Lennart Guné says at a press conference that he has decided on Thursday not to reopen the preliminary investigation.
"The decision means that I will not reopen the preliminary investigation that was closed. However, the decision means that I am changing the reason that justifies the preliminary investigation being closed. The change means that Stig Engström is no longer singled out as the perpetrator," says Guné.
The Chief Prosecutor says he understands if many people receive the decision with disappointment.
"The decision does not mean in any way that I have come any closer to a solution to the Palme murder. I have not been able to fulfill the hopes that many may have that the murder can be solved with modern technology," says Guné.
“Unlikely to find traces”
The decision is based on a request from a journalist to reopen the preliminary investigation to conduct DNA analyses of Olof Palme's coat, as there is witness evidence that the murderer had worn it.
Guné says that given that the coat has been handled by a large number of people, not least blue light personnel, it is unlikely to find DNA traces on it from the perpetrator.
It is not unimportant that we do not have any DNA profiles from currently living potential suspects to compare with, says the Chief Prosecutor.
The police press service writes in an email to TT that the coat has been returned to Olof Palme's relatives.
“Missing real explanation”
The Chief Prosecutor further states that he has reviewed the parts of the murder investigation that concern the suspicions against Engström, and that he has also read books about him that both point to and reject Engström as the murderer.
Like many before me, I have also found several circumstances that undermine the gravity of the suspicions, says Guné.
He mentions witness statements that make it doubtful whether Engström had enough time to carry out the murder.
It also needs to be taken into account that there is no real explanation as to whether, and if so how, he knew that Palme would be outside Skandiahuset at that time. Nor has it been explained in what way he would have had possession of the type of weapon used in the crime, says Guné.
