sou-2015-52-rapport-fran-bergwallkommissionen

Summary SOU 2015:52investigations and, in most cases, also issued opinions to theprosecutor. This meant that there was a risk of a conflict of interest.The issue of conflict of interest was particularly evident inthe case of the advising psychologist, and of the forensic doctorwho was repeatedly engaged in the investigations.We find reason to question whether the advising psychologist,in his role as court expert, consistently provided knowledge thatwas based on science and tried and tested experience. Furthermore,he did not make it clear that the claim that Sture Bergwall hadsuffered abuse as a child – a claim that was a basis of his testimonyat some of the trials – was not supported by anything other thanSture Bergwall’s own account.Throughout the period during which he confessed to and wasconvicted of murder, Sture Bergwall was being treated with benzodiazepines.At that time, there was limited awareness of the factthat benzodiazepines can lead to disinhibition. It was, however,well known that the medication was addictive, a fact that in itselfshould have prompted greater caution on the part of the health careservices. Sture Bergwall subsequently became heavily addicted tomedication.At the time, the theories concerning repressed memories andthe idea that traumatic childhood experiences could be re-enactedin later events – murder, in Sture Bergwall’s case – were muchdebated and, to some extent, controversial. It seems that the psychotherapythat Sture Bergwall received at Säter Hospital aimed, amongother things, to help him to recover repressed memories both ofchildhood events and of the murders that were assumed to be a reenactmentof those events. The psychotherapists do not appear tohave sufficiently considered the risk of false memories being created,or of Sture Bergwall being encouraged to make up stories. It is truethat psychotherapy need have no other aim than to improve thepatient’s wellbeing. Nonetheless, the psychotherapists were wellaware that information that emerged during the therapy was usedin the murder investigations.Against this backdrop, we have come to the following conclusions.Several of the flaws we have observed were a result of theapproaches and judgements of individual actors. Times have changedsince the investigations were conducted and the murder convictions26