Nursing Home Manslaughter: The Plejebo Case

Scandinavian Crimes (w/ Devante & Delila)

Year(s) of Incident: October 1997
Location: Denmark
Nursing Home Manslaughter: The Plejebo Case
Victim(s):  1?
Method: Negligent Death, Fraud

The Plejebo case, once known as the largest murder investigation in Danish history, began in October 1997 with the arrest of 32-year-old nursing home assistant Dorte Gramkow.

Dubbed the "corridor of death," the second floor of Plee-yeh-boh nursing home in central Copenhagen, became infamous. It was there that Dore-tuh was accused of poisoning and killing 22 elderly residents. Authorities claimed her motive was simple: to steal money from the vulnerable elderly people in her care.

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

Transcript

Welcome to Scandinavian Crimes. My name's 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. Today we're gonna be talking about the Pliabo case. And forgive me if I butchered it, but that's what it says to, that's basically how it says to say it phonetically, based on online, Google and all that stuff. So if I butchered, forgive me.(...) But this is a case that was known as the largest murder investigation in Danish history, which began in October, 1997, with the arrest of 32 year old nursing home assistant, Dorta Gramkow. Dubbed the corridor of death, the second floor of the Pliabo nursing home in central Copenhagen became infamous.

(...)

It was there where Dorta was accused of poisoning and killing 22 residents.

(...)

Authorities claimed her motive was simple, to steal money from the vulnerable elderly people in her care. But besides all that, you already know what to do.

(...)

Grab your tea, grab your snacks, if you're on your way to work, tuck yourself into a nice little corner,

(...)

because this is a story of Dorta Gramkow in the Pliabo case.

(...)

In the spring of 1997, what began as a routine investigation into thefts quickly spiraled into something far more sinister.

(...)

At the Pliabo nursing home in central Copenhagen, initial reports of missing funds from the elderly residents led police to uncover a troubling pattern of suspicious deaths at the facility.

(...)

By October, the case had escalated dramatically, drawing in Copenhagen's homicide unit and capturing national attention.

(...)

On October 20th, Dorta Gramkow, a nursing assistant at Pliabo was arrested.(...) She faced charges not only of embezzling 629,000 Danish krona from residents, but also of murdering 22 elderly individuals under her care.

(...)

Adding to the case's gravity, the nursing home's supervising physician was charged with negligence, accused of failing to properly oversee the medical treatment of the residents,(...) which allegedly allowed the deaths to occur unchecked.

(...)

The day after her arrest, Dorta appeared in the constitutional hearing that stretched over nine hours.

(...)

She adamantly denied the murder charges but admitted to embezzling 5,000 Danish krona, a confession she later retracted.

(...)

Despite police confidence in their case and public assertion of her guilt, the presiding judge deemed the evidence insufficient to warrant her continued detention and she was released. However, this reprieve was short-lived.

(...)

On May 4th, the Eastern High Court overturned the court's decision, ruling that there was extreme suspicion in six of the alleged murders.

(...)

Dorta was ordered to remain in custody as the case grew more complex and contentious.

(...)

As the Pliabo case gathered momentum, it became a national spectacle capturing the attention of both the public and the media.

(...)

Copenhagen's health mayor took the opportunity to launch a broad investigation into nursing home care, vowing to address any systemic failures that might have allowed such alleged crimes to occur. Meanwhile, Dorta replaced her lawyer with the renowned Thomas Radam. His aggressive defense strategy would not only challenge the prosecution, but also shape the narrative surrounding the case.

(...)

By late 1997, tensions between Thomas and the lead investigator, Detective Inspector Kurt Jensen, reached a boiling point.(...) Thomas repeatedly criticized the investigation as poorly conducted and filled with tons of errors,

(...)

publicly labeling it as a rush to judgment.

(...)

In response, Kurt accused Thomas of using media coverage to manipulate public opinion and exert undue influence on the courts.(...) In December 1997, the case suffered a major setback for the prosecution when Denmark Supreme Court ordered Dorta's release.

(...)

The court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to justify her continued detention, delivering the first significant blow to the narrative of guilt that the police and prosecution had been building.

(...)

The decision called into question the strength of the charges and raised doubts about the investigation's foundation. As 1998 began, the flaws in the investigation became more apparent.(...) The medical evidence that underpinned the allegations faced increased criticism.(...) Experts began to challenge the conclusions drawn by the city physician whose initial assessments had been central to the police's theory of deliberate poisoning.(...) Legal experts, including Associate Professor Jiren Vestigore were vocal in criticizing the investigation.

(...)

Jiren highlighted systemic failures in how the case was handled, arguing that the responsibility for the dramatic escalation could not be pinned on any one individual or authority.

(...)

He pointed to inadequate medical assessments as a critical flaw, emphasizing the need for expertise from the Danish Health Authority in such complex cases.

(...)

Additionally, the police faced backlash for their overconfident assertion, including a public statement by the lead investigative proclaiming, "In our eyes, she is guilty."

(...)

Such comments were criticized for unfairly assuming guilt and influencing the case.

(...)

Thomas seized on these inconsistencies accusing the authorities of mishandling evidence and misinterpreting the deaths of Pliaboo.

(...)

He fiercely contested the prosecution citing flawed medical reports and procedural errors, including the absence of top forensic experts' input.(...) This led to a criticism of the Copenhagen police for their handling of the case with accusations of bias and procedural errors. Despite these setbacks, investigators persisted.

(...)

In June, they submitted an exhaustive list of questions to the Danish Council of Forensic Medicine, seeking definitive answers about the causes of death in the 22 cases linked to Dorta.

(...)

However, the council's finding did little to clarify the situation.

(...)

Conflicting opinions among medical experts only deepened the uncertainty, leaving the prosecution with no solid ground to proceed.

(...)

In a parallel development to the murder investigation, authorities reexamined the financial charges against Dorta.

(...)

Initially accused of embezzling 629,000 Danish kroner from Pliaboo residents, the police revised the alleged amount to 383,671 kroner after further analysis.

(...)

Despite this adjustment, they failed to substantiate their claims with concrete evidence.(...) Dorta steadfastly denied the accusations, maintaining her innocence beyond her initial admission of embezzling 5,000 Danish kroner, an admission she had since retracted.

(...)

As the investigation into Pliaboo case continued, cracks in the prosecution's foundation grew more evident.(...) By late 1998, the case grew against Dorta suffered a critical blow when the state attorney general officially dropped all murder charges.

(...)

The decision was primarily based on findings from the Danish Medical Council, which highlighted questionable medical practices at the nursing home, but could not be definitively linked to them as deliberate criminal acts or determine the exact causes of death. The ruling signified a turning point as the once dominant narrative of Dorta as a serial killer began to crumble.

(...)

In the wake of the dismissed murder charges, attention shifted to the supervising physician at Pliaboo. She faced accusations of gross negligence with claim that her failure to adequately monitor and treat patients had contributed to several deaths.

(...)

A review by the Danish Health Authority revealed errors in 14 of the 16 cases they examined.(...) These errors were considered significant, but were disputed by some medical experts who argued that the accusations were grounded in outdated medical standards in hindsight bias. The physician's trial commenced in 2000, three years after the initial arrests at Pliaboo. She was accused of five accounts of negligent involuntary manslaughter, along with violating medical ethics by failing to provide appropriate care to patients under her supervision.

(...)

Prosecutors claim she administered painkillers instead of providing proper treatment. The trial garnered intense public attention with debates raging over the boundaries between medical error, negligence, and criminal liability.

(...)

In November, 2000, the court delivered its verdict, acquitting the physician of all manslaughter charges.(...) However, she was found guilty of breaching the medical act or lapses in professional conduct. It was fined accordingly. In the aftermath of the case, reforms were implemented in 2002, requiring medical officers to oversee health conditions and medication management in nursing homes nationwide. Although Dorta was cleared of the murder charges, the ordeal left lasting scars on her life and reputation.

(...)

In the aftermath of the case, Dorta focused on reclaiming her life and reputation.

(...)

She was granted financial compensation for her unjust detention, initially set at 400,000 Danish kroner, but later increased to 700,000 kroner after additional negotiations.

(...)

This settlement was seen by some as insufficient, giving the profound damage to her reputation and personal life. Seeking to share her side of the story, Dorta authored a memoir, "Dee's Story," which chronicled her experience. The book served as both a personal catharsis and a scathing critique of the justice system, highlighting what she perceived as a failure in protecting her rights and ensuring a fair process. In interviews and public appearances following the book's release, she repeatedly called attention to the damage caused by the investigative overreach and the rush to judgment that had dominated her case. The plea boot case, once one of Denmark's most shocking criminal scandals, ended without any convictions but sparked deep societal reflection. The case concluded without a clear dramatic resolution, leaving unresolved questions about justice, responsibility, and how society treats its most vulnerable.

(...)

While the trial provided closure for those directly involved, it exposed significant flaws within Denmark's justice system and public institutions.

(...)

It highlighted the urgent need for reform in handling complex investigations, particularly those involving medical and ethical ambiguities.

(...)

So I just want to,(...) because we, in the beginning of the story,(...) or the case, Devontae mentioned about what's going on in Denmark and stuff like that. Well, this case wasn't really anybody's fault. At least it didn't feel like they called it a manslaughter or murder. But I still want to compare this case with the Kristina Hansen case that we have covered.(...) If you guys are interested in that, you can go and listen to it. But basically, the 22 suspicious deaths at Plajebo could have been, because of either mistreatment, negligence, or possible motive for money, which doesn't seem entirely impossible. It could have been the case, as she did kind of admit it, but then she retracted it, so it could have happened. However,(...) because the victims were elderly, there wasn't really enough evidence to prove that this is true, because as you know, elderly people can die easily due to age or health complications.

(...)

So I think because of that, it's so scary(...) that it's a very similar narrative that can be made with the patients who died in Kristina Hansen's case,

(...)

as they all had poor health and lifestyle issues(...) that also complicated and made it easier for them to die.

(...)

So it wouldn't have been weird for them to die.

(...)

So until the college, sorry, until the other nurse saw what Kristina did and known as her suspicions and the deaths was weird.

(...)

And giving the lack of clear details about the true nature of the investigation(...) or what truly was happening in the nursing home, it's hard to say whether the trial was fair or justified. On one hand, I believe it should be easy to send this, like it shouldn't be easy to send this medical staff(...) for patients that without solid proof, but also like on the other hand,

(...)

I can also acknowledge that there are individuals like Kristina Hansen, for example, who may use their position of power for personal gain and I don't think it should be overlooked.

(...)

So I think it's very important to have this discussion.

(...)

And I'm not saying that Dort is guilty or anything. I just think it's important to talk about this as well.

It's very hard to kind of gauge what the situation is.

Have a fine line, you know.

You know what I'm saying? But yes, it's kind of hard because I can agree where it's entirely possible. This could have happened. Dort could have did what she did because she did admit to it, even though she did retract it eventually.

(...)

But I know back in those days, like the process in which they would do things in a lot of these homes and medical facilities in general were very questionable because people had certain opinions about the elderly, as we both know about children as well, when people were taking care of kids.

(...)

But I think at least when a lot of people were complaining about the justice system, I forgot who it is who said it over here. I think his name was like William Blackstone or something like that. He was like an English politician, something like that. But I know people would say like they would rather, I think the quote directly was, "I would rather see 10 guilty men go free before one innocent person be in prison."(...) And that quote, I guess is reflective of this case where whether she's guilty or innocent, the evidence didn't hold up. And there's no reason for the justice system(...) as well as the system in general, because it wasn't just the court system, but it was just the medical staff and just the way they did things was flawed.

(...)

And whether she did it or not,(...) that's all up to speculation. We wasn't there, we don't know. But the system needs to be better so that way we can make sure we catch people and do things more efficiently.

(...)

And we wouldn't want someone who's innocent to go to prison for something they may have not done at all.

(...)

So, and this situation is really tough because it's like, dang, like, yeah, there were gaps in the investigation,

(...)

but I think most of the issue just lies with the medical system in this story.

(...)

It's how they did things. And I think that's what makes this far more difficult, which is why the case fell apart so quickly for prosecution.(...) Because I think at first it was like, "Oh yeah, we had this in the bag."

And you just really need to have proof. Like proof here is so, so important. And I think that's also like, if we compare it to the Christina Hansen case, like because of her colleague who was making sure that they were proof,

(...)

she did have some type of evidence to back up her claims.(...) And, or else, you know, Christina would have never been caught.

(...)

And it would have been hard to, because she was denying it for a long time too.(...) So that's why I'm like, proof and evidence is really important in this case. And I'm kind of glad that they were able to be like, "Okay, but we don't have anything that is like tangible enough to detain her, like even detaining her."

(...)

I agree. And also with the Christina Hansen case, I can admit it's because we saw the show that was based on her.

Yeah, the Netflix show. You are very biased. I'm like super biased.

(...) You are very biased. Because I'm like that coworker, like that's how I imagine the situation now because of that show. I'm like, "Yo, the coworker locked in. She got proof she did everything she was supposed to do."

(...) The characters were actually playing that role so well. Like they were doing it so well.

So that was like a really good,

(...)

just that was, I'm biased on that one.

(...)

But how do you feel about the,(...) like the sentence that they freed a dorte?(...) But they ended up like kind of, not blaming, I guess, but they put their responsibility on the supervising physician, I can't say that word.

Was it the physician or the head nurse?

Physician, who was like(...) charred with medical negligence, but was in charge of the manslaughter part.

(...)

Do I think it's fair? I mean, I know the supervisor only got the, only got a fine, so their life wasn't really ruined per se to the same level.

I guess reputation could have been like.

Yeah, the reputation of her, like her professional reputation took a hit, but you know, she can recover. Maybe she did.

You know why? Because I couldn't find the information of the, this, the fusi, fusi, fusio.

Physician?

I hate that word. Yes, I hate that word. I couldn't find the name. Everything was anonymous. There was nowhere to be found, but I could have found Dorta's name everywhere.

(...) Yeah, so even then it's like,

(...)

she's able to, so the head nurse or the supervising physician.

Dorta's reputation is already gone.

Yeah, so even now, like, this is 2025,(...) you know? So this is like, the trial started into what, 2000? This is 25 years later. We can still see Dorta's name,(...) but we have no idea who the supervising physician was, which means if we can't find out.

At least it was hard for me to find out.

So yeah, we might be wrong, but that shouldn't be the case if we can see Dorta. Like that's usually,(...) they're in the same case. We should be able to see it. So something is going on with that. So the fact that her name possibly might be less known means her life was able to be recovered and she only got fined, which means it's likely she might not have even had to leave her profession.

She kept her medical license and everything.

She probably still able to go somewhere else. I thought she was exactly gonna wear it. Yeah, I thought so too, actually.

(...) But- It seemed like it, but I don't know.

But she didn't. So it seemed like she probably was able to go get another job somewhere else and do what she got to do and call it a day. And which I think is, I don't know. I think it's not quite fair, I guess.

It's so hard. This case is so hard because like, I can also agree that, you know, sometimes if, you know,(...) doctors might not have the time to actually do everything or they might do, you know,

(...)

fail and mistakes and stuff.

(...)

So like, it's so hard. Like maybe I'm biased or something. I don't know. I feel like this case is just so complicated.

(...)

I can't really have an opinion. I feel like I understand both sides, honestly.

Yeah, this is one of those situations where because of the lack of information we have, we truly have no idea, like what to think because one, we did this information we just don't know. And then two, this is not just a one system failure.

No, I'm just conflicted.

I mean, I agree. Like I'm conflicted too. I'm just conflicted. But I'm conflicted because like, I feel like there's multiple systems that failed, you know, or did things improperly. And I can't really make an opinion about who's to blame or who's not to blame or what. Like, so I'm like, I don't know. You know, I think at the end of the day, they probably did the right thing because they probably felt conflicted too. They was like, I don't know who to believe here. So they probably just was like, you know what? A fine for this person, I'd rather, you know, be in a door to not be found guilty because already the public probably doesn't have a good opinion of us doing so. So they probably took the safest route possible truthfully, but I'm conflicted as well.

(...)

At least you got some compensation, but you know.

Yeah. So let us know what y'all think, you know, I don't know what to think about this case at all. Maybe if you're from the Denmark area, you can give us some opinions. If you were, you know, around during that time, that would be great to hear some more details. Maybe you have some information that we don't have and let us know.

(...)

I just want to say something. Yes.(...) So I don't think we did like a foodies thing last episode.

(...)

We did not.

(...)

So I think we should do it today.

Of course we want to do it today.

(...) I like strawberries.(...) Strawberries you like, me like, yes, good.

I like potatoes.

(...)

Honestly, I like potatoes too. I'm going to boil some potatoes right now.

(...) Some mashed potatoes, some good gravy. That's too chicken I make.

No, I just want to boil it with salt and just eat it like a savage.

Yeah, I'm about to say, yeah, that's Neanderthal behavior.

Yes, I will gladly accept that.

Then again, you are in the Swedish Nordic area. That's very normal. No, listen, that's not like- You guys love potatoes.

I used to hate potatoes, but like, if you found a really good potato, you can really make it yummy.

That's such a Nordic thing.

No, no, it's not a Swedish thing. It's not a Swedish thing, no.

So you're like, hey.

(...)

I am going to go for,(...) I do like potatoes, but officially I think I want, I don't know, I haven't really been craving, I'm lying, I have been craving something.

(...)

I want a really good birria.

(...)

A what?

(...) Birria, you know the-

Oh, okay, okay, okay.

No, we went to the Mexican spot, and finally dipped it in the sun.

Yeah, I know what it is, calm down, sir.

That was so good.

(...)

That's what I'm gonna move for, some good birria.

(...)

Nice. Nice.

(...)

I mean, now I wanna change my mind. I feel like my potato is just like, being completely overridden by your,(...) like-

It's funny, we said nice at the same time, it's like, nice.

(...)

I'm still dead. We're little foodies. Thank you all for listening. We appreciate you, we love you all.

(...)

Bye.

Bye.