Skip to content
SVERIGEFAKTA.com

Last updated: View changelog

Arkiv · lagakraftvunna domar

Fallen vi aldrig glömmer

Dokumenterade fall — inte rangordning

Sverigefakta.com dokumenterar rättsfall där processen är avslutad och domen vunnit laga kraft. Vi väljer inte fall efter gärningsmannens bakgrund — vi väljer efter att domen är lagakraftvunnen och att fallet fick nationell uppmärksamhet. Fakta står. Läsaren drar slutsatserna.

Se den statistiska helhetsbilden

Enskilda fall är exempel — makrobilden ges av Brå 2021:9.

Överrepresentation i grov brottslighet

Så väljer vi

  • ✓ Endast lagakraftvunna domar (inga misstankar, inga pågående mål).
  • ✓ Offer anonymiseras som standard. Namn anges bara där familjen offentligt gått ut.
  • ✓ Ursprung, medborgarskap, vistelsetid och uppehållsstatus anges som datafält — inte som ledtext.
  • ✗ Inga adjektiv ("brutalt", "vidrigt"). Inga detaljer utöver dom och etablerad media.
  • ✗ Inga misstankar, inga rykten, inga rättsprocesser som inte är avslutade.

Vill du bidra med ett fall?

Vi tar bara med lagakraftvunna domar. Skicka domsnummer, minst en primärkälla (tingsrätts- eller hovrättsdom) och två etablerade medielänkar.

  • •domsnummer (t.ex. B 1234-24)
  • •instans (tingsrätt/hovrätt/HD)
  • •medielänkar med datum

n824euiy@anonaddy.com

13
Dokumenterade fall
1
Verkställda utvisningar
11
Kvar i Sverige
4
Med tidigare domar

The question this page answers

How are individual criminal cases selected into public memory — and when can we say that a verdict is final and an individual event has become documented fact?

At a glance

Key figures — the most important numbers on this page

Sole selection criterion

Final only

No suspicions, no pending processes, no political categorisation

Facts stand — reader interprets

0 adjectives

No value words (»brutal«, »horrific«), no details beyond verdict and established media

Source requirement per case

3 channels

Case number + primary source (verdict) + at least two established media links

Classification system

6 categories

Honor violence · Terror · Gang violence · Sex crime · Individual perpetrator · Partner relation

Typical time from event to final verdict

≈2–3 yrs

District court → appellate court → possibly Supreme Court; varies with case complexity

Appealed to appellate court

≈70 %

Courts Administration — most serious cases tried in two instances

Leave to appeal granted by Supreme Court

≈3 %

Courts Administration — Supreme Court only hears precedent cases

Deportation enforced after served sentence

≈45 %

Migration Agency + Prison Service — others: stay, delayed, not yet enforced

What does the data show?

Objective observations — not interpretations

  • Sverigefakta.com documents criminal cases where the verdict has become final — not suspects, not pending cases, not cases where someone was acquitted. This is a strict methodological criterion that distinguishes the archive from ongoing media reporting.
  • Cases are not selected by the perpetrator's background. The criterion is that the process is closed AND that the case received national attention. Background data (origin, citizenship, time in Sweden, residence status) is shown as data fields when it appears in the verdict — not as guiding text.
  • The chain from event to final verdict typically takes 2–3 years for serious crimes. About 70 % of serious cases are appealed to the appellate court; only about 3 % are granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. A verdict becomes final when the appeal window has expired or when the last instance has ruled.
  • Deportation after serving a sentence is not automatic. The Migration Agency and Prison Service enforce about 45 % of deportation orders from serious criminal cases. The rest fall on enforcement obstacles, delayed enforcement, or the perpetrator cannot be located after release.
  • Individual cases are examples — not proof of larger patterns. The aggregate picture for crime trends is given by Brå 2021:9 and later reports. The case archive documents concrete events behind the numbers; the statistical picture documents frequency.
  • Victims are anonymised by default. Names are only given where the family has spoken publicly — this is a journalistic minimum standard that differs from many foreign crime editorial policies.

Method note
The archive builds on three parallel sources per case: (1) case number and instance from the Prosecution Authority or court (primary source), (2) at least two established media links with dates (verification), (3) public data on outcomes (Prison Service, Migration Agency) for sentence and enforcement. Cases without all three sources are not published. We actively correct facts in published cases when verdicts change in a higher instance.

Definitions

How the numbers are counted — and what they do not cover

Final verdict (lagakraftvunnen dom)
A verdict becomes final when the appeal window has expired without any party appealing, or when the highest instance that heard the case has ruled. After finality, the sentence can be enforced and the verdict is considered established.A district court verdict that has been appealed does NOT become final — only the appellate court's (or Supreme Court's) verdict does so after the appeal window closes.
The legal chain
The chain of authorities handling a crime: Police (investigation) → Prosecution Authority (charges) → court (district/appellate/Supreme) → Prison Service (enforcement) → Migration Agency (any deportation). Each step is a prerequisite for the next.
Leave to appeal to Supreme Court
The Supreme Court only hears cases of precedent interest — those where the outcome can guide future legal application. About 3 % of applications are granted. For individual cases this means the appellate court's verdict is the final one in over 95 % of cases.
Deportation on grounds of crime
Under Chapter 8a of the Aliens Act, a court may order deportation of a foreigner sentenced for a crime with imprisonment in its penalty scale. The decision is made in the criminal case itself — not in a separate migration process.
Enforcement obstacle (inhibition)
The Migration Agency or a court decides that deportation cannot be enforced due to risk of persecution, torture or the death penalty in the destination country. Inhibition can be temporary or permanent and means the person may stay in Sweden despite the deportation order.
Delayed enforcement
Deportation that cannot be carried out because the destination country does not accept, because the person lacks identity documents, or because the person absconds after release. Differs from inhibition — here practical means are lacking, not legal grounds.
Serious crime
Crime where the penalty scale starts at one year of imprisonment or more, or where the law explicitly specifies a »serious« variant (serious causing another's death, aggravated assault, aggravated rape). The archive only documents crimes of this severity.
National attention
Criterion for inclusion in the archive: sustained coverage in at least two of the country's largest news editors (SVT, SR, Aftonbladet, Expressen, DN, SvD, TT) over at least two weeks. Excludes local cases and one-off news items.
Categorisation (the archive's six categories)
Honor violence · Terror · Gang violence · Sex crime · Individual perpetrator · Partner relation. Categories are descriptive — not political — and based on the act's character according to the verdict, not the perpetrator's background.
Data field
Objective data reported for each case: year, place, perpetrator (number, sex, age, citizenship if it appears in the verdict), victim (number, sex if anonymised), sentence (prison time), enforcement (deportation enforced/not enforced). Fields without reliable data are left blank — we do not guess.

Primary sources

Agencies and research institutions behind this page

4

agencies/institutions

3

reports & studies

2

primary datasets

Frequently asked questions

Short answers to what is most often discussed

It is the only point in the legal chain where facts are established. Before finality, the verdict can change, the case be remanded or the prosecutor drop charges. Documenting facts that can still change would make the archive unreliable — and would risk creating public profiles of people later acquitted.

Related topics

Logical next steps if you want to understand the background

Sources for this page

The data comes from official primary sources.

Report an error on this pageSupport Sverigefakta
Share this page:XFacebookReddit
Cite this page

Content and our own calculations are CC BY 4.0. Please also cite the primary source.

APA 7
Sverigefakta.com. (2026). Sverigefakta. Retrieved 2026-08-19, from https://sverigefakta.com/en/cases-not-to-forget
Harvard
Sverigefakta.com (2026) Sverigefakta. Available at: https://sverigefakta.com/en/cases-not-to-forget (Accessed: 2026-08-19).
Simple web citation
Sverigefakta.com, "Sverigefakta", https://sverigefakta.com/en/cases-not-to-forget (accessed 2026-08-19).
BibTeX
@misc{sverigefakta_2026_en_casesnottoforget,
  author       = {Sverigefakta.com},
  title        = {Sverigefakta},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://sverigefakta.com/en/cases-not-to-forget}},
  note         = {Dataset v2026.2, accessed 2026-08-19}
}
Permanent link
https://sverigefakta.com/en/cases-not-to-forget
More citation formats and rules