Lennart Guné announced on Thursday that there is no reason to reopen the Palme investigation, but at the same time states that the designation of Stig Engström is based on weak evidence.
In his decision, he lists several things that speak against Engström as the perpetrator – and also points to things that are still unexplained.
Lisbeth Palme's identification: Lisbeth Palme identified Christer Pettersson as the perpetrator. He is not similar in appearance to Stig Engström. Pettersson was charged with the murder but was acquitted in the Court of Appeal.
The perpetrator stood and waited: The assumption that Engström is the perpetrator is incompatible with the witness's statement that the perpetrator stood and waited for the Palme couple for some time at the corner outside the Dekorima store.
Time window: The information about when Engström left Skandiahuset is difficult to reconcile with him being the perpetrator.
Knowledge of the spouses' activities: It is unexplained whether and, if so, how Engström could have known that the Palmes would be outside Skandiahuset at the time in question.
The murder weapon: There is nothing to show how Stig Engström allegedly had possession of the murder weapon that was used.
Motive: It is unclear what his motive would be for wanting to murder Olof Palme.
Regarding the circumstances that, according to prosecutor Krister Petersson, could point to the Skandia man as the perpetrator, Lennart Guné notes that witness statements and other supporting evidence are fraught with uncertainties.
