- Welcome to another episode of Scandinavian crimes. My name is Devante and say hello to my lovely co-host Delila. - Hi.
(...)
- And on this podcast, we cover famous Scandinavian criminals who made their mark throughout Scandinavian history. So today is part two of Joanna Mahler, you know, the crazy chick.
(...)
And this one is very, very juicy. And I say it's juicy because you'll really understand how unhinged she was. And also she wasn't that bright in my opinion, and you'll see why obviously. But in August, 2016, Sweden was definitely shocked by this horrific tragedy.(...) During a man in his sixties who discovered brutally murdered with a knife and his wife severely injured at the summer cottage outside of Arboga. Initially the suspicions fell on the couple's daughter, Joanna and her partner, Mohammed. Despite the extensive questioning, the police lacked sufficient evidence for an arrest. However, additional leads involving Joanna came to light, which is what this part is about basically. Leading up to part one, and it's gonna be overlap obviously, just in case you weren't sure about that.
(...)
So I want you to, you know, get, you know the usual, you know, just, I know you're gonna listen to this podcast, grab your phone, you know, just putting your AirPods or putting your headphones, you know, get tucked into a corner, you know, grab your coffee, tea, snacks, breakfast, whatever time you're listening to this, tuck yourself in a corner and prepare yourself for a ride. Because this is a story of Joanna Mahler.
(...)
On a warm August evening in 2015, Joanna and her then husband, Aki Pasila celebrated his birthday with their two year old twins at the summer house in Grand Leiden.
(...)
They enjoyed the dinner at the pier around 1830, and two hours later, Joanna returned to the house with the twins to put them to bed.
(...)
Afterward, Joanna messaged Aki, intending to join him at the beach once the children were asleep. However, she fell asleep with the children shortly after, as Aki did not respond.(...) The following day, Joanna woke up and took the children to the beach, expecting to find Aki at the pier.(...) She assumed he might have chosen to sleep outside, ignoring her messages to avoid tending to the children in the morning.
(...)
Not until after nine did Joanna begin searching for Aki.(...) Heading to the pier, Joanna found no trace of Aki. All that remained was his phone on the table. With no signs of their boat, Joanna being concerned, dialed 1112, and once again for my American folk, that's pretty much 911,
(...)
without hesitation to report her husband's disappearance.
(...)
Tragically, the birthday celebration turned into a tragedy when Aki was found dead, his body in the water, hidden close to the pier.
(...)
Police in the ambulance arrived to investigate the apparent drowning accident. However, the two police officers harbored suspicions that something was amiss.(...) The police officers noted Joanna's behavior and demeanor at the scene, finding it strange that they weren't allowed to make any calls.
(...)
Joanna seemed keen to resolve this incident swiftly, as well as discreetly, urging the officers to leave promptly. While reactions to the news of death vary, the officers found Joanna's response, particularly unusual, as she appeared unwilling to accept any assistance. They went to Shu-ping station to voice their concerns, but their report wasn't documented seriously at the time. Just days after his passing, Joanna applied for a substantial sum from his life insurance policy. However, the circumstances surrounding the insurance were raised doubts among the employees within the insurance company.
(...)
Investigators were contacted by the insurance supervisor from the accident and life injury department in Gothenburg.
(...)
They then presented the case to their superiors
(...)
and involved an unusual death in a life insurance policy worth 2 million Swedish crowns, which is a considerable amount.
(...)
The investigators were stuck by the fact that the policy was taken out only six months before his death.
(...)
The short interval between policy acquisition and the incident itself, as well as the swift reporting within six days, raised red flags for the investigators.
(...)
Upon further investigation, Joanna and Akhi once shared a home and had children, but eventually separated.(...) Then suddenly they decided to get married and take out an insurance policy. It was discovered that the insurance wasn't taken out by Akhi, but by Joanna.
(...)
The payment for Akhi's insurance came out of Joanna's account while her own policy remained unpaid and invalid.
(...)
This revelation prompted them to contact the police who were previously unaware of this fact. Despite Joanna's strange behavior at the summer house and the uncertainty surrounding Akhi's death, the incident was still classified as a drowning accident. However, the insurance company's investigators were not satisfied with the police's explanation. And in February, 2016, the insurance investigators decided to visit the location where Akhi had allegedly drowned.
(...)
Contrary to their expectations, the investigators found the location to be surprisingly beautiful, rather than the unsafe and rundown place they had initially anticipated.
(...)
They even sensed that at the time, it could serve as a perfect setting for a crime with no witnesses nearby.
(...)
The investigators also looked into Joanna's SOS call and thought there was something off about her distress call and noticed inconsistencies in her narrative. Furthermore, Joanna has offered contradictory explanations regarding her husband's death depending on her audience.(...) She instructed her children to inform her parents that Akhi fell from a scaffolding in Stockholm and passed away.(...) However, she told others that he died from a heart attack.(...) Joanna concealed the truth from her parents withholding the details of Akhi's death at their summer house. She also refrained from confiding in her sister and also kept details on the incidents from her friends.
(...)
During the investigation into Akhi's character, testimonies from his family, relatives, as well as colleagues and friends portrayed him as a very loving man. However, Joanna's family and their children's view of Akhi painted a contrasting picture.
(...)
Reports suggested Akhi drank excessively in Mystery of Joanna and the Kids frequently.
(...)
Moreover, there were instances when Joanna called Jiren, claiming Akhi was behaving erratically and that they needed assistance.(...) Yet just as parents neared the house, she would call again and reassuring them that everything was fine, contradicting her earlier plea for help.
(...)
This pattern was repeatedly done multiple times. After the investigators questioned Joanna's family members about whether they had witnessed any of this on their own, it emerged that they hadn't seen or heard anything beyond what Joanna had said.(...) She had thus constructed a narrative over the years portraying Akhi as an abuser and consistently being cruel to her.
(...)
The insurance company's investigations felt that it was time to involve the police and they scheduled a meeting in Shupi.
(...)
The officers who were at the scene insisted that there was nothing unusual about this case while the insurance investigators tried to point out the strangeness in the situation since it was unclear on how he lost his life.(...) The forensic report states that there's no explanation for why the death occurred, meaning it's an unclear death.(...) Essentially, the insurance investigators wanted it to result in an investigation, which is why they shared what they found, but no investigation was initiated when the death occurred on August 1st, 2015.
(...)
The insurance companies investigators scheduled a meeting with Joanna to hear her version of the incident.(...) After 10 minutes, she portrayed Akhi as a verbal abuser claiming he tormented her, calling him a pig.
(...)
Yet in the same breath, she could cry over him. But what struck the investigators the most was her anger towards him. She once expressed, "I wish she were alive so I can kill him."
(...)
The investigators increasingly realized that Joanna is being dishonest.(...) However, to avoid raising suspicion about conducting their own probe into Akhi's death, they avoid asking further questions.(...) Following this, Joanna explains that she wanted closure since some time had passed since her husband's death and she wanted her money to settle matters.(...) Her demeanor became progressively less patient during the spring of summer 2016, when she pressured the insurance company to end the investigation in order for her to receive the insurance money.
(...)
12 months after Akhi's death, Joanna's parents were attacked. That is when on August 9th, 2016, the insurance company investigators received a call from the police regarding Akhi's drowning incident. In 2016, two separate investigations converged on Joanna while the insurance company probed her husband Akhi's death. While the insurance company probed her husband Akhi's death, Joanna became a suspect in her father Jiren's murder as well.
(...)
She and her boyfriend, Muhammad were arrested but were shortly released due to insufficient evidence. As the police continued surveilling them, more evidence emerged and with enough information and evidence, they arrested the couple.
(...)
As the investigation into Jiren's murder progresses, the police reopened the investigation into Akhi's death. Consequently, Joanna's children were questioned, revealing her attempts to persuade them to fabricate stories about Akhi's death and her interactions with the insurance company.
(...)
During Joanna's interrogation, it surfaced that she had been present at the Grand Light in Pierre with the twins and Akhi to celebrate his birthday on the wedding of August 7th. This disclosure is supported by phone records which indicate Joanna's presence at the pier through calls and text messages.(...) Particularly around 2100 hours, her phone connects to the tower exclusively reachable from the pier, contradicting her assertion of being asleep with her children at the time.(...) Additionally, another call was made at 8.30 the next morning, registering at the same tower, indicating her earlier presence at the pier.(...) These inconsistencies led the police to suspect her in involvement in orchestrating elements of the incident.
(...)
Subsequently, the police contemplated the possibility of exhuming Akhi's body, which is a significant procedure.
(...)
Approval was granted for the exclamation in mid-November 2016. At the site,(...) there were at least two forensic pathologists who conducted a new autopsy, yielding no new findings from previous reports. Yet the pathologists initiated a new examination testing for algae in Akhi's lungs.(...) Surprisingly, only a minimal amount of algae was found with no traces detected in his other samples. This anomaly was peculiar, giving the lake's unusual abundance of algae in the summer, hinting at the potential cause of death other than drowning.
(...)
The possibility arises that Akhi might have been suffocated with a bag or plastic covering on his head before being deposited in the lake.(...) However, given the absence of bodily injuries, it was suggested that assistance might have been involved in the act that Joanna couldn't have executed single-handedly.
(...)
Now, police and prosecutors are investigating both cases simultaneously, and Joanna is being interrogated about both her husband's death and her father's murder.
(...)
During the interrogation, Joanna came up with a dozen different versions of what she did the evening her father was murdered. She holds an alibi for the night her parents were attacked, supported by her underage son, who informed authorities that they had spent the evening together at home.(...) After the son had talked to his father about it, they both decided to inform the police of the truth.
(...)
The son had been at his cousin's house when he received a text from Joanna, asking him to return home and take care of his younger siblings.(...) During his babysitting, Joanna and Muhammad were absent for some time, and upon their return, they claimed they were delayed due to traffic.
(...)
Joanna cautioned her son against revealing their absence to the police, urging him to state that they remained at home watching TV all evening.
(...)
The trial of Joanna and Muhammad began on May 8th, 2017. Throughout the legal proceedings, Joanna presented a conflicting image shifting between portraying herself as an innocent victim and a threatening, ruthless perpetrator.
(...)
At first, both Joanna and Muhammad denied the charges against them.(...) However, Muhammad eventually broke, confessing that the murder of Joanna's father, Jiren, and the attempted murder of her mother at Joanna's demand.
(...)
Despite Muhammad's confession, Joanna persisted in denying any involvement in the alleged crimes.(...) Joanna displayed outbursts in the court on multiple occasions. She even insulted Muhammad, calling him an idiot towards the trial's end. On August 21st, 2017, Joanna was convicted for the murder and attempted murder of her parents.(...) Additionally, she was found guilty of instigating the murder of her husband, Akhi, in 2015, and was officially sentenced to life.
(...)
Muhammad received a 14-year sentence for his involvement in the murder and attempted murder of Joanna's parents.
(...)
Joanna lodged an appeal against the verdict at the Court of Appeals.(...) Joanna's defense attorney, Amanda Hikes, specifically challenged the judgment regarding Akhi, highlighting the absence of evidence into the cause of his death. She pointed out the lack of comprehensive crime scene investigation back in 2015,(...) resulting in numerous gaps and a delayed start in the inquiry, which hindered the collection of clear evidence. On February 27th, 2018, the Court of Appeals upheld the district court's verdict on the Arboga case.
(...)
However, Joanna was acquitted of instigating the murder of Akhi. To this day, Joanna continues to deny any involvement in the Arboga murders.(...) She persists that no evidence makes her to the crime. In her mind, it was an injustice that someone could receive a life sentence for a crime they did not commit.
(...)
Joanna pursued another appeal and sought a review in the Supreme Court, but her request was then denied.
(...)
Wow.
(...)
- Yeah. - Before you start talking, I wanna say something. - Okay. (laughing)
(...)
- My thing that is interesting about this, and really sad, this is relatively new-ish. I was in college when this happened. This was like 2016, 17. I graduated 17. So the fact that the insurance adjusters, investigators, whatever, the investigators, they did a better job than the police. - Mm-hmm. - Far better. They found out how inconsistent her stories were. They literally pieced together all the details and was like, "This doesn't make any sense." And you know what the police did? They was just like, "It's fine."
(...)
And then until another murder happened,(...) oh, maybe they were right. - Maybe this is a serial killer or something. - I'm just like, that's out of control. How is an insurance investigator doing better? - The thing is, what's why this is so interesting is because even though they did all of the, they obtained transcripts from the SOS call, the phone records.
(...)
They did a thorough investigation and talking to the Aki's part of the family and friend group and also Johanna's, and they did everything.
(...)
And the police was like, "No." - Right.
(...)
- And I get it, maybe they didn't wanna judge the mother of six children who is just like, "You know, that's a possibility. I don't know what's up in their brains." But the two police officers, they were like, that was at the scene, even said that this is, she's acting strange, guys.
(...)
And their reports was not really documented.
(...)
So it's just a lot of flaws in here that I think is a bit sus.(...) - Yeah, I felt like, and like I said, the investigators for the insurance did such a great job because they put two and two together. Even as police, like wouldn't that be odd? I only took out an insurance policy six months prior. Your own insurance policy is not active. It's invalid. You're not paying it, but you're paying the insurance policy that has you listed as the beneficiary.
(...)
And you took it out six months prior. That's odd. - But the police didn't know that though, because they didn't get that documentation. So they wouldn't know until the insurance company-- - Yeah, the insurance, they told them eventually. They remember they brought everything to them. - Yeah, I know. - So I'm like, once they brought them that information, that should have been like, "Hey, this was really good investigative work. Let's look into this." They was just like, "Nah,(...) I'm okay." - You know what's weird too? Like the insurance company investigators,
(...)
usually they are previous police investigators or private detectives or something like that. So I just, like they knew how the system were and they were very shocked that the police didn't really do anything and that they didn't take them seriously.
(...)
And they were very disappointed and they kept continuing on for a whole year until they got a call from the police again. So they kept going and going and going until they got called again by the police for another reason for the other murder of the parents. - Right, related to the same person. - And they wanted more-- - That was the only way.(...) - Yeah, that's the only reason. - Pathetic.
(...)
That's what I'm gonna say, pathetic. - You know what's interesting too?
(...)
The SOS call, if you listen to it,
(...)
she said basically that she didn't find the body, but during the call that she found the boat and the body, but then when the police and the ambulance arrived there,
(...)
she said she didn't find them and the police found them. So it was very unclear who like found it when I tried to dig up the, like find research and stuff. But this whole second part, it was a lot of like what she said, counter what they found.
(...)
And that's why I think it's important for you guys to understand that it was a lot of inconsistencies
(...)
which made this hard, hard to like write honestly.
(...)
But if you guys are interested in listening to this whole thing, there's a lot of documentaries and also a lot of stuff online.
(...)
But she was very inconsistent in a lot of the interviews and other things as well.
(...)
But yeah, what do you think like how, if she did it, how did she do it?(...) Cause he was a grown man
(...)
and that lake is not really super deep and dangerous if you know that lake. So how do you think like he died basically?
(...)
I'm gonna take a piece of her story. So one thing,(...) that's how I'm gonna dissect it.(...) She wasn't good at lying but I'm not encouraging people to do this either. So, you know, I don't want this to be taken out of context but usually if you wanna be a good liar,(...) you take pieces of the truth(...) and then you may morph it or use it in out of context. So I'll give you an example. So she was like, okay, well, she went in her initial story, right? She was like, okay, well, she went to put the kids to sleep and he didn't answer. And she assumed that he fell asleep on the beach. Now I think what happened was he probably did fall asleep on the beach and then she saw an opportunity and basically suffocated him or basically, you know, exficcated him.(...) And from also what I know is that exficication for the most part, it looks kind of similar to drowning in terms of like, I think it has something to do with your lungs, the way like when you're trying to fight for air internally, like the way it looks, it kind of looks similar to like when you're drowning cause you're fighting for air the same way in a very similar way. So I think he probably did fall asleep or maybe she got him to fall asleep with something that doesn't quite show up in his body because we truthfully don't know when he died,
(...)
but you know,(...) it could have been something- - Because they didn't make an investigation on it. - Yeah, we don't know if, you know, they could have been a drug in the system that they didn't test for, we don't know. - I think that she drugged him. I think that she put something in the food. - I think so too. Even if she gave him like 16 melatonin. - Then he became sleepy. Yeah, exactly. - Cause then on a drug test that wouldn't pop up.
(...)
So that's what I think. I think like, you know, he probably did fall asleep, but- - Because he didn't have any markings on the neck when they did the autopsy. So I don't think like suffocation was the thing. I think she did something with drugs and I'm not a pathologist.
(...)
I can't say too many P's and ten autologists. - There's only one P.
(...)
Too many P's, only one P. - Too many, - You could have been like too many O's maybe. - Too many letters, okay, either way.
(...)
I think that if she would have drugged him, I don't think it would have been visible in the autopsy a year later is what I think, but I don't know. However, regarding the algae thing,
(...)
like I don't know if algaes exist a year later.
(...)
And like, it's just to me, because I don't know how it works. I don't know if stuff stays in the body a year later, if it just kind of disappears.
(...)
So that's why I'm like- - I'm gonna do that for you. - Oh really? Okay, go ahead.(...) - So, you know, like algae obviously can break down, but when your body's dead,(...) you know, there's nothing in your body breaking that stuff down. - Even drugs too.(...) - Some drugs can linger for a while, but you know, it depends on the drugs and all drugs specifically, it really varies. But when your body's like dead, there's nothing attempting to get rid of it. So, you know, when you're alive, let's say you,(...) even if you get bitten by a snake, your body's reacting, trying to get rid of the poison, even though it probably can't, depending on the snake, you know, you gotta go get help, but your body's attempting to do something.(...) So when it comes to like stuff like that, when they say like, "Oh, there's not enough algae in his lungs,"(...) comparative to what it should have been if he truly drowned, which when you drown, you inhale a ton of water, and then that much water is not supposed to be in your lungs. So there should have been way more than what was present.(...) So even though if it was dead algae, there should have been way more of the dead algae in his lungs, and it wasn't. - I think it was really smart that they did that though. You know? - Yeah. So they suspect that obviously he probably was suffocated somewhere else or on the shore, and then throwing his body in, and then algae, but little of it just got into his body because he's dead, so his mouth was probably open or it got in his nose, and he's not fighting it because he's not breathing. He's dead.
(...)
- I wonder, like, you know how she betrayed him as an abuser and stuff like that?
(...)
I wonder if she did that to the other husbands or exes and stuff. - She probably did, especially because other people knew him as nice, and then sometimes that can happen with abusers. Other people may know him as nice, but the fact that it was never a firsthand account of it, like not once. And anytime someone tried to help her, it wasn't even like, "Please don't show up. He's gonna do such and such." It was like she tried to prevent people from cooperating her stories.(...) So basically it was like, "Oh my God, he does this, he does that," but then the second someone tried to help her or trying to be like, "Oh, I can do something about that." No, don't come, stay away.
(...)
And even though like I said, that can happen in abusive relationships,
(...)
it sounds like she was the abuser(...) taking advantage of the fact that she herself was a woman and also isolating him to portray him as a monster. So that way she can take advantage of whatever she needed to do. Because remember from the first part, they classified her as like a really good manipulator. And one of the best things you can do as a manipulator- - But you don't think she is though. - No, she's dumb as fuck. - Oh my God.(...) - And the one thing they do as a manipulator is they try to isolate you. If people can't get to you, it's easier to manipulate someone because they're isolated.
(...)
So, you know, she's not, truthfully, she's not that bright. - I think she's good with understanding people and she's good with seeing and giving them what they like.
(...)
And I think that's the manipulation thing. And she's good in getting what she wants, basically.(...) Even though she's not as good as other manipulators we've had in the podcast before,
(...)
she, like, as you guys already know, she uses them, the people who are truly in need of like help and using them.
(...)
So,(...) yeah. - Yeah, she only- - Honestly, it sucks. I'm glad that she didn't really, like,(...) if you think about it, it all stems from her wanting money.
(...)
That's the whole issue. - Oh, she's so crazy. And her dad was giving her like- - And she wasn't even though- - She had an apartment.(...) She wasn't paying bills.(...) - She wasn't paying any bills. I don't know why. - She had, she made good money. No bills, her dad would still give her money. What more do you want? But that also proves a point that she probably was like some narcissistic sociopath because she just couldn't imagine life outside of her.
(...)
- But either way, like, I'm like, she had, she was living good. And also both of her parents, I guess, were kind of rich too, obviously.
(...)
It was like,(...) I don't know why she was so in need of money constantly, like,
(...)
and asking for what, $2 million?
(...)
Sorry, 2 million crowns or something.
(...)
I don't know. - No, she needed help. So,(...) well, that's all I gotta really say about it. She's dumb. The police is dumb. Good job to the investigators from the insurance. Did a better job. - Good job to them, honestly. - Good job.
(...)
- They also, for you guys, if you are interested, there's a lot of information about Johanna Muller.
(...)
There's also a documentary that questions the evidence against Johanna and her conviction as well.
(...)
And there's also an interview with her in that same documentary series. I did not watch it because, like, I didn't have any time, but they go through everything and, you know, try to justify that she have had a great injustice and stuff like that.
(...)
But I don't know, because I haven't watched it, but if you guys are interested in watching it, go ahead and do it.(...) - Yes, sir.
(...)
So,(...) how do you wanna end the episode with food? You already know these are food. - Yes.
(...)
I feel like summer is here, but it's not summer. So, grill, like barbecue stuff.
(...)
- Yesterday, I had a cheeseburger quesadilla.(...) - That sounds a lot. - It was delicious. It was juicy, succulent.
(...)
- Sounds cool. - It was really good. You probably would've liked it. - I still want my barbecue, though. - Yeah, you know.
(...)
I was gonna say something, but it's not related to the podcast. Either way, I hope you guys really enjoyed today's episode.
(...)
Be sure, you know, to leave us a nice little review, of course, you know, we work very hard to make sure we maintain the episode, give you nice information, bless you with our voices, and put a lot of effort into editing this to get top quality mixing and mastering. Please, just give us a nice little review, and we shall catch you next week. And also just watch the in-between episode between part one and part two. It's only like 10 minutes. It just kind of explains why sometimes a mastermind can get more time, because it kind of, you know, she got life versus Mahamika 14. It explains that detail, all right? So, it takes 10 minutes, if you want to understand a little better. And we'll see you guys next week. Bye. - Bye.
(...)
(soft music)