So exceedingly strange for me to be commenting on this. I was once a member of the support group around Copenhagen Suborbitals, Peter Madsen's first space rocket venture, which also had the submarine in hand, and from which he was later ejected for erratic behaviour, vile explosions of temper, and general pain-in-the-ass-ness.
Around Christmas 2010, in the rocket assembly hangar - inevitable known as the HAB - I had a long talk with a leading support group member. Two things I very clearly remember from tat conversation: I was directed towards Hacker News as a serious forum (have been here ever since), and much more to the present point was told "With all his energy and dynamics and creativity, Peter must have a dark side that we know nothing about".
We were not to know that the dark side was a terrifying psychopathic personality, now exposed in all its gore. Danish police is now reopening various old macabre murder cases. I shall be unsurprised if the charming, charismatic Peter Madsen I have met on several occasions turn out to be the craziest serial killer in Danish history.
My rage is barely containable.
[Written on phone in noisy, unconducive environment. Please excuse typos, clumsiness, and errors]
"With all his energy and dynamics and creativity, Peter must have a dark side that we know nothing about" - no idea what else the person who said that knew. However if I read this as a conclusion, it appears unsubstantial.
Wait! No! I never made the connection to Copenhagen Suborbitals! I read now that Madsen left it a few years ago. Does that mean that the work will go on? I hope so!
The article doesn't mention it, but the suspect Peter Madsen is the cofounder of Copenhagen Suborbitals. This is an absolutely crazy story which just gets more insane by the day. Starting with a missing journalist and seemingly accidental sinking of a private submarine, getting more and more weird and inconsistent until now a decapitated, limbless corpse shows up.
With the corpse cut in pieces, it's hard to reach any other conclusion than that this was a murder. Or just almost in the region of the semi-plausably concievable, an accident followed by a gruesome attempt to cover it up. The repeated change of stories certainly doesn't help his credibility, and the explanation doesn't stand to reason in any way.
> Or just almost in the region of the semi-plausably concievable, an accident followed by a gruesome attempt to cover it up.
The accident theory is being stretched beyond the breaking point by now, I find it hard to come up with even a remotely plausible theory of what kind of accident it would have to be to justify the subsequent events. Such an accident would have to look so suspiciously close to murder that he responded just as if it actually was a murder.
So, now we know why the sub was sunk. I'm curious what implausible rabbit of an explanation Madsen will pull out of his hat to explain this away, and I hope that instead he will now simply confess to what actually happened. What an idiot. Poor family and spouse.
Yes I expect this to play out as it usually does, as more evidence is gathered, the story he is telling changes accordingly while he is trying to paint himself as good as possible given the proven circumstances, with a full confession once there is no more room for anything but the actual truth.
Yeah I don't think the evidence leaves much to the imagination. It sounds like he probably raped her, killed her and then disposed of the body to protect his reputation.
It must be be extremely painful for the partner of the victim who was probably feeling paranoid before she even stepped on the submarine.
"The torso was mutilated in an apparent attempt to ensure that decomposition gases passed out of the body, and there was also metal attached to it to make it sink, he added."
I have a hard time believing anyone would commit a murder on a submarine in Denmark. I feel like it's almost impossible to cover that up. But if it was an accident... who mutilates the body like that? If I wanted to cover it up, mutilating the body would be too much for me.
The case is pretty bizarre, although I'm pretty sure law enforcement has it mostly cracked already.
> I have a hard time believing anyone would commit a murder on a submarine in Denmark. I feel like it's almost impossible to cover that up.
The 'perfect crime' doesn't have to leave you above suspicion; but it has to deny sufficient evidence to convict you. You might believe your plan avoided incriminating you to the point that you can plausibly claim that you didn't commit the murder or tried to conceal the evidence.
Basically, a psychopath would think they could cover it up.
>I have a hard time believing anyone would commit a murder on a submarine in Denmark. I feel like it's almost impossible to cover that up.
You mean "premeditated murder". Because it's too easy to commit a murder or manslaughter anywhere on the heat of the moment (e.g. makes a pass, she refuses, argument, pushes him, pushes her, she falls and dies, etc).
My heart goes out to the family and friends of Kim Wall, I cannot begin to imagine what they're going through. I hope the truth of what happened comes to light and the family at least have some answers. Given Mr Madsen's evasiveness and his unwillingness to answer questions honestly I wonder if we'll ever know for sure?
What evasiveness and unwillingness are you referring to? He changed his statement once, and that was within 24 hours of his arrested. Ever since he has remained silent, most likely by order of the court.
I actually believe that he told them "everything" at the first hearing (like the admission that she died on board the vessel and was "buried at sea") and as we've seen up until now, the court only releases a part of it once that part no longer has influence on the ongoing investigation. For instance, I think he also admitted to dismembering the body but that part hasn't been disclosed as the police would risk people sailing up and down the coast looking for body parts, and thus risk ruining evidence. The reason why I put 'everything' in quotation earlier, is that I don't personally believe the accident-story until I see evidence that proves it.
However, it puzzles me that the prosecutor is still going for the indictment with involuntary manslaughter. I think they know something that the public doesn't - perhaps something that in fact supports the accident-story.
As you suggest, it's all speculation, but the police are saying it does look like deliberate mutilation. Trying to imagine the scenario where all 4 limbs and a head get cut off by a prop, and it's quite a stretch. There's also blood in the submarine, and the accused's statement that he "buried her" at sea.
The key thing here is that he claims to dropped her off at this location[1] at 22:30.
The article mentions cameras around but no info about is she was seen there or not. At that time, the area is probably busy with people wants to chill, so there could be eye witnesses seeing her.
It's still not proof that he's innocent, but that would raise lots of doubts.
>But what a poor engineer he also turned out to be ... and then utterly failing to submerge a body at sea. Not understanding that police would find her DNA in the submarine.
I'm an engineer and knowing that kind of forensic tools are available now to police, there is no way I'd ever think to commit such a crime (and also because WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?!). Unless the police are very incompetent or you are able to conceal it very well, you will be caught. [0]
I can tell you I never had a class during my B.Eng about how to kill someone and destroy DNA evidence. I'm not sure what being an engineer has to do with sinking a dead body and removing DNA evidence, since these are not at all related to Engineering...
> Goes without saying that he is a despicable human being.
Assuming the allegations against him are true. (I freely acknowledge that I can't even come up with an explanation that absolves him at this point - but I'd rather not convict based on news articles and a couple of police statements)
What is it with Madsen that gets people to come up with conspiracy theories about the woman involved?
Really, this is getting annoying. Just the other day someone came up with the absolutely brilliant theory that she must have been stealing submarine secrets for the Chinese or something to that effect and now this.
Did you notice that (1) he lied about having dropped her off, (2) he sank his sub on purpose claiming it was accidental and (3) he said she died in an accident and (4) he claimed he buried her at sea?
So far only (4) seems to be somewhat truthful, he forgot to mention he butchered her first.
There's a fair chance he raped her and then murdered her. Much more common and less glamorous than Russian mobsters taking out someone about to break the big story.
[+] [-] interfixus|8 years ago|reply
Around Christmas 2010, in the rocket assembly hangar - inevitable known as the HAB - I had a long talk with a leading support group member. Two things I very clearly remember from tat conversation: I was directed towards Hacker News as a serious forum (have been here ever since), and much more to the present point was told "With all his energy and dynamics and creativity, Peter must have a dark side that we know nothing about".
We were not to know that the dark side was a terrifying psychopathic personality, now exposed in all its gore. Danish police is now reopening various old macabre murder cases. I shall be unsurprised if the charming, charismatic Peter Madsen I have met on several occasions turn out to be the craziest serial killer in Danish history.
My rage is barely containable.
[Written on phone in noisy, unconducive environment. Please excuse typos, clumsiness, and errors]
[+] [-] nuclx|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Bromskloss|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] marvin|8 years ago|reply
With the corpse cut in pieces, it's hard to reach any other conclusion than that this was a murder. Or just almost in the region of the semi-plausably concievable, an accident followed by a gruesome attempt to cover it up. The repeated change of stories certainly doesn't help his credibility, and the explanation doesn't stand to reason in any way.
[+] [-] jacquesm|8 years ago|reply
The accident theory is being stretched beyond the breaking point by now, I find it hard to come up with even a remotely plausible theory of what kind of accident it would have to be to justify the subsequent events. Such an accident would have to look so suspiciously close to murder that he responded just as if it actually was a murder.
[+] [-] colde|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] quickthrower2|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jacquesm|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gribbly|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jondubois|8 years ago|reply
It must be be extremely painful for the partner of the victim who was probably feeling paranoid before she even stepped on the submarine.
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] emerongi|8 years ago|reply
I have a hard time believing anyone would commit a murder on a submarine in Denmark. I feel like it's almost impossible to cover that up. But if it was an accident... who mutilates the body like that? If I wanted to cover it up, mutilating the body would be too much for me.
The case is pretty bizarre, although I'm pretty sure law enforcement has it mostly cracked already.
[+] [-] falsedan|8 years ago|reply
The 'perfect crime' doesn't have to leave you above suspicion; but it has to deny sufficient evidence to convict you. You might believe your plan avoided incriminating you to the point that you can plausibly claim that you didn't commit the murder or tried to conceal the evidence.
Basically, a psychopath would think they could cover it up.
[+] [-] coldtea|8 years ago|reply
You mean "premeditated murder". Because it's too easy to commit a murder or manslaughter anywhere on the heat of the moment (e.g. makes a pass, she refuses, argument, pushes him, pushes her, she falls and dies, etc).
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] wlkr|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ladbye|8 years ago|reply
I actually believe that he told them "everything" at the first hearing (like the admission that she died on board the vessel and was "buried at sea") and as we've seen up until now, the court only releases a part of it once that part no longer has influence on the ongoing investigation. For instance, I think he also admitted to dismembering the body but that part hasn't been disclosed as the police would risk people sailing up and down the coast looking for body parts, and thus risk ruining evidence. The reason why I put 'everything' in quotation earlier, is that I don't personally believe the accident-story until I see evidence that proves it.
However, it puzzles me that the prosecutor is still going for the indictment with involuntary manslaughter. I think they know something that the public doesn't - perhaps something that in fact supports the accident-story.
[+] [-] mariusmg|8 years ago|reply
Expect the Hollywood version in 2024.
[+] [-] _Codemonkeyism|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tptacek|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Voyage_wanderer|8 years ago|reply
It is just another possible explanation.
Worst marine accidents happen when person falls aboard and gets sucked into propulsion system.
Not guilty until proven....
[+] [-] tyingq|8 years ago|reply
As you suggest, it's all speculation, but the police are saying it does look like deliberate mutilation. Trying to imagine the scenario where all 4 limbs and a head get cut off by a prop, and it's quite a stretch. There's also blood in the submarine, and the accused's statement that he "buried her" at sea.
[+] [-] pvaldes|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kowdermeister|8 years ago|reply
It's still not proof that he's innocent, but that would raise lots of doubts.
https://www.google.hu/maps/@55.6958462,12.609141,3a,75y,197....
[+] [-] joncrocks|8 years ago|reply
"He initially said he had dropped her off safely near Copenhagen, but has since said she died in an accident and that he had "buried" her at sea."
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] wodenokoto|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] js8|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] styren|8 years ago|reply
https://translate.google.se/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&u=https%3A... (google translate)
[+] [-] jacquesm|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] danso|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alexozer|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] flexie|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] dang|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kogepathic|8 years ago|reply
I'm an engineer and knowing that kind of forensic tools are available now to police, there is no way I'd ever think to commit such a crime (and also because WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT?!). Unless the police are very incompetent or you are able to conceal it very well, you will be caught. [0]
I can tell you I never had a class during my B.Eng about how to kill someone and destroy DNA evidence. I'm not sure what being an engineer has to do with sinking a dead body and removing DNA evidence, since these are not at all related to Engineering...
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Pickton
[+] [-] Ntrails|8 years ago|reply
Assuming the allegations against him are true. (I freely acknowledge that I can't even come up with an explanation that absolves him at this point - but I'd rather not convict based on news articles and a couple of police statements)
[+] [-] 0xFFC|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] jacquesm|8 years ago|reply
Really, this is getting annoying. Just the other day someone came up with the absolutely brilliant theory that she must have been stealing submarine secrets for the Chinese or something to that effect and now this.
Did you notice that (1) he lied about having dropped her off, (2) he sank his sub on purpose claiming it was accidental and (3) he said she died in an accident and (4) he claimed he buried her at sea?
So far only (4) seems to be somewhat truthful, he forgot to mention he butchered her first.
[+] [-] scarmig|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nippples|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Ensorceled|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dnaas|8 years ago|reply