I have been looking at pictures of UC3 Nautilus after her re-launch in May 2017. It strikes me than none show the deck hatch open. The deck hatch was also closed when Peter Madsen scuttled UC3 Nautilus, despite it being the quickest escape from the control station where he operated the valves (it's directly above the controls, and you can actually operate the valves with your head above deck). In another forum I also read police tried to open the hatch for 20 minutes, but eventually gave up (apparently Swedish television was broadcasting most of the salvage operation live). I can see the hatch is open on later pictures (during technical investigation), but they likely pried/cut it open. This suggests the deck hatch was sealed for one reason or another. If this was the case, Peter Madsen would have to remove Kim Wall's body through the hatch in the conning tower, which means he would have to life/drag her body through a 7-6 feet long narrow tube (about 2 feet in diameter). I deem this to be nearly impossible for a person of Madsen's stature. If I'm right about the deck hatch, dismemberment would seem the only way for a single person to remove a body from UC3 Nautilus.
GUILTY Denmark - Kim Wall, 30, Copenhagen, 10 Aug 2017
- Thread starter FrostOwl
- Start date
- Status
Logical_Inference
Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2012
- Messages
- 244
- Reaction score
- 2
I have been thinking about the different theories of what had happened, that has come up here in this thread.
My own theory is that it must be planned, but I am always open for other views of the case, as long as the dots can be connected. In my own theory I can connect the dots, so thats why I believe in that.
The theory about it being an accident and that PM must have panicked about losing his lifes work is something I have a hard time with connecting the dots. I will try to explain why here.
1. argument: There was a fatal accident and PM felt he had to hide it, because he was afraid of losing his lifes work.
2. argument: He had to dismember the body to get it out of the submarine.
3. argument: He sank his submarine deliberately after he was discovered on the sea.
This last argument is exactly what I cant connect with the other arguments. Why would he want to sink the submarine if it is so important for him so he dismember a body just to save the submarine and the work on it?
It doesnt connect. I cant get into my head why he would do that.
Maybe someone here can find the connection and explain to me?
My own theory is that it must be planned, but I am always open for other views of the case, as long as the dots can be connected. In my own theory I can connect the dots, so thats why I believe in that.
The theory about it being an accident and that PM must have panicked about losing his lifes work is something I have a hard time with connecting the dots. I will try to explain why here.
1. argument: There was a fatal accident and PM felt he had to hide it, because he was afraid of losing his lifes work.
2. argument: He had to dismember the body to get it out of the submarine.
3. argument: He sank his submarine deliberately after he was discovered on the sea.
This last argument is exactly what I cant connect with the other arguments. Why would he want to sink the submarine if it is so important for him so he dismember a body just to save the submarine and the work on it?
It doesnt connect. I cant get into my head why he would do that.
Maybe someone here can find the connection and explain to me?
SATA
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 995
- Reaction score
- 117
If it was planned, he would have to gain something from Kim Wall´s death. Do you have any suggestion as to what purpose her death might serve?
If planned, why sail her out in the submarine? He could have killed her anywhere where it wouldn´t directly point to him as the culprit.
They were both filmed and photographed on the way out from Refshaleøen.
I think there might have been an accident on board. The nature of the accident I don´t know.
Another possibility: He might have made advances at her and it went rough resulting in her death, one way or another.
Was Peter Madsen drunk? Was he on any kind of drug? That might explain some things. The mess he made of it all first and foremost. Logic takes a back seat if that is the case.
I have a feeling PM doesn´t think what he did is all that bad. He wants out of prison NOW. He is used to getting things done his way.
It is scary that apparently he doesn´t consider dismembering a body and dumping the six bits in the ocean as an unthinkably horrible thing to do. "Buried her at sea" makes it sound almost like a noble act.
Does he think, as the captain of the sub, he had the right to do that? Is he that delusional, so used to living his life in his imagined little kingdom?
ZaZara
AstraZaZara
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2014
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 18,159
BBM
IMHO a burial at sea might have been a noble act if they were sailing somewhere in the Great Ocean and no land or ship was in sight. But they were next to Copenhagen! or Sweden. Or even Germany. That man must live in a parallel universe, at least for the time being when it comes in handy. He had no trouble returning to reality once he surfaced.
I wonder what the experts make of his state of mind.
SATA
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 995
- Reaction score
- 117
I can see what you mean, I have no explanation other than panic.
It wasn't deep (22') where he sank the submarine, police were able to salvage it, so maybe he believed he could salvage it later.
I get the impression he thinks he's very smart and that police are dumb. I think perhaps when he was younger people were impressed and fawned over him and he became arrogant, but that's not working for him any more.
I get the impression he thinks he's very smart and that police are dumb. I think perhaps when he was younger people were impressed and fawned over him and he became arrogant, but that's not working for him any more.
SATA
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 995
- Reaction score
- 117
It certainly doesn´t work with the police!
Something I have wondered about:
I know there is no shower on Nautilus.
PM´s clothes looked clean, so he could have chopped up poor Kim Wall while naked (horrible to write this, I am sorry!!!), but there must have been physical evidence from her on his bare skin, he couldn´t have showered.
I don´t think that dip in the ocean would have been enough to clean his body, especially with clothes to "seal" it in.
Perhaps that is why he was arrested so fast.
Can´t get over those fingernails of his as we have seen on an HD photo. :/
ZaZara
AstraZaZara
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2014
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 18,159
MADSEN WAS FILMED IN THE HOURS BEFORE HE WENT TO SEA WITH KIM WALL
Aftonbladet
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a...mmarna-innan-han-gick-till-sjoss-med-kim-wall
An Australian film team met Peter Madsen the hours before he sailed off with the Nautlius. This is revealed by Danish BT today.
The police will review the film and hear the film team.
During the day prior to Peter Madsen and Kim Wall leaving on the Nautilus submarine, the inventor was followed by an Australian film team for the documentary film entitled "Rocket Man".
The film and the interrogations of the film makers are important pieces of puzzle to create an image of what really happened onboard the boat - something that only Peter Madsen knows.
"It is clear that the video material is interesting to us. The most important thing for us, however, is to chart their boat trip. In particular, I want to know what he did when he sailed off, I'm most interested in that," says Jens Møller, who heads the investigation.
The film team from Australia was led by Emma Sullivan who refused to comment on the filmed interview that was made with Madsen before the police interrogated them.
Previously, witnesses said they saw Kim Wall interview Peter Madsen in his space laboratory before embarking on Nautilus, but that seems now a confusion and possibly Madsen was interviewed by somebody from the Australian film team.
The film material can help the police to map out what preceded the fatal boat trip, for example, what mood Madsen was in.
Ekstrabladet has talked to a man who was familiar with Madsen and spoke to him the same day.
"He was happy and said that all his projects were going well, but he said nothing about going out with the u-boat," said the anonymous man.
He himself has been out with Madsen in Nautilus but he can not figure out what kind of accident would have happened to Kim Wall on board, as Madsen refers to.
"I do not really know what could happen onboard that would cause someone to die," he told the newspaper.
The Australian documentary about Madsen was one in a trilogy of "remarkable Danes". It would have been shown in Aarhus as part of its cultural capital year but last week, organizers decided to remove the film from the program out of consideration for Kim Wall's relatives.
BBM
Aftonbladet
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a...mmarna-innan-han-gick-till-sjoss-med-kim-wall
An Australian film team met Peter Madsen the hours before he sailed off with the Nautlius. This is revealed by Danish BT today.
The police will review the film and hear the film team.
During the day prior to Peter Madsen and Kim Wall leaving on the Nautilus submarine, the inventor was followed by an Australian film team for the documentary film entitled "Rocket Man".
The film and the interrogations of the film makers are important pieces of puzzle to create an image of what really happened onboard the boat - something that only Peter Madsen knows.
"It is clear that the video material is interesting to us. The most important thing for us, however, is to chart their boat trip. In particular, I want to know what he did when he sailed off, I'm most interested in that," says Jens Møller, who heads the investigation.
The film team from Australia was led by Emma Sullivan who refused to comment on the filmed interview that was made with Madsen before the police interrogated them.
Previously, witnesses said they saw Kim Wall interview Peter Madsen in his space laboratory before embarking on Nautilus, but that seems now a confusion and possibly Madsen was interviewed by somebody from the Australian film team.
The film material can help the police to map out what preceded the fatal boat trip, for example, what mood Madsen was in.
Ekstrabladet has talked to a man who was familiar with Madsen and spoke to him the same day.
"He was happy and said that all his projects were going well, but he said nothing about going out with the u-boat," said the anonymous man.
He himself has been out with Madsen in Nautilus but he can not figure out what kind of accident would have happened to Kim Wall on board, as Madsen refers to.
"I do not really know what could happen onboard that would cause someone to die," he told the newspaper.
The Australian documentary about Madsen was one in a trilogy of "remarkable Danes". It would have been shown in Aarhus as part of its cultural capital year but last week, organizers decided to remove the film from the program out of consideration for Kim Wall's relatives.
BBM
The only reason for scuttling UC3 Nautilus must be that he couldn't clean it (disappear the evidence - he probably didn't think it would be salvaged). Dismembering the body of a recently deceased is an extremely bloody and messy affair. Despite having been filled with seawater for some 24 hours police technicians actually still found traces of Kim Wall's blood.
We don't know what time Kim Wall died, or what time Peter Madsen disposed of the body, but it's at least safe to assume she was dead before her boyfriend contacted the Swedish police. That was 3:40AM, and the UC3 Nautilus was sunk 10:30AM. Sunrise is just before 6AM, so likely Peter Madsen had disposed of the body by then. However, Peter Madsen initially claimed he put Kim Wall ashore at 10:30PM, which could very well have been what they originally planned (3-4 hours of sailing/interview). I will therefore conclude Kim Wall was dead by 10:30PM, and Peter Madsen spent the next 12 hours trying to come up with a plan. This is where the idea of a planned murder doesn't fit. If you plan to murder someone you (likely) include a way to dispose of the body. It was, in fact, the long absence that led police to suspect Peter Madsen. He would have known that the authorities would come looking for a missing submarine in Øresund (UC3 Nautilus was reported missing by one of Peter's friends around the same time Kim Wall was reported missing). Also, the police normally don't start looking for a missing adult before that person has been missing for 24 hours - at least. Initially they weren't looking for Kim Wall, they were looking for UC3 Nautilus. If he had simply returned to Copenhagen, moored UC3 Nautilus, and told the police he dropped Kim Wall off at 10:30PM, he would probably have had another day or two before police would suspect foul play. In short, killing someone on a submarine and then sailing around until the maritime rescue authorities start looking for you is without doubt the worst plan ever.
There is another thing here. Peter Madsen didn't sink UC3 Nautilus until a private motor boat came up alongside her. He shouted to them that he was heading for Copenhagen harbor (he was heading that way) with a technical problem, and asked them to stand by. He disappeared below deck for a moment, then popped back up as the submarine began to sink. What would he have done if the motor boat hadn't arrived? Would he had continued to Copenhagen, or was he waiting for a boat to come close? The whole thing stinks of panic.
My belief is that Kim Wall died (either murdered, or by accident) before 10:30PM August 10, and Peter Madsen had no idea what to do next. He sailed around for some time trying to find a way out, and eventually decided to dispose of her body by dismembering it and dumping it in the sea. He would likely have spent many hours trying to clean the submarine without success. The idea of scuttling UC3 Nautilus might have been brewing, but I don't think it was truly formed before he saw the motorboat. Otherwise he would either have waited around over deeper water (where salvage would be difficult) until someone came close (it's a very busy area), or simply scuttled her while nobody was watching (swimming ashore and claiming he didn't know exactly where UC3 Nautilus was).
"Was Peter Madsen drunk? Was he on any kind of drug?"
Peter didn't drink or take recreational drugs (I don't know about prescription drugs).
"I have a feeling PM doesn´t think what he did is all that bad."
My thoughts exactly. This is trademark of antisocial personality disorder (which I claim Peter Madsen has displayed for years, and which would explain how he could dismember Kim Wall's body and call it a burial).
Note: we don't know if Peter Madsen chose the "burial at sea" phrase. That could have been suggested by his lawyer to make the whole story sound better. I don't think anyone but Peter Madsen knew Kim Wall was dismembered when that statement came out.
It's possible there were spare coveralls in UC3 Nautilus. The submarine was a work in progress, so tools and coveralls might have been laying around. I was actually looking into this a few days ago. (this is gonna get geeky) Peter Madsen normally wear an Australian tank crew suit (or at least a suit that looks like Australian jellybean camouflage). It's darker green and has a zip, instead of the lighter US M65 buttoned coveralls he wore when arrested (these are normally worn by his team). All the recent pictures (from before this case) has Peter in his darker zipped overalls, and his team in lighter M65 buttoned overalls. However, from the last pictures of Kim Wall and Peter Madsen I have not been able to determine fully which overalls he wore when they sailed out, but the best picture seems to suggest he did wear the lighter M65 buttoned overalls.
Some of the high resolution pictures from right after he came ashore (yes, the ones with dirty fingernails) show specks on sleeves and legs. However, this could easily be dirt and oil, and one would expect the overalls to look like a butchers apron if he wore them while dismembering Kim Wall.
I would prefer not to speculate about Peter Madsen's deadly accident story, but it seems many people can't fathom how such a thing is even possible, so I'll give an example.
Let's say Kim Wall and Peter Madsen sails out of Copenhagen harbor to dive where he normally dive. The submarine is now stopped and Peter Madsen begin filling the dive tanks. This is a rather complicated affair, where he has to let air out while flooding the tanks (two separate tanks than must be filled in sync not to destabilize the whole submarine). Those who have seen the dive video might remember how long it took.
If a serious accident happens while the submarine is submerged Peter Madsen cannot both attend the injured and bring the submarine to the surface. If, and this is pure speculation to illustrate my point, an accident caused both unconsciousness and artery bleeding it would almost certainly lead to death.
Nobody but Peter Madsen would even consider diving alone. In fact, one of the crewmembers said Peter Madsen was the only one able to dive UC3 Nautilus alone.
Let's say Kim Wall and Peter Madsen sails out of Copenhagen harbor to dive where he normally dive. The submarine is now stopped and Peter Madsen begin filling the dive tanks. This is a rather complicated affair, where he has to let air out while flooding the tanks (two separate tanks than must be filled in sync not to destabilize the whole submarine). Those who have seen the dive video might remember how long it took.
If a serious accident happens while the submarine is submerged Peter Madsen cannot both attend the injured and bring the submarine to the surface. If, and this is pure speculation to illustrate my point, an accident caused both unconsciousness and artery bleeding it would almost certainly lead to death.
Nobody but Peter Madsen would even consider diving alone. In fact, one of the crewmembers said Peter Madsen was the only one able to dive UC3 Nautilus alone.
Logical_Inference
Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2012
- Messages
- 244
- Reaction score
- 2
This is interesting. I havent read about it before, that he did shout that to them.
Somehow it tells me that he wanted them to leave. He didnt want to be found. I dont see any panic here except from being discovered. He then apparently realised that the game was over and decided to sink the boat and go with the people that found him.
SATA
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 995
- Reaction score
- 117
I am wondering about that because he is detained for negligent manslaughter under particularly aggravating circumstances.
Particularly aggravating circumstances normally involve drugs and/or alcohol.
IMO most accidents - especially fatal accidents - happen when people aren't paying close attention to their environment: rushing down narrow stairs without hanging on to a rail, working with dangerous equipment when distracted by something else. The body and nervous system are designed to preserve us. I don't think Kim Wall would've been doing anything but watching him, and would likely have been on high physical alert in that strange environment. I don't believe those are circumstances in which a fatal accident would happen, unless, for eg, there was a sharp/heavy object that came crashing down on her head.
Will certainly be interesting to hear what the circumstances of the accident are. The overwhelming number of those 'fell down the stairs and hit her head and died' accidents, are, IMO, murders that noone else saw.
SATA
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2005
- Messages
- 995
- Reaction score
- 117
Originally Posted by MONDA
I would prefer not to speculate about Peter Madsen's deadly accident story, but it seems many people can't fathom how such a thing is even possible,
I would like to react to this too.
Yes, it is hard to wrap your head around that to cover up an accident, PM sawed off Kim Wall´s arms, legs and HEAD, then punctured her body for crying out loud!
It is very ugly, very brutal.
ZaZara
AstraZaZara
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2014
- Messages
- 8,454
- Reaction score
- 18,159
BBM
PM is not obliged to tell.
If LE does not manage to find the missing parts of Kim Wall's remains, and IMHO the chances that they will find them are not very high, this may become a very complicated case in the legal sense. If I remember well, the cause of death could not be derived from the torso - but perhaps the details of the autopsy and further investigation will clarify that later.
Tampering with a corpse is possibly the only charge LE might be able to prove.
He specifically asked them to hang around while he tried to fix something. Why would that make you think he wanted them to leave?
Likely a technicality. He was charged Friday afternoon. At that stage the police didn't even know if Kim Wall was actually dead (even if Peter Madsen said she was). It's simply the smallest charge where a judge can give pretrial custody.
- Status