Two Aliens - The Submarine Case: The Murder of Kim Wall

🚢🕯️ The Submarine Case: The Murder of Kim Wall

Podcast: Two Aliens

In this episode, our two alien minds investigate the shocking case surrounding the death of Kim Wall — a story involving an experimental submarine, conflicting statements, and a disturbing discovery.

We explore:

• Who Kim Wall was — a freelance journalist covering unique human-interest stories

• Her interview with inventor Peter Madsen

• Boarding the privately built submarine UC3 Nautilus

• The vessel failing to return as expected near Copenhagen

• Madsen’s changing explanations about what happened

• The submarine being deliberately sunk

• The discovery of Wall’s remains in surrounding waters

• Forensic evidence contradicting initial claims

• The arrest, trial, and conviction of Peter Madsen

• The case’s impact on public perception and media worldwide

A deeply disturbing case — exploring trust, deception, and a crime that shocked the world.

👽👽

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

Usually when you think about a classic locked room mystery, um there is a very clear expectation of architectural boundaries.

SPEAKER_01 0:07

Right. A defined space, like a room and a house.

SPEAKER_00 0:10

Exactly. You picture a study with the door bolted from the inside, or you know, you picture a train compartment with the windows painted shut. The parameters are visible, they are fixed. And well, they're terrestrial, you can walk the perimeter. Yes.

SPEAKER_01 0:25

The puzzle has physical edges that investigators can measure and photograph and basically analyze from every angle.

SPEAKER_00 0:31

Aaron Powell But then you step into the reality of a modern maritime investigation, and suddenly uh that locked room is not a room at all.

SPEAKER_01 0:38

Not even close.

SPEAKER_00 0:39

In the compiled case files we are looking at today, the locked room was a custom-built midget submarine and it was completely isolated at the bottom of the sea.

SPEAKER_01 0:47

Aaron Powell, which completely changes the nature of the investigation.

SPEAKER_00 0:49

Aaron Powell It really does. I mean, we are looking at a crime scene that was suspended in dark water. It was subjected to ocean currents, and crucially, it was deliberately erased. It is the absolute definition of an investigative nightmare.

SPEAKER_01 1:03

When the boundaries of a crime scene become the ocean itself, the standard protocols of law enforcement are immediately stretched to their absolute limits.

SPEAKER_00 1:11

Because the environment is so hostile, right?

SPEAKER_01 1:12

Exactly. You are no longer just fighting against human deception. You are fighting against nature, you're fighting against time and against the immense physical pressure of the sea.

SPEAKER_00 1:22

So today, for you listening, we are undertaking a comprehensive chronological exploration of a 2017 Danish submarine case that um really shocked the world.

SPEAKER_01 1:35

It did. It was an unprecedented case.

SPEAKER_00 1:37

But more importantly, we are looking at the enduring legacy of the journalist at the absolute center of it all, Kim Isabel Frederica Wall.

SPEAKER_01 1:44

Yes, her story is really the core of this.

SPEAKER_00 1:46

We are relying entirely on compiled records and source documents today to understand not just what happened, but uh how the truth was meticulously unearthed from the depths of Cudge Bay.

SPEAKER_01 1:57

It's a fascinating look at forensic methodology.

SPEAKER_00 1:59

I want to understand how forensic science and just sheer human persistence managed to speak for someone who had been deliberately silenced. So um let's set the scene here, because to understand the gravity of this, we really need to know who Kim Wall was before she ever stepped onto that vessel.

SPEAKER_01 2:16

Right. To do that, we look at the exact date. Thursday, August 10th, 2017. Kim Wall was a 30-year-old Swedish freelance journalist.

SPEAKER_00 2:26

And she was incredibly driven from what the source materials say.

SPEAKER_01 2:30

Highly driven. She was dedicated to her craft, and she was actually on a precipice of a major life transition. At that exact moment, she and her partner, Oli Stoeb, were hosting a farewell party.

SPEAKER_00 2:40

Right? They were at Ref Shalin in Copenhagen.

SPEAKER_01 2:43

Yes. They were surrounded by friends because they were preparing to move to Beijing just six days later.

SPEAKER_00 2:47

On August 16th.

SPEAKER_01 2:49

Exactly. So this is a moment that should have been purely celebratory. They are packing up their lives, getting ready for this massive international move.

SPEAKER_00 2:55

But then you have to think about the freelance economy today. You know, you hustle, you network, you take risks, you are constantly chasing the story.

SPEAKER_01 3:03

That's the nature of the job.

SPEAKER_00 3:05

When Kim Wall stepped away from her own farewell party, she was doing what so many gig workers and freelancers do every day. She was seizing a rare opportunity.

SPEAKER_01 3:14

And this was a very specific opportunity.

SPEAKER_00 3:16

Yeah. She received a text message from a Danish entrepreneur named Peter Madsen. She had previously requested an interview with him, and suddenly he invites her aboard his submarine, the UC 3 Nautilus.

SPEAKER_01 3:30

He offered her a two-hour interview on the vessel.

SPEAKER_00 3:32

Context is incredibly important here, I think. Madsen was a really unique subject for a journalist.

SPEAKER_01 3:38

He was. He was an inventor utilizing this self-built midget submarine as a command center for a space rocket project.

SPEAKER_00 3:45

Which sounds almost like science fiction.

SPEAKER_01 3:47

It does. For a journalist looking for a compelling, unconventional profile, this was a highly intriguing assignment. But as you mentioned, freelance journalism carries an inherent vulnerability.

SPEAKER_00 3:58

Break that down for me if you would. How is it fundamentally different from, say, a staff reporter taking this exact same assignment?

SPEAKER_01 4:05

Well, staff reporters generally have institutional backing. They have a clear itinerary that is known to editors. They have an infrastructure of security and an entire newsroom tracking their whereabouts.

SPEAKER_00 4:15

So if they don't check in, alarms go off immediately.

SPEAKER_01 4:17

Exactly. Freelancers, on the other hand, operate with a much higher degree of independence. They are their own security, they are their own logistics team, and their own backup.

SPEAKER_00 4:26

Which means there's less of a safety net.

SPEAKER_01 4:28

Precisely. This independence translates to a higher degree of physical vulnerability. Wall recognized a rare opportunity to profile a highly unusual subject in an isolated setting, and she took it. It was a professional decision.

SPEAKER_00 4:42

So she boards the submarine at 1900 local time. The plan is a two-hour interview. Just two hours. Right. But the submarine fails to return to the harbor. The hours tick by. And you can only imagine the rising panic for her partner Oli waiting for her to come back to the party.

SPEAKER_01 4:59

The party they were hosting together.

SPEAKER_00 5:00

Yeah. At 01.43 that night, Oli Stubb officially calls the police to report Kim Wall missing.

SPEAKER_01 5:07

And that phone call is the absolute catalyst for the entire search. The timeline from that moment is critical.

SPEAKER_00 5:13

Because it's the middle of the night.

SPEAKER_01 5:14

Exactly. Hours pass in darkness. Authorities are searching, but it is not until the next morning at 1030 that the Nautilus is finally sighted.

SPEAKER_00 5:23

And it was found near the Drogden Lighthouse in Ku Bay.

SPEAKER_01 5:26

Yes. But the situation escalates rapidly from there. Just 30 minutes after being sighted, at eleven more water, the vessel founders and sinks.

SPEAKER_00 5:36

It just sinks right there.

SPEAKER_01 5:37

Right in front of them. Madsen is rescued from the water and immediately arrested.

SPEAKER_00 5:42

Wait, um, I need to stop you there. A vessel founders and sinks immediately following a reported disappearance, literally just as the authorities locate it. Yes. How do investigators initially separate what could be a tragic coincidental maritime accident from a deliberate malicious act?

SPEAKER_01 5:59

That is the pivotal question law enforcement faces in those initial hours. At first glance, the ocean provides an exceptionally convenient cover.

SPEAKER_00 6:07

Because accidents do happen at sea.

SPEAKER_01 6:09

They do. Submarines, especially custom-built amateur ones, do experience catastrophic mechanical failures. However, investigators are trained to look at the convergence of probabilities.

SPEAKER_00 6:19

Okay, unpack convergence of probabilities for me. What does that actually look like in practice for a detective?

SPEAKER_01 6:27

It means looking at the mathematical likelihood of multiple rare events happening simultaneously.

SPEAKER_00 6:33

Okay.

SPEAKER_01 6:33

A journalist goes missing. The sole other occupant is found alive. And the vessel, coincidentally, suffers a catastrophic failure and sinks at the exact moment authorities located.

SPEAKER_00 6:45

When you lay it out like that, it sounds impossible.

SPEAKER_01 6:48

The probability of all those independent variables aligning purely by chance is astronomically low. That specific sequence of events triggers immediate suspicion.

SPEAKER_00 6:57

So they didn't buy the accident theory for a second.

SPEAKER_01 7:03

They viewed it as a highly probable attempt to erase the primary crime scene.

SPEAKER_00 7:08

Which forces them to literally look beneath the surface. And it brings us to the interrogation room. Once Madsen is in custody, the initial charge is negligent manslaughter.

SPEAKER_01 7:17

Because they suspect him of intentionally scuttling the submarine.

SPEAKER_00 7:20

Right. And this is where we see the beginning of his shifting narratives. The compiled records show a very specific pattern of lying.

SPEAKER_01 7:28

The psychology of a shifting alibi is a grim but highly revealing area of criminal investigation.

SPEAKER_00 7:36

How so?

SPEAKER_01 7:36

A perpetrator's initial statement is almost always a projection of what they believe the authorities can prove at that exact moment.

SPEAKER_00 7:44

So they only admit to what they think the police already know.

SPEAKER_01 7:47

Exactly. They test the waters, so to speak.

SPEAKER_00 7:49

So what was his first story when he was first brought in?

SPEAKER_01 7:53

According to the compiled records, his first major lie was remarkably simple. He claimed he had simply dropped Kim Wall off on land safely earlier in the evening.

SPEAKER_00 8:02

That is an audacious claim because it completely removes him from the timeline of her disappearance.

SPEAKER_01 8:08

Yes, it distances him entirely.

SPEAKER_00 8:09

He is essentially saying, I did my interview, I brought her back to shore, and whatever happened to her happened on land completely independent of me.

SPEAKER_01 8:17

That's the narrative. But why does he choose that specific lie? Because it relies on the hope that the ocean has destroyed the vessel entirely. He's hoping that no contradictory physical evidence will ever surface from that wreck. He is gambling on the depths of Koj Bay.

SPEAKER_00 8:33

But as the investigation progresses, the pressure mounts. Law enforcement has the timeline. They have Staub's missing persons report.

SPEAKER_01 8:42

And they have the highly suspicious scheduling of the vessel.

SPEAKER_00 8:45

The ocean did its job. It sank the crime scene. But Madsen didn't account for the fact that police would not just accept his word. They were going to raise that submarine.

SPEAKER_01 8:55

Which they did.

SPEAKER_00 8:56

So when that initial lie becomes completely unsustainable, he shifts to a second narrative.

SPEAKER_01 9:02

He has to pivot.

SPEAKER_00 9:02

He admits to dumping her body at sea, but he frames it as a tragic accident.

SPEAKER_01 9:07

Right, the accident offense.

SPEAKER_00 9:09

He claims that a heavy submarine hatch cover accidentally struck her on the head, resulting in her death. And he says that in a state of panic, he buried her at sea.

SPEAKER_01 9:17

This specific type of adaptation is very common when perpetrators are cornered.

SPEAKER_00 9:22

It is like an algorithm trying to optimize for a shrinking set of variables. Every time forensics or the timeline closes a door, his brain instantly recalculates a new path of least resistance through the remaining evidence.

SPEAKER_01 9:35

That is a perfect way to describe it. He concedes a portion of the truth that she died on the submarine and he disposed of the body.

SPEAKER_00 9:43

Because he knows the police can probably prove that much now.

SPEAKER_01 9:46

Exactly. But he restructures the context to absolve himself of malicious intent.

SPEAKER_00 9:51

By claiming it was a mechanical accident.

SPEAKER_01 9:53

Yes. With the hatch cover, he knows she is dead, and he knows he was the last person with her. So he invents a scenario that explains her death without requiring premeditation or violence.

SPEAKER_00 10:04

But the physical evidence has a way of anchoring the truth. And the transition from a missing person's inquiry to a definitive homicide investigation hinges entirely on the physical evidence that begins to emerge from the water.

SPEAKER_01 10:16

The water eventually gives up its secrets.

SPEAKER_00 10:17

On August 21st, which is 11 days after she boarded the submarine, a cyclist discovers Kim Wall's torso washed up on a beach in the southwest of Amateur.

SPEAKER_01 10:27

A terrible discovery.

SPEAKER_00 10:28

And the forensic details here are really chilling.

SPEAKER_01 10:31

The compiled records detail that the post-mortem examination revealed deliberate tampering with the remains.

SPEAKER_00 10:37

What kind of tampering?

SPEAKER_01 10:38

Metal had been deliberately affixed to the torso in a clear attempt to ensure the remains would sink and never be found.

SPEAKER_00 10:46

Wow. How does a prosecutor look at that detail? I mean, does that completely destroy the panicked accident defense he was using?

SPEAKER_01 10:54

Absolutely. The affixing of metal speaks directly to cold calculation.

SPEAKER_00 10:57

Right. It's methodical.

SPEAKER_01 10:59

If you are in a state of pure panic after a tragic accident, you do not take the time to methodically weight down remains. Furthermore, the postmortem revealed 15 stab wounds, specifically targeting the lower torso and abdomen.

SPEAKER_00 11:12

Fifteen?

SPEAKER_01 11:13

Yes. This level of targeted violence completely shatters the illusion of an accidental death caused by a falling hatch cover.

SPEAKER_00 11:19

The physical body becomes the ultimate witness against him.

SPEAKER_01 11:23

It does. It testifies when she cannot.

SPEAKER_00 11:25

But the torso alone does not complete the picture. And this is where I am truly staggered by the logistics of this investigation.

SPEAKER_01 11:32

The scope of the search was immense.

SPEAKER_00 11:34

Finding further evidence in the vast, turbulent waters of Kuzla Bay weeks later seems statistically impossible. How does an investigation maintain the stamina and more importantly the technique for a marine search of that magnitude?

SPEAKER_01 11:49

It requires international cooperation and highly specialized forensic tools.

SPEAKER_00 11:53

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 11:53

The major breakthrough occurs on October 6th, nearly two months after the disappearance.

SPEAKER_00 11:58

Two months of searching the ocean.

SPEAKER_01 12:00

Yes. Danish authorities requested assistance from Swedish police, specifically their cadaver dogs. Now these are not standard tracking dogs.

SPEAKER_00 12:08

Right, they're specialized.

SPEAKER_01 12:09

These canines are specially trained to detect the specific scent of human remains through water.

SPEAKER_00 12:14

I really need you to explain the science of that, because the concept of detecting a scent through the physical barrier of an ocean sounds like science fiction. How does a dog smell something that is deep underwater?

SPEAKER_01 12:26

It comes down to the biology of putrefaction and the physics of water. When human remains are submerged, the decomposition process releases specific gases. These gases do not just stay trapped at the bottom, they dissolve into the water and eventually bubble up to the surface.

SPEAKER_00 12:42

But the ocean is not a still glass of water. It has currents, it has tides, it has constant temperature changes.

SPEAKER_01 12:50

Which is exactly what makes the dog so remarkable. The dogs operate standing on the prow of a police boat as it moves over the water.

SPEAKER_00 12:58

They're just standing on the front of the boat sniffing the air.

SPEAKER_01 13:00

Yes. They are trained to alert when they hit the scent plume of those gases at the surface. But because of the currents you mentioned, the gases do not rise in a perfectly straight vertical line.

SPEAKER_00 13:12

Right, they get swept away.

SPEAKER_01 13:14

So the dog alerts the handlers to a general sector of the bay, not a specific pinpoint location.

SPEAKER_00 13:20

So the dog barks or signals, but the evidence isn't directly underneath them.

SPEAKER_01 13:25

Correct. Investigators then have to calculate the current, the wind, and the water temperature to trace that scent plume diagonally back down to the source in the seabed.

SPEAKER_00 13:35

That is incredible mathematical work on Todd of the Canine work.

SPEAKER_01 13:38

It is a massive multidisciplinary effort. Using these indications, police divers were directed to specific sectors. And on October 6th, they found two plastic bags.

SPEAKER_00 13:48

Down on the seabed.

SPEAKER_01 13:49

Yes. These bags contained Wall's head, her legs, her clothes, and a knife. Six days later, on October 12th, they recovered a saw. And later in November, police divers found her arms.

SPEAKER_00 14:01

The recovery of these remains allowed the forensic pathologist to conduct autopsies that served as a scientific cross-examination of Madsen's claims.

SPEAKER_01 14:08

That's a great way to frame it. The autopsy interrogates the alibi.

SPEAKER_00 14:12

Let's go back to a second lie. The claim that a heavy metal hatch cover struck her head. The examination of the head showed absolutely no signs of blunt force trauma. None whatsoever.

SPEAKER_01 14:23

That finding is paramount to the entire case.

SPEAKER_00 14:26

But wait, I have to ask. Even if it was a glancing blow, wouldn't a heavy metal hatch leave some kind of trace? I mean, does water degrade bone that quickly to hide a fracture?

SPEAKER_01 14:34

No. Water does not degrade bone structure in a matter of weeks to the point of hiding catastrophic blunt force trauma.

SPEAKER_00 14:40

Okay, so the evidence should have been there.

SPEAKER_01 14:42

Exactly. A heavy metal hatch cover striking a human skull with enough force to cause death would leave unmistakable fractures, micro fissures, and structural damage to the cranial vault. The pathologist examines the skull, and if the bone is intact, the science proves that the narrative is a complete fabrication.

SPEAKER_00 15:02

So, confronted with the irrefutable fact that the autopsy debunked his story, he issues his third lie. The algorithm recalculates again.

SPEAKER_01 15:10

Another pivot.

SPEAKER_00 15:11

This time he claims that she died from poisonous exhaust gases that entered the submarine while he was safely up on deck.

SPEAKER_01 15:17

Yes.

SPEAKER_00 15:17

He finally admits to dismembering her, but he still desperately clings to the idea that the death itself was an accident.

SPEAKER_01 15:24

We see the exact same pattern of behavior here. He concedes ground only when he is absolutely forced to. Right. He admits to the dismemberment because the recovery of the remains makes denial impossible. He can't say it didn't happen anymore.

SPEAKER_00 15:36

So he admits the physical act but denies the intent.

SPEAKER_01 15:39

Yes. But he invents the exhaust gas theory to explain the lack of trauma to the head. He needs a cause of death that leaves no skeletal evidence.

SPEAKER_00 15:48

He thinks he's outsmarted the pathologists, but forensics caught him again.

SPEAKER_01 15:52

They did. The postmortem performed on Walls torso showed absolutely zero signs of exhaust gas's inner tissue.

SPEAKER_00 16:00

It is a phenomenal demonstration of how meticulous scientific analysis speaks for those who cannot. Every single time he offered a fabricated cause of death, the physical evidence systematically proved it to be scientifically impossible.

SPEAKER_01 16:14

It's a rigorous dismantling of his defense.

SPEAKER_00 16:16

It is also worth noting the sheer thoroughness of the authorities here. While they were building this case, police probed possible links to other unsolved crimes in Scandinavia.

SPEAKER_01 16:26

They had to look at his entire history.

SPEAKER_00 16:28

They thoroughly checked for connections to the 1986 unsolved Copenhagen case of a 22-year-old named Kazuko Toyonaga. Her remains were also found in the water decades earlier. Right. They ultimately found no connections, but it shows they were leaving absolutely no stone unturned.

SPEAKER_01 16:44

That level of thoroughness is essential when building a case that will withstand the scrutiny of a high-profile trial. By late 2017, the physical evidence had discredited all of Madsen's defensive narratives.

SPEAKER_00 16:56

But the prosecution still faced a hurdle, didn't they?

SPEAKER_01 16:58

They did.

SPEAKER_00 16:59

Because water does degrade some things. It washes away DNA.

SPEAKER_01 17:03

Precisely. To secure a murder conviction in court, the prosecution needed to prove not just that she was killed, and not just that he lied about it, they had to prove that it was an intentional premeditated act.

SPEAKER_00 17:15

Which is hard when the ocean has washed away trace evidence.

SPEAKER_01 17:18

Right. Lacking direct DNA from Madsen on Wall's body due to the water, they had to pivot their strategy. And this is where the digital trail becomes the absolute cornerstone of the legal reckoning.

SPEAKER_00 17:30

Let's look at the timeline for the trial. On January 16, 2018, Peter Madsen is formally charged with murder, indecent handling of a corpse, and severe assault.

SPEAKER_01 17:39

Those are the official charges.

SPEAKER_00 17:41

The prosecution's theory is that he intentionally tortured her before killing her. And since the physical crime scene was submerged and degraded, they had to look at his digital footprint to prove that intent. And the digital evidence they uncovered was profoundly disturbing.

SPEAKER_01 18:08

It was.

SPEAKER_00 18:09

Investigators accessed his computer and found an extensive, disturbing internet history. They found videos showing extreme violence against women, including decapitation. Furthermore, witnesses came forward to confirm his dark fixations on violent, non-consensual acts.

SPEAKER_01 18:26

This digital history bridges the crucial gap between the circumstantial physical evidence and a psychological reality of the perpetrator.

SPEAKER_00 18:33

It shows premeditation.

SPEAKER_01 18:35

It demonstrates to a judge that the violence inflicted upon Kim Wall was not an isolated anomaly. It was not a sudden panicked reaction to an accident.

SPEAKER_00 18:43

Right.

SPEAKER_01 18:43

It was a realization of a long-standing fixation that he had actively researched and consumed online.

SPEAKER_00 18:49

Furthermore, they did find traces of forensic evidence on his underclothing, which was secured right after his arrest, traces of DNA.

SPEAKER_01 18:57

Yes, that was a crucial physical link.

SPEAKER_00 18:59

He claimed this was completely unrelated to the events on the submarine. But when you combine that forensic trace with the digital footprint and the repeatedly debunked alibis, the picture becomes incredibly clear.

SPEAKER_01 19:11

The prosecution built a devastatingly comprehensive case. They pieced it together flawlessly.

SPEAKER_00 19:17

The trial ran from March 8 to April 25, 2018. And the strategy was successful. Madsen was convicted on all charges and sentenced to life imprisonment.

SPEAKER_01 19:26

The highest penalty. But we do.

SPEAKER_00 19:43

In August 2018, he is hospitalized after an attack by an 18-year-old fellow inmate. Then, jumping to September 2020, he finally admits to killing Kim Wall in a Danish documentary.

SPEAKER_01 19:53

After years of denial.

SPEAKER_00 19:54

But it is what happens a month later, on October 20, 2020, that really requires some analysis.

SPEAKER_01 20:00

The prison escape attempt.

SPEAKER_00 20:01

Yes. He attempts a highly brazen escape from custody. He threatens a prison employee, a psychologist, using a fabricated pistol-like object.

SPEAKER_01 20:11

A fake weapon.

SPEAKER_00 20:12

And he flees the facility wearing what he crimes is an explosive belt. The bomb squad is actually deployed. Police manage to surround and apprehend him just 500 meters, which is about 1600 feet, from the prison walls.

SPEAKER_01 20:26

This incident is a textbook demonstration of the pathology of control.

SPEAKER_00 20:30

Break that down for me. When you say pathology of control in the specific context of a fake bomb belt, what is actually happening in his brain? Is he genuinely trying to escape or is it something else?

SPEAKER_01 20:40

Well, the physical act is an escape attempt. The psychological driver is dominance.

SPEAKER_00 20:45

Dominance over the authorities.

SPEAKER_01 20:47

Even after a definitive conviction, after the exhaustion of appeals, the perpetrator exhibits a relentless desire to bend reality to his will.

SPEAKER_00 20:55

By making people believe he has a bomb.

SPEAKER_01 20:57

Exactly. Fabricating a weapon, constructing a fake explosive belt, and taking a psychologist hostage, these are acts designed to instill terror and force authority figures to react to him.

SPEAKER_00 21:07

He's making himself the center of attention again.

SPEAKER_01 21:10

It is a demand to be recognized as powerful. It shows that the behavioral traits that led to the crime were still very much active.

SPEAKER_00 21:18

Which really makes you wonder about the purpose of his admission of guilt in that September 2020 documentary. Does a confession like that years after the fact offer any real closure, or is it just another manipulation to keep himself in the spotlight?

SPEAKER_01 21:33

From a psychological standpoint, such confessions from individuals with these behavioral profiles are rarely about genuine remorse.

SPEAKER_00 21:40

What are they about then?

SPEAKER_01 21:42

They are almost exclusively about managing the flow of information. By withholding the truth during the trial and then selectively releasing it to a documentary crew years later, he is attempting to dictate the terms of his own narrative.

SPEAKER_00 21:56

He wants to be the author of the story.

SPEAKER_01 21:58

He wants to control the history of it.

SPEAKER_00 22:00

The concept of the spotlight, of who gets to author the historical narrative, is a critical issue in how we process true crime cases like this. Usually the media spotlight shines almost entirely on the villain.

SPEAKER_01 22:12

That's a very common flaw in how these stories are told.

SPEAKER_00 22:14

The perpetrator's background is endlessly analyzed, and the victim is often reduced to just a footnote in their own story, but the legacy of this case actively fights against that dynamic.

SPEAKER_01 22:25

The efforts to preserve Kimwall's legacy are a masterclass in recentering the narrative. Her family, friends, and colleagues recognized the danger of her life being eclipsed by her death.

SPEAKER_00 22:36

They didn't want her remembered just as a victim.

SPEAKER_01 22:39

No. They took decisive action. They established the Kimwall Memorial Fund.

SPEAKER_00 22:44

And the mission of that fund is incredibly poignant. It is designed to fund female reporters covering stories of cultural value.

SPEAKER_01 22:51

It continues her exact work.

SPEAKER_00 22:52

It actively supports the kind of nuanced journalism that she pursued. They also organized a global memorial run on August 10th, 2018, which was the first anniversary of her disappearance.

SPEAKER_01 23:02

A global event.

SPEAKER_00 23:03

It ensured that people marked the day by moving forward in her memory rather than focusing on the perpetrator.

SPEAKER_01 23:09

She also received significant professional recognition. She was posthumously nominated for Pre-Europa's Outstanding Achievement Award as Journalist of the Year in October 2017.

SPEAKER_00 23:19

Which is a huge honor in European journalism.

SPEAKER_01 23:22

It is. And her parents contributed profoundly to the literature surrounding the case by publishing a book, A Silenced Voice. It was translated into English in 2020.

SPEAKER_00 23:32

Her partner, Ola Staub, also contributed a vital perspective. In 2018, he wrote a critical piece for the Danish newspaper Weekend Davison regarding how the media handled the case.

SPEAKER_01 23:43

Challenging the sensationalism.

SPEAKER_00 23:44

Yes. It forces society to examine how we consume these stories, and that critical examination extended into television and film portrayals.

SPEAKER_01 23:53

The media adaptations represent fascinatingly different philosophies of true crime storytelling.

SPEAKER_00 23:58

Let's look at the 2020 series The Investigation, created by Tobias Lindholm. This series made a highly unusual creative and ethical decision.

SPEAKER_01 24:06

A very deliberate choice.

SPEAKER_00 24:07

Across its entire run, it never shows the perpetrator, nor does it ever depict the crime itself. It solely follows the tireless work of the investigators and the emotional journey of Wall's parents.

SPEAKER_01 24:18

Lindholm's approach is a radical deconstruction of the genre. By actively removing the killer's face and name from the dramatization, the series denies the perpetrator the infamy they crave.

SPEAKER_00 24:30

It just cuts him out entirely.

SPEAKER_01 24:31

It treats the killer as a negative space. By doing so, it forces the audience to center their empathy exactly where it belongs, on the dignity of the victim and the vital mechanics of the justice system.

SPEAKER_00 24:44

It wrestles the spotlight away. There were other portrayals as well, like the 2022 documentary Undercurrent, The Disappearance of Kim Wall, and the 2022 Netflix film Into the Deep, directed by Emma Sullivan, which utilized footage shot before the crime occurred. It was originally intended to document the space rocket project.

SPEAKER_01 25:03

Each of those contributes to the broader dialogue.

SPEAKER_00 25:05

They do, but Lynnholm's omission of the killer remains a fascinating study in media ethics.

SPEAKER_01 25:10

It raises a vital point about legacy. The physical investigation utilized science to speak for Kim Wall when she could no longer speak for herself.

SPEAKER_00 25:17

Through the forensic pathology and the ocean search.

SPEAKER_01 25:20

Exactly. And the legacy efforts, the fund, the literature, and the ethical media portrayals utilize storytelling to ensure that her professional voice is not erased by the actions of one individual.

SPEAKER_00 25:33

We have traced the records from the timeline of that fateful Thursday evening through the shifting deceptions and the brilliant forensic work that dismantled them right up to the courtroom reckoning and the perpetrators' ongoing attempts to assert control.

SPEAKER_01 25:46

It's a vast amount of source material to cover.

SPEAKER_00 25:48

It is. So as we conclude this detailed examination, consider the media you consume up to the present day. When a tragedy strikes, do we remember the creators, the journalists, and the bright minds that were lost? Or do we allow the perpetrators to steal the historical narrative?

SPEAKER_01 26:04

It is a question every consumer of media should ask themselves.

SPEAKER_00 26:07

The enduring legacy of Kim Wall challenges all of us to ensure that the silenced voices are the ones that ultimately echo the loudest.

SPEAKER_01 26:15

It's a very powerful reminder.

SPEAKER_00 26:17

It is a profound challenge. We began this conversation by talking about a locked room mystery isolated at the bottom of the sea. But what we found was that even under the immense pressure of the ocean and the even greater pressure of human deception, the truth eventually surfaced.

SPEAKER_01 26:33

The science and the dedication of the investigators made sure of it.

SPEAKER_00 26:36

Science, persistence, and love proved stronger than the dark waters of Koji Bay. Thanks for listening.