Police infiltrated a chat group where, according to the prosecutor, drugs were sold and individuals were “more or less openly recruited for tasks.”
Using an alias, police contacted someone seeking to hire help.
The police operative was then tasked with collecting explosives in Skellefteå, which the now-convicted man had manufactured.
The Skellefteå resident went to the agreed location, placed two explosive devices behind a container, and sent photo confirmation via the encrypted chat.
Subsequently, police tracked and arrested the man at his home.
A search of his property revealed more explosives and materials likely used in their production.
The court found that the man admitted to handling explosives but argued against the aggravated charge.
He also admitted moving the explosives, but his defence claimed unlawful police entrapment negated his culpability.
The court disagreed, ruling that police provocation did not cause the offence.
– The district court therefore considers the provocative measures permissible, the ruling states.
Reportedly, the man stated in interviews that he is not evil or a terrorist, claiming no involvement in bombing plots and asserting his task involved a rubbish bin.
The court dismissed this argument.
They concluded the man must have realised the risk of the explosives' criminal use.
– By delivering the explosives to someone unknown, thus losing control of their potential use, he acted with indifference to the risk that these dangerous devices could be used criminally, the ruling states.
He received a five-year prison sentence for a serious offence under the law on flammable and explosive goods and was also convicted of a drug offence.