> Everyone who is knowledgeable about the case knows it can't have been a conspiracy. It was a lone gunman
Can you please elaborate? I could very well imagine a seemingly lone gunman who would indeed be a part of a conspiracy, and I have a kind of a direct experience: I was personally a victim of a robbery where only one man attacked me, in what at that moment appeared to me as a completely random attack. Only after that didn't went as planned, a second man came, but not to help me but to help him, to my complete surprise. By chance and my luck the attack was ultimately not successful, but their goal was anyway not to harm me but just to get something I've possessed. Even more interestingly, after reporting the case to the police and after the investigation based on my previous movements before the attack it turned out that these two had two more accomplices. In total, at least four men were involved in one "small" robbery attack. The police told me they are aware of many such cases, and that there was probably even a fifth person involved who coordinated the four. And this all happened in the country and city of more or less comparable overall security and well being to Stockholm, not somewhere where everybody expects such dangers.
So what appeared to be a random attack is actually often indeed planned and involves more people. Even the thieves seldom operate alone.
Then what should be the arguments that there wasn't any conspiracy there?
> Can you please elaborate? I could very well imagine a seemingly lone gunman who would indeed be a part of a conspiracy, and I have a kind of a direct experience:
So much has been written about the murder so I can't really add much of value. Here are a few facts that makes it obvious that murderer wasn't a professional - hence no conspiracy:
1. The murderer tried to shot Palme's wife from a distance of about 2 meters but missed. 2. The murder weapon was a loud and heavy revolver. Real assassins use (silenced) pistols. 3. The murderer kept the gun rather than disposing it which professional assassins do. 4. The deed took place in one of Stockholm's busiest corners on a Friday after salary (lot's of drunk people out). 5. No good escape routes. I walk past the corner many times per week. All the streets are wide and you have to run for about 100m to the closest hiding spot (a small cemetary). 6. OP was often without bodyguards. There would have been way better opportunities to assassinate him.
Roughly, this was the conclusion of the experts from the FBI, who steered the Swedish police away from the political conspiracy theory to the "lone gunman" one. People still cling on to the conspiracy theory though. I think it is easier for them to digest because then there was some "meaning" to the murder, rather than a drug addicted street-thug doing it for no reason.
Fun (sad) fact; in the 90's you could often see the main suspect of the murder Christer Petterson (subsequently released) sitting intoxicated on the subway or commuter rail. People of course avoided him.
> a drug addicted street-thug doing it for no reason
It still sounds much less probable than anybody who would do it with an agenda.
> the streets are wide and you have to run for about 100m to the closest hiding spot
Can you post a link to the location? Not being from there and reading about these details for the first time, it's hard for me to imagine "one of Stockholm's busiest corners" but with no place to hide for 100m? No buildings? No entrances to the buildings? No entrances to the combinations of the buildings where you enter in one block of houses but can magically appear wherever across, already dressed in new clothes? That's all very doable in the busy cities I know, especially if somebody already planned and verified one or two escape routes.
Additionally, there could be a logic behind using an old gun: an origin of an old gun could be harder to trace, it could have been never recorded or marked.
The killer ran up this flight of stairs. Another indication that he wasn't a professional. The stairs were ice-covered and slippery so he would risk falling.
After the stairs, it is not known what route he took. According to most witness accounts, he ran straight. Some believe he ran to the left though, towards the cemetery and hid there.
Thanks! I still don't see how it's an argument that the attack wasn't planned by somebody else, but it is at least obvious, if I understand that the route of the attacke is confirmed, that the attacker himself wasn't prepared to disappear as soon as possible but to simply run for a while.
I was told about similar experience in Moscow. To still a small bag from a man at least three thieves were involved. One distracted, one “accidentally” pushed, one picked up the dropped bag.
"Street pickpockets generally work in teams, known as whiz mobs or wire mobs. The “steer” chooses the victim, who is referred to generically as the “mark,” the “vic,” or the “chump,” but can also be categorized into various subspecies, among them “Mr. Bates” (businessman) and “pappy” (senior citizen). The “stall,” or “stick,” maneuvers the mark into position and holds him there, distracting his attention, perhaps by stumbling in his path, asking him for directions, or spilling something on him. The “shade” blocks the mark’s view of what’s about to happen, either with his body or with an object such as a newspaper. And the “tool” (also known as the “wire,” the “dip,” or the “mechanic”) lifts his wallet and hands it off to the “duke man,” who hustles away, leaving the rest of the mob clean."
If I counted correctly, the described team has five members. For that kind of action it could be an optimum, otherwise it wouldn't be a typical example.
In the article there's a reference to "a paperback, published in 1964, called “Whiz Mob: A Correlation of the Technical Argot of Pickpockets with Their Behavior Patterns,” by David W. Maurer, a professor of English who devoted his life to the study of raffish subcultures, before apparently killing himself, in 1981."
"David Warren Maurer (April 12, 1906 – June 11, 1981) was a professor of linguistics at the University of Louisville from 1937 to 1972, and an author of numerous studies of the language of the American underworld."
Thanks to the modern technology if you're interested in that topic you can find today various CCTV footage of such acts on the YouTube. What's fascinating is how everything happens so "easily" in the real life that even when you try to watch carefully you'd initially miss all the actors until the video points to them or until you replay the video. It's almost like a famous gorilla in the basketball game, but happening continuously on the streets and in the shops.
Indeed -- look at the popular street "con" known as "Three-Card Monte" -- a fraudulent card game which seems to be run by a single person, but in fact also involves several [or all] people in what appears to be 'the crowd.' The victim of the con has no clue that these other folks are working with the guy manipulating the cards.
Can you please elaborate? I could very well imagine a seemingly lone gunman who would indeed be a part of a conspiracy, and I have a kind of a direct experience: I was personally a victim of a robbery where only one man attacked me, in what at that moment appeared to me as a completely random attack. Only after that didn't went as planned, a second man came, but not to help me but to help him, to my complete surprise. By chance and my luck the attack was ultimately not successful, but their goal was anyway not to harm me but just to get something I've possessed. Even more interestingly, after reporting the case to the police and after the investigation based on my previous movements before the attack it turned out that these two had two more accomplices. In total, at least four men were involved in one "small" robbery attack. The police told me they are aware of many such cases, and that there was probably even a fifth person involved who coordinated the four. And this all happened in the country and city of more or less comparable overall security and well being to Stockholm, not somewhere where everybody expects such dangers.
So what appeared to be a random attack is actually often indeed planned and involves more people. Even the thieves seldom operate alone.
Then what should be the arguments that there wasn't any conspiracy there?