing at a movie theater when he was killed.

The mystery of his death has haunted Sweden since.

There has been widespread criticism about the way the Swedish judiciary and the police have handled the case over the past decades. The mystery endured through six investigations and three commissions over the years, but Mr. Engstrom eluded suspicion though he had presented himself to the police as a witness to the killing.

Now, there has been perhaps a final investigation.

At a news conference in Stockholm, the prosecutor Krister Petersson said that there was “reasonable evidence” that the assailant was Stig Engstrom, a graphic designer at an insurance company, who killed himself in 2000, at the age of 66. He added that only a court could rule on whether Mr. Engstrom was guilty or not, but that since the suspect is deceased, there would be no court case.

The case, as I understand it, is primarily circumstantial. It could have happened as presented. But there is no hard-and-fast evidence that it must have happened as presented.

And then there are uncomfortable counter-factuals, also not conclusive.

Mr. Engstrom’s former wife, whom he divorced in 1999, dismissed the idea of his involvement in the killing of the prime minister.

“It is out of the question,” she told the newspaper Expressen in 2018. “He was not that kind of person, that’s for sure. He was too much of a coward. He wouldn’t harm a fly.” The Swedish news media are not identifying her by name.

At this point, we simply don't know. The police conclusion seems a reasonable balancing of probabilities. But absent some unexpected new evidence we may never know.

It seems impossible, but these things happen. We still, inconceivably, do not know the reason for the Las Vegas 2017 shooting. We are almost equally unclear about the Pulse Nightclub shootings.

Two other observations. The article is dotted with grammar or similar errors. Unusual for the NYT.

Also, I couldn't help but smile at the Nordic naming challenge. As if the case were not already complicated enough. Name spelling is everything when it comes to distinguishing the homophones.

Mr. Thomas Pettersson was the freelance journalist who provided the foundation for the most recent investigation.

Mr. Krister Petersson is the Stockholm Prosecutor who lead the most recent investigation.

Mr. Christer Pettersson was the initial suspect convicted of the assassination.