Murder: The Death of Ida Fässberg

Scandinavian Crimes (w/ Devante & Delila)

Year(s) of Incident: 2013
Location: Sweden
Murder: The Death of Ida Fässberg
Victim(s):  1
Method: Murder

In 2013, Ida Fässberg, a young woman, disappeared under mysterious circumstances, leading to a high-profile murder investigation in Sweden. With limited evidence, police focused on forensic analysis and surveillance footage to piece together the events surrounding her disappearance. Despite the challenges, their persistent efforts eventually led to the identification and apprehension of the perpetrator. The case highlighted the importance of meticulous investigative work and the use of technology in solving complex crimes.

Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!): 
https://uppbeat.io/t/adi-goldstein/blank-light 
License code: A1C1SZ12UFNPUARU 

Music from #Uppbeat ( free for Creators!): 
https://uppbeat.io/t/clemens-ruh/this-place-has-never-known-some-love 
License code: DZOFU4ELCVA6ZWEE 

Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!): 
https: //uppbeat.io/t/kevin-macleod/lightless-dawn 
License code: SNWCDIJUOPTFEHMK

Chapters

• 0:00 Introduction
• 1:37 Story - Police Arrival At the Scene
• 3:56 Story - Investigation
• 7:11 Story - Finding More Evidence
• 9:32 Story - Arrest and Finding the Body
• 11:23 Story - Trial & Aftermath
• 12:49 Discussion Section
• 20:30 Conclusion/Outro

Transcript

Welcome to Scandinavian Crimes. My name is Devante and say hello to my lovely co-host, Delila. Hi. And on this podcast, we talk about famous Scandinavian criminals who made their mark throughout Scandinavian history. So this case took place in 2013, where Eda Fesberg disappeared and was murdered, which led to a challenging investigation.(...) Now the investigation had limited evidence and the police worked tirelessly relying on forensic analysis and surveillance footage. In the end, their efforts did pay off and they were able to identify the murderer. So I don't want to spoil anything in terms of the story. Usually we give a little bit slightly more detailed summary, but you already know what we're going to do for this podcast anyways. Grab your tea,

(...)

grab your snacks. If you're on your way to work, just tuck yourself into a nice little corner and prepare yourself as we cover the story of Eda Fesberg.

(...)

On Sunday, June 30th, 2013, a warm summer day in Trollhechtan, police officers were alerted to a quiet residential area. Upon arrival, they noticed blood on the stairwell floor and began following the trail and led them to the second floor where bloodstains marked the elevated door and an apartment entrance.

(...)

Peering through the mail slot, they saw more blood inside.(...) After calling out police and receiving no response, they cautiously entered the unlocked apartment.

(...)

The scene was eerily silent.

(...)

In the kitchen, they found a large pool of blood on the floor with a backward facing stroller at its center.(...) The stroller's canopy made it hard to see inside, prompting one of the officers to cautiously approach the stroller.

(...)

Lowering the canopy, they braced for the possibility of finding a lifeless child, but they were relieved to discover it was empty.

(...)

A moment of relief and an otherwise grim scene.

(...)

Continuing the search,

(...)

they entered the bedroom and found a young child sitting silently in a crib, wide-eyed with fear.(...) The officers reassured the child but left him in the crib as they checked the rest of the apartment.(...) Despite the unsettling scene, the apartment was completely empty except for the frightened child and the TV playing in the background. The officer rushed to the child's room, worried about how long the little child had been left alone in the apartment. In the crib, the child stood silently, arms outstretched. When the officer picked them up, the child clung tightly to their grip, desperate and unwavering. Noticing the child was dressed only in an overflowing diaper, the officer found clean supplies in the apartment and changed them. The child remained silent, showing only a need for comfort and security. Even as paramedics arrived, the child refused to let go of the officer. The officer stayed and took care of the child while investigators began examining the scene.(...) The bloody department and abandoned child raised alarming questions, especially about the mother's whereabouts.(...) The blood found in the apartment raised concerns about her safety, making time crucial to find her alive. Police soon identified the missing mother as 23-year-old Ida Fesberg, a single mother of two.(...) Friends describe Ida as a kind, loving woman, though some acknowledge her history of troubled relationships. Forensic investigators found not only the large pool of blood but drag marks and faint blood spatters suggesting a violent struggle and a body being moved.

(...)

Other evidence indicated a sudden chaotic departure. The same day emergency services found a burning Volvo near Grazdo, it was registered to a 35-year-old man living nearby.(...) Along with his 31-year-old acquaintance, both men were questioned by police.

(...)

The charred remains of the car were sent to be examined. While the missing woman, the burned car, and the suspicious individuals were circumstantially connected, there was no direct evidence linking the two men to Ida's disappearance. By July 1st, Ida's ex-boyfriend had been taken into custody, though he denied any involvement. He had contacted Ida on the day she vanished, but it was unclear whether he had been at her apartment that day. The ex-boyfriend provided details to strengthen his alibi. After verifying his claims, it was clear he had no involvement, leading to his release later that evening.(...) The investigation then shifted to Ida's acquaintances, uncovering a connection between her disappearance and the burned car.

(...)

Ida's father mentioned a man named Andreas Johansson, who had a violent criminal history. He had been involved in the neo-Nazi circles leading the National Socialist Front in Trollheten during the 1990s. He was convicted in 1993 for assaulting a Somali man and later for domestic abuse and hate crimes.(...) Expelled from high school, he was taken into care by social services.(...) By 1999, Andreas was one of Sweden's leading neo-Nazis known for threatening democracy.(...) He had been issued multiple restraining orders and faced charges of violence and threats towards past partners. The police began searching for Andreas, Ida's new boyfriend, who had spoken to her father the night she disappeared. The 35-year-old car owner and his 31-year-old friend revealed that they had connections to Andreas, but their conflicting stories raised suspicions.(...) Despite this, the prosecutor chose not to detain them and they were released.

(...)

The investigation then focused on Andreas, and soon, an attorney claiming to represent him contacted the police.(...) The attorney informed investigators that Andreas was willing to meet with the police. When Andreas arrived for questioning, he explained that he and Ida had a good evening until she received a call from her ex, who was angry about her being with Andreas. He stated that he took the phone from Ida, felt threatened by the ex, and decided to end the evening.

(...)

After his initial interview, Andreas was detained due to inconsistencies in the story, with investigators needing more time to verify his account.(...) Police suspected Andreas of harming and killing Ida and involved the other two men to dispose of the body.(...) Despite the investigators confidence, the prosecutor deemed the evidence insufficient to charge him with kidnapping, leading to his release and a delay in the investigation.(...) The police remained confident in their hypothesis and leads, convinced they were on the right track. While Ida's whereabouts remained uncertain, both authorities and her family struggled to determine whether the case was one of murder or abduction. The investigation continued with relentless effort. The likelihood of her being alive grew slimmer with every passing hour. Each lead was pursued with volunteer organizations like Missing People. The community became heavily involved, offering tips through computers and late night efforts, generating 50 to 75 tips daily.

(...)

Meanwhile, a parallel investigation took place on the flashback form where unexpected assistance came from its users.

(...)

Several threads on flashback offered valuable insights and one regular contributor was Ramer, a local from Trolhetan, who actively tried to find Ida. Ramer searched several areas without success. However, during one of his walks in the woods, he discovered a campsite that caught his attention. He found it unusual because it wasn't a typical fire site. Normally, when a fire is built in nature, there are burnt twigs and remnants, but here, the area appeared cleaned up. It seemed that someone had removed the items that they burned.(...) Ramer noticed pieces of poorly burned fabric scattered around, suggesting someone had tried to destroy something but took the main items with them.

(...)

Ramer, who knew a lot of details about the case, contacted the police about the unusual campsite on July 28th, which ended up being about one kilometer away from the residence of the 35-year-old car owner.(...) Initially reporting anonymously, without seeing any progress of the case, Ramer later posted the coordinates and details on flashback. He posted the partially burned fabric pieces on flashback, hoping someone would recognize it.

(...)

Shortly after Ramer's post, users identified the clothing brand and one found footage of someone wearing the same brand. The police took notice of the flashback form discussions and reached out to Ramer. He revealed his identity and led them to the campsite where they found buttons and his shoe sole, though too damaged for DNA testing. Later surveillance footage showed Andreas wearing similar clothing, linking him to the site and turning it into a crucial lead in the investigation. Andreas became a main suspect in Ida's disappearance and an arrest warrant was issued. However, it was later discovered that he had fled the country.(...) Weeks went by and while the police suspected Ida might be dead, they couldn't rule out the possibility that she was still alive. Without a body, no charges could be made, leaving her family in agony over the uncertainty.

(...)

Eventually the police learned that Andreas contacted the Swedish embassy in Warsaw. He was arrested by Polish authorities and extradited to Sweden on August 2nd, 2013. As the investigation progressed, the 31-year-old and the 35-year-old men were questioned again. Then on August 8th, 2013, five weeks after Ida's disappearance, a person discovered Ida's body in a forest near their home.(...) The body was severely damaged, but some parts remained intact, allowing for identification through tattoos.

(...)

It was now certain that a murder had occurred, making it possible to press charges, which would have been impossible otherwise. With Ida's body found, the police and prosecutor had enough evidence to move forward with charges against the three suspects. Andreas initially denied any involvement, but DNA evidence from a beer can at Ida's home and shoe prints at the discovery site connected him to the locations.(...) Throughout the six-month investigation, Andreas' story changed repeatedly, but further evidence, including his mobile phone usage on the night of June 30th, undermined his claims.(...) It was confirmed that the murder occurred by 1230 a.m. and Andreas had been with Ida in the apartment until at least 1215. The chance of another person entering during that brief window was highly unlikely.(...) The only person who could explain what happened that night was Andreas himself. In court, Andreas appeared composed, showing no signs of worry or fear, and maintained his innocence,(...) insisting he was not involved in the crime.(...) The other two suspects also remained unemotional. The prosecution's theory suggests that after an evening phone call from Ida's ex-boyfriend, Andreas became violent, possibly using a blunt object or knife to kill Ida. He then allegedly contacted the other two men and together they disposed of her body in the forest, where it was eventually found.(...) The case proved challenging for the prosecution, who had to present the evidence clearly to ensure the court understood the chain of events. While the outcome initially seemed certain, the defense's argument created uncertainty.(...) Despite this, the prosecution's case was convincing and the court had reached a conclusion.

(...)

Andreas was convicted of Ida's murder and sentenced to 16 years in prison despite his continued denial.(...) The two men, aged 31 and 35, were convicted of aiding a criminal.

(...)

Andreas appealed the district court's verdict to the court of appeals, which upheld the ruling.

(...)

He also appealed to the Supreme Court, but permission was denied.(...) In late March 2024, Andreas was released from prison. While in Salaburga prison, he wrote his debut book where he recounts his life and confesses to the murder of Ida. So he tried to get a bag off of a murder?

I mean, most murderers do that. They always make a documentary, participate in documentary interviews,

(...)

create books and stuff like that.

(...)

So yeah.

He made a book like I did it.

He actually made multiple books. That's why I didn't want to really promote and say the names of the book. But I think it's important to mention that he did confess that he murdered, because up until that point,(...) he was denying everything,

(...)

including the other two people.

(...)

But I just want to say, I don't know if anybody knows Flashback Forum, but it's like a forum that's very popular in Sweden that a lot of people put not only cases, but it's like discussion of everything.(...) And there is no filter. People can discuss a lot of different things there.(...) And for them to be able to find and have discussion threads and was able to solve or find a lot of evidence to at least identify Andreas and stuff like that, that's incredible.(...) They did a really good job. And Raymer, who that's not his real name.

(...)

It's that was the name, kind of like the name he uses for his forum,

(...)

his username. So he was like so involved in the case because it was a local and he wanted to help out that he was like searching so much. And with the help of the other people who were also interested in the case, they were actually able to find a lot of really crucial evidence. And I think that's remarkable. I think that's really amazing, actually. I never thought about people solving cases or stuff like that on Flashback Forum.

I mean, also, I think stuff like that requires, I guess, people having faith in their police force.

(...)

So I know I'm speaking very negatively about where I'm from. But I know, for example, like that would never really happen over here. Because even though there has been plenty of accounts of people solving cases in the States, most people would not typically help the police unless they have a personal stake in the situation, mostly because one, we don't trust a lot of the police forces, because I'm pretty sure everyone around the world has seen cases of very corrupt systems over here. So that means at least it seems like people were very, they were very trusting of the police force. And it seems like the force as well(...) was very reliant on the public. And I guess there was some level of camaraderie between the public and the police, which I think is good when people trust you in your judgment. So I think that's a good thing.

(...)

Yeah.(...) I also noticed something that even though they did receive more evidence, it was still very loose in a way. They didn't really have a secure DNA(...) like result that this is act like he is the culprit. But they had like this circumstance kind of they could piece everything together based on the evidence of circumstances.

(...)

Like they could be like piece everything together. And at first, I didn't think that actually was possible to send to somebody for 16 years, like this is a very long time(...) without having, I guess, more evidence. But they were basically saying like, oh, because he got a call 12am or something, it would be impossible for anybody else to go during that short amount of time. And then there was this evidence of the clothing and stuff like that. So like everything was circumstantial. And I just feel like I noticed at least that when it comes to murder, there's always this like, you have to have a lot of hard proof evidence to be sentenced. So I just wondered, like, what do you think about like, do you feel like this was enough evidence to sentence him for 16 years? Or do you feel like because everything logically makes sense, they would, it couldn't be anybody else?

(...)

I mean, in reality, I would have preferred, you know, more. But also, I think the issue happened. Well, the main issue, at least in his case, was I had a I have a sneaking suspicion that he knew that he at some point, it was going to come and try and talk to him.(...) So even in the story, he already had a lawyer before he even showed up to the first initial interrogation, which means off rip, if you knew someone was going to contact you, you were involved. Because, you know, like I said, it's I always recommend if you're getting interrogated or whatever the case may be, you show up to a police station and they're trying to ask you questions, you have your representation. But that's only if you find out after the fact. But the thing is, he was already prepared when they.

Which is so.

(...) Yeah, that his lawyer reached out to the police like, oh, I'll speak to you only fit. So he basically told them you were guilty by essentially having a lawyer reach out, even though they themselves didn't contact you directly yet. So that was already a huge red flag.

(...)

And and because of that, because he was at least smart enough to get a lawyer, even though that kind of did make him look more guilty in reality, because they couldn't arrest him or hold him long enough. Now he was able to probably get not probably we know he was able to get rid of evidence. So basically, he probably burned clothes that had her blood on it because based on the crime scene, there was a lot of blood. There was a huge pool of blood. There was like a whole trail of blood like dragging and moving of the body. So I'm pretty sure each of them had clothes that tied them to her. That's what had her DNA on it. But then now it's burned. And then after that, he disappears from the country. So it's like, yeah, it's circumstantial. But in reality,

(...)

it's it's really bad circumstantial. Like it's strong circumstantial.

Like why would he leave the country?

(...) Yeah.

Because like I was thinking about the whole like, when we talk about, you know, the whole circumstantial and like him going back and forth and that they couldn't really detain him because they didn't have enough proof.

(...)

I wrote like I, I saw a documentary about this case, where they actually were talking about the police or the experts or the people involved, how they were complaining about them not having enough evidence to keep them. And because of that, it led to them to get released, and then they could talk to each other and create a story. And then they can come back and be detained again when they have more evidence. So they never had the time to verify their accounts. But they noticed that the 31 year old 35 year old car owner and Andreas had different stories, and they weren't consistent. And this could have been avoided if they had the time to detain them for some time and verify everything.

(...)

And but I also agree that you know, you can't really detain somebody if you don't have enough evidence because obviously that's not right either.(...) Yeah, like, it's such a huge contrast compared to like, you know, the last case we had where they detained him for like six months or what was it like, two or three months or something.

Yeah, and he didn't even do anything. He wasn't even involved.

Yeah.

And then they held them in

and then we have this we're like, no, not enough evidence. And then they just kind of like

(...)

got released and then they could talk to each other and create a story.(...) Yeah.(...) And that's kind of I thought I thought it was like a I didn't, you know, think about it, but like, yeah, that's right. Actually, that's, you know, that could ruin the investigation and even prohibit them to it takes longer and more resources and stuff, you know.

(...) Yeah, the more you try to do things the right way, it takes more resources, more time, you try to do things by the book. And then you end up with situations like this where people are burning and getting rid of evidence, which can then hinder an airtight case versus relying on, you know, circumstantial evidence, even though the evidence was, like I said, a really bad circumstantial, it still would have been a far better, you know, case if they had absolutes versus, you know, things that technically someone can wiggle their way out of.

(...)

So based on what was presented in the story, it seems like, you know,

(...)

justice was served. And especially if you wrote a book saying, oh, yeah, I did it. And I'm like, yeah, if you admit he did it and wrote a book about it, try to make money off of it, then yeah, justice was served.

Do you think the sentence in itself was fair?

(...)

Because some people were very criticizing and saying that it was too lenient,

(...)

saying that, you know, it was a very severe

(...)

murder and crime.

(...)

And also his history, criminal history and stuff like that. And, you know, they thought that it was a very lenient sentence. Do you think that's lenient or do you think it's fair?

I think it's a little lenient because he came out in 2024.

Oh, sorry. I meant for like Swedish standards, not like America standards.

I mean, yeah, Swedish standards is just lenient in general.

(...)

So yeah, 2013, I remember 2013. I was in college 2013. He was released in 2024. 2024 was just a few weeks ago. So in reality,(...) I know it's been a long time, but it wasn't even 16 years, right? It was more like 10.

(...)

2013 and 2024 is like 11, 10 years.

(...)

When did he get it was? 2024.

(...)

Yeah, he got released 2024, but he got arrested 2013.

(...)

Yeah, that's like.

But when did he get sentenced? Oh, maybe we would.

I mean, if he got arrested 2013.

We can assume 2013. Yeah. Okay.

Yeah. So he was on, he was only in jail for 11, 10, 11 years.(...) So that was very lenient.

I guess he probably wasn't parole.

(...)

Yeah. No, I still think that's far too lenient, especially(...) coming out of jail. And then

I think in Sweden,

(...)

it's usually around 10 to 16.

(...)

If it's like super severe,

(...)

I know it's like planned and everything. I don't know if there's like proof of a lot of planning. Like there's a thing I can't remember. Yeah, exactly.

I think I guess since it was circumstantial, they gave him 10, but even then he wrote a book afterwards,

(...)

which technically, I mean, he confessed, which they could not reopen the case.

But isn't it outside of the constitutional, what was the name of it?

I think you're talking about double jeopardy. You can't be charged for the same thing twice.

No, no, no, no. I'm saying that like you can't be charged after a certain time of the case. So if it's like more older than 15 years.

But he was already charged, so that doesn't apply.

Oh, really? Okay. I don't know.

(...)

Yeah. Like if it was something he would never got charged for, then yeah.

Oh, you can't double charge anyway.

So that's why I said double jeopardy specifically because you can't double charge. But I don't know.(...) Swedish laws are different, but I think it was too lenient. But let us know what y'all think. Do you feel like his time was lenient? Do you feel like the evidence could have been a little more detailed? Do you think they should have put a little more effort into the investigative process? Y'all let us know, because I think it's too lenient. He should have had more time. Take care of the people you find special and stay safe out there, my lovely friends. And we shall(...) reconvene next week.

(...)

Peace out.

Bye.