Norge - Anne-Elisabeth Falkevik Hagen kidnappet, krav om 9 mill euro, 2018-10-31

Jeg er enig i at det er spesielt at eks-svogeren gikk ut i media. Jeg vet ikke hvorfor han har sagt ting som ikke stemmer overens med det som de nærmeste har sagt.
I den krimpodden som heter "Jeg måtte gå til politiet (2)", sa eks-svogeren dette:"Ut i fra det jeg visste om deres forhold og det jeg hadde opplevd selv fra TH i perioder, så konkluderte jeg med at dette var et konedrap".

Spesielt at eks-svogeren er OVERBEVIST om at hun er drept før dette går offentlig, mens politiet etterforsker det som kidnapping og politiet ikke har sagt noe om spor i boligen.
Vet han mer enn han gir uttrykk for i saken? Da tenker jeg hendelsen som fant sted 31.10.18 og ikke historien mellom TH og AEH.
Hvordan kan man være overbevist om drap når det faktisk kan være kidnapping ut i fra det han visste da?
Oppførselen til eks-svoger virker mistenkelig og så ekstremt mot TH som man kan få det, til og med lenge før saken ble kjent.
Om det er så ekstremt som han får det til å fremstå så må vel flere dele det synet? Og da tenker jeg ikke på at noen venninner sier at det var turbulens i forholdet, men slle de negative karakteristikkene av TH.

Hadde vært spennende å vite mer om eks-svoger og hva politiet tenker om han også.

Spesielt at eks-svogeren er OVERBEVIST om at hun er drept før dette går offentlig, mens politiet etterforsker det som kidnapping og politiet ikke har sagt noe om spor i boligen.
Vet han mer enn han gir uttrykk for i saken? Da tenker jeg hendelsen som fant sted 31.10.18 og ikke historien mellom TH og AEH.
Hvordan kan man være overbevist om drap når det faktisk kan være kidnapping ut i fra det han visste da?
Oppførselen til eks-svoger virker mistenkelig og så ekstremt mot TH som man kan få det, til og med lenge før saken ble kjent.
Om det er så ekstremt som han får det til å fremstå så må vel flere dele det synet? Og da tenker jeg ikke på at noen venninner sier at det var turbulens i forholdet, men slle de negative karakteristikkene av TH.

Hadde vært spennende å vite mer om eks-svoger og hva politiet tenker om han også.

VG spesial måned for måned er oppdatert:

"FUNNET I EN SKITTENTØYSKURV
Politiet vil at Tom Hagen skal forklare seg: De har funnet seks blodflekker fra ham på to steder i huset. De argumenterer også med at det er mistenkelig at hans DNA er funnet under borrelåsen på sandalen til Anne-Elisabeth.
Det virkelig store beviset, mener etterforskerne å ha funnet i en skittentøyskurv:
Tom Hagens skjorte med ørsmå partikler av biologisk materiale fra Anne-Elisabeth. De samme partiklene finnes også i avtrykk fra den mye omtalte Sprox-skoen på åstedet."
https://www.vg.no/spesial/2020/loren...ned=januar2020

Fetad: Må disse partiklene ha blitt avsatt på samme dag? Hvis ja: Kan det hende at GM plantet partiklene på THs skjorte?

Her är en teori från en användare i subredditen "unsolvedmysteries":

If it was legitimate kidnappers, there's no way there would have been radio silence for so long. Communication attempts would have been made, and then would have ceased upon investigation if they had murdered her. They would *not* have kept her alive for that long without any attempts to collect money or give an ultimatum. Keeping somebody alive, administering medical care, and providing supervision are expensive. Here's the only thing I can make of it(and I fully understand that this is complete conjecture and is in no way supposed to be a completely accurate analysis of this case):


The husband wanted her gone. For some reason. That's the motive. Maybe their marriage wasn't working out, maybe now that theyve amassed a huge fortune, maybe she was romantically involved with somebody else. Maybe he was. It's obviously very complicated and there's no real way to know for sure, but here's why i believe that to be the case.


The entire situation was not set up to be a kidnapping. It reeks of a murder, set to be staged as one. Again, kidnappers would be much more likely to have made communication with the victims family and possibly even law enforcement, but they did not. Whatever happened that morning exactly is hard to say, but in keeping with my theory, it's likely the husband had somebody professionally take care of it.


Arriving home early isn't weird in and of itself, and could be explained by him being prompted by others(such as family/friends) that his wife was not responding to their communication. Again though, keeping with the theory that he *is* involved, it would have been him beginning to finalize his part in the plot. His sole responsibility would be to cover his own ass, and perhaps even his nerves were getting to him and he had to scour the house to make sure that nothing was out of place before he initiated his contact with police.


For kidnappers to say to not involve police is not totally unusual, but in this case it seems like a very easy way for the flip to be switched from "possibly alive" to "dead". This would be the best case scenario for Tom, by making it look like a kidnapping gone wrong. Kidnappings are *not* like they are in movies like Taken, where the victims family are the only ones in contact with the perpetrators. In many cases, law enforcement and and the FBI(even in international cases) are in contact with the perpetrators in order to establish a reliable line of contact. That line of contact is the most important thing for kidnappers.


In addition, the case being kept under wraps is a huge win for tom if he is indeed the one who ordered her murder, because that separates a *huge* amount of time between a full scale investigation and the crime. If the investigation being conducted in private is totally fixated on the kidnapper alibi, then that gives him so much time to double down and feel as though he is not even a suspect as well as get/keep his own story straight.


Now, after the case goes public is when it gets weird. It's after this point that it really screams to me that he's involved, because this is just not how kidnappers operate. It is *way* too convenient that, now that it's public, the family is in communication with the "kidnappers." This really just seems like he's trying to save face and to deter the public/police/media from thinking of him as a suspect. Didn't they explicitly say they were watching him and his family to ensure no police contact? And now it's public and they're again attempting to make contact? Doesn't add up.


It's also obvious that police beginheavily suspecting Tom as well, being that 1) they declared that she was most likely murdered, 2) the men in the videos are of no suspicion or concern despite no follow-up on them as suspects and 3) they began searching the lake for her body. They clearly have moved from suspicions of a kidnapper, to a domestic case.


Moreover, Tom is clearly feeling the heat by that point. *that* is exactly why he paid 1.3 million euros and received *nothing.* It's not impossible that the kidnappers had already murdered her and we're just trying to get some money out of it by that point, but highly unlikely given the fact that again, no communication and no attempt to collect money prior to being public. Just a half assed note indicating to pay money via monero. That's just not how kidnappers operate.


Finally, it's obvious that all of the things left at the crime scene were bought locally in order to be staged as a kidnapping. A single cable tie? Not likely to have been left by accident. In cases like these, a confession is required when little to no evidence is left trying the perpetrator, in this case tom, to the crime. If they had began investigating him in the beginning, there's a high chance that he would have broken down and admitted guilt.


What Tom needed most out of all of this, if he truly is behind the murder, is for nobody to suspect him. It's much easier to disassociate yourself from doing something so absolutely horrible when you're not being suspected. And that's exactly what he got. Because of that fact, and the fact that the "kidnappers" made *no* attempt to collect money until well after the police obviously were beginning to investigate Tom, leads me to really believe he is behind it at a certain level. I said earlier he may have hired someone professionally, somebody he knows, worked with, etc, but we will only really know until Tom ever admits to the crime.

Side note: I recently read the book "Never Split the difference: negotiate like your life depends on it," which was written by a very renowned FBI hostage negotiator. By the cases he presented in the book(involving kidnappers that wanted money, kidnappers that only wanted to kidnap/murder, etc), it made this specific crime stand out much more than any other typical kidnapping crime. I'd highly recommend checking it out

Nå poster du ting uten å ha lest hele VG-artikkelen og avslørte deg selv.

Det med skjorten ble lagt til side og er ikke lenger et relevant spor i etterforskningen, noe som fremkommer tydelig hvis man leser hele saken - noe du tydeligvis ikke har gjort.

Likevel satte du raskt i gang med nye bortforklaringer om planting av bevis på skjorten til TH.

Avslørende. Dette viser at du er mest opptatt av å bortforklare og finne på ting som ikke har rot i virkeligheten, uten å kjenne til fakta i saken. Her laget du spekulasjoner rundt et spor som ikke lenger er et spor.

Jeg kom ikke med bortforklaringer.

Du klippet jo bort den siste setningen i sitatet: "De endelige resultatene skal vise at sporene på skjorta ikke har noen verdi likevel."

Du kan kanskje fortelle om hvorfor sporene på skjorta ikke var et spor allikevel?

Jeg klippet ingenting og siterte bare ditt opprinnelige innlegg, før du oppdaget at du var på villspor og redigerte.