Jordås copied his entire Palm Theory from a Danish book

Published 30 August 2024 at 19.17

Culture. Jon Jordås' new book about the Palm murder is claimed to be the result of painstaking research in the archives of the Palm investigation. But in fact, Jordås has copied his entire Palm Theory – yes, the entire content of the book actually – from previously published books by the Dane Paul Smith. Jonas De Geer has read the manuscripts for the year's most celebrated author scam.

Share the article

TwittraShare

Fria Tider reveals

• Riksdagman Kjell Jansson (M) blackmailed for SEK 65,000 after buying sex
• Former M-top behind giant crypto scam
• Reinfeldt's son was arrested for serious crimes against a young woman
• Read the entire classified file on Erik Reinfeldt
• Strandhäll bluffed about right-wing extremist threat image

Show all

Books about the Palm Murder are usually given quite a bit of attention, even if they are good and add something new. It has been different with Jon Jordås The last book about the murder of Olof Palme. As early as April, cultural pages were written about the book being in the works and a couple of weeks ago it was time for release in Natur & Kultur's premises on Karlavägen with 120 invited guests and Hasso Aro himself as emcee.

Since then, Jordås has made one appearance after another, on both radio and TV, where he was told that he actually became interested in the Palme murder only after the strange naming of Stig Engström in 2020, when the preliminary investigation was closed. It raised a number of questions and he sought answers in the enormous material that had just become available. In the reams of documents, he discovered that there was another lead, another suspect, which was never properly followed up and until now was only known to a small, narrow circle of crime investigators and special interests.

That is what Jordås claims. But that's simply not true.

Reviews have been generally very positive. Not least Aftonbladet's Åsa Linderborg was almost lyrical. She writes cluelessly:

«Until now, all new books about the Palm Murder have refined tracks that have been in vogue all along. It's almost surreal that new things can come out this late. I find no flaws in Jon Jordås' construction, which are found in all other theories.»

Other, more experienced reviewers, admittedly point out a little cautiously that although the book is of course excellent, it doesn't really add anything new. A few have even dared to mention Paul Smith's name in passing.

Already in 2012, the Danish author Paul Smith's book Palmes morder (Palm's killer) was published with Christer Andersson's photo on the cover. It received attention, but was then dismissed with a contemptuous snort in the same Swedish newspapers where Jordå's work is now celebrated.

In 2021, Smith published The Swedish Inquisition. It is about Stig Engström and Christer Andersson, why the former was innocent and the latter guilty. It contains pretty much all the so-called «indicia», or whatever they are supposed to represent, against Christer Andersson that a few years later is presented in Jordås's book: the suspected revolver, the profile of the perpetrator, the cafe on Sveavägen, the murder scene on the tenth anniversary, the tax increase, the shot the television set, the kicked dog, constable Stålnacke's meeting with the mysterious man in the Andersson summer cottage and, not least, the forgotten phantom picture, which Jordås makes such a big deal about. It is also written in short, more or less independent sections, not unlike the form Jordås later chooses for his book.

The last book about the murder of Olof Palme ends with a shorter list of «works that contributed in different ways». About ten titles and Flashback are mentioned there, but nothing by Smith. So comes “A special mention to Paul Smith and Marc Pennartz who brought C.A. on the agenda — as well as the anonymous forum writers Roerlig, Omiga, Lookalike and Hellbastard».

Why mention Smith in passing, along with anonymous forum writers, for having «put C. A. on the agenda» (whatever that means) , but not that he has actually written several books about him?

Marc Pennartz who is mentioned is, incidentally, a Dutch, Swedish-speaking journalist who in 2021 published a book about Christer Andersson as the likely perpetrator, De prögöelijke klöder van Olof Palme (The suspected murderer by Olof Palme). Why not state it?

A source list and bibliography for Jordås's book is available at Natur & Kultur's website, but even there Smith's and Pennartz's books are conspicuous by their absence.

Jordås describes himself as a «documentary journalist who has examined hundreds of murder cases». That he, as a long-time employee of Sveriges Radio, and with that focus, would somehow have missed Paul Smith's books is not possible, at least not after he decided to write about the same thing.

Jordås claims that he himself has sat and gone through enormous amounts of material. But pretty much all the material he uses is already in Smith's books. Jordås has essentially copied his substance, his argumentation and his conclusions from Paul Smith, but rephrased everything in his own words so that there was literally no copying.

Whether this legally constitutes plagiarism can certainly be answered by lawyers, but to be presented as the first with something that someone else has actually done before, what should you call it? And what should we call the fact that Jordås carefully avoids mentioning Smith's books in his bibliography, and that he pretends to have come up with everything himself? At best, it's just dishonest and frivolous.

That Jordås even came up with the idea of ​​bluffing like this and also thought he could get away with it is strange in itself, but no one in his environment, no colleague could , have stopped him?

The fact that, in addition, one of the country's most prestigious and reputable publishers is aggressively promoting this and the major newspapers and television stations are uncritically praising it is bad.

Worse than usual, even. The media establishment has long been lied to and morally rotten, but now they apparently can't manage basic intellectual hygiene anymore.

Or is there another explanation?

In 2018, Thomas Pettersson and the magazine Filter were awarded with the gold spade for pointing out Stig Engström in the Skandiamannen and the murder of Olof Palme. It is not a far-fetched assumption that chief prosecutor Krister Petersson relied on the fact that it had won general acceptance when, a couple of years later, he dropped the investigation and tried to bury it with Engström.

It was a miscalculation. It rather had the opposite effect and, on the contrary, breathed life into the question of the then 34-year-old murder.

Why didn't they just drop the preliminary investigation once and for all, without blaming anyone? Perhaps because they want to establish a general consensus that the murder has been solved, the perpetrator found and the «national trauma» healed.

It is hard to get away from the feeling that the third state power is now making another attempt. When, despite gold shovels and Netflix series, it didn't work with Stig Engström, they had to bet on the reserve Christer A.

When Jordås visited SVT's Go'kväll on Tuesday, he finally got the inevitable question if he really believe this is the last book on the Palm Murder. He answers:

«So for me it is the last book, it is the point that the investigation, if [Jordå's emphasis] you were to single out someone, well then you should have singled out Christer A. /. ../My ambition is for it to have an explanation, so that you feel that this is an explanation that I can really live with, that is the ambition of the book.»

In other words, the purpose is not really to contribute to the solution of the riddle, without delivering something the common people should be able to buy.

Then at least try not to sell us something used.

JONAS DE GEER