Chumba Casino Advertiser (3:20)

Ready to level up? Champa Casino is your playbook to fun. It's free to play with no purchase necessary. Enjoy hundreds of online social games like blackjack, slots and solitaire anytime, anywhere with fresh releases every week. Whether you are at home or on the go, let Chumba Casino bring the excitement to you. Plus, get free daily login bonuses and a free welcome bonus. Join now for your chance to redeem some serious prizes. Play Chumba Casino today. No purchase necessary. VGW Group void board prohibited by law 21/TNCs apply I don't know about you.

Vanessa Richardson (3:51)

But leaving the house can sometimes feel a little stressful. You know, wondering if everything back home is safe. Most security systems only react after someone's already inside, which honestly doesn't feel very secure. That's why I trust SimpliSafe. Their system stops crime before it even happens. AI powered cameras detect threats outside your home and trained monitoring agents step in right away. They can speak to the intruder, trigger alarms and spotlights, and alert the police. That's proactive security you can actually rely on. I use Simplisafe myself and I love how simple it was to set up. The app keeps me connected no matter where I am and there are no long term contracts or hidden fees, just real dependable protection that lets me focus on life, not worry about what's happening back home. Right now my listeners can save 50% on a SimpliSafe home security system at SimpliSafe.com PavePods that's SimpliSafe.com Pavepods P A V E P O D S There's no safe like simplisafe on August 10, 2017, 30 year old journalist Kim Wall was in the middle of packing up her life in Copenhagen and preparing for a move to Beijing with her boyfriend Ol Stobe. That night, the pair was planning to host a going away party with their closest friends. But just a few hours before the festivities were set to begin, Kim got a text from someone she'd reached out to months earlier. The brilliant Danish inventor Peter Madsen. Kim had contacted Peter back in March for a piece she was writing about Denmark's space race. The competition between Peter's old company Copenhagen Suborbitals and his new one rocket Madsen Space Lab. Both of these home built aerospace companies were trying to send a manned rocket past Earth's atmosphere. Peter had been ousted by his old company due to his anger issues and disregard for safety guidelines. For him, the competition was personal. Kim usually wrote about rebels and game changers, so she was interested to learn Peter's side of the story. In the process, she uncovered much darker truths about the man known as the Danish Elon Musk. Ol lived near Peter's warehouse. So that day, when Peter texted Kim and invited her there for tea, she thought the perfect opportunity had fallen right into her lap. Kim's boyfriend Ol was a little hesitant for Kim to enter Peter's workshop alone. But she assured him she would be fine. That afternoon, Kim walked over to the warehouse. Thirty minutes later, as Ol was setting up for the party, Kim returned to his apartment with good news. Peter had offered her something even better than a sit down interview. A ride on his self made submarine called the Nautilus. Peter, he wanted to take her out on the sub that very evening. Kim said it would only take a couple of hours and she would be back in time for the party a short while later. Kim met back up with Peter on the dock around 7pm and they boarded the sub. Ol watched as the Nautilus sailed by. Soon it was underwater. Shortly after leaving, Kim sent Ol a few texts. She joked that she was still alive and said Peter even brought coffee and cookies for their voyage.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (7:21)

This is a pattern of premeditation. Peter carefully constructed an atmosphere of safety and trust. First by inviting her into his workshop for tea. He exposed her to a casual setting that would feel safe and would give him the opportunity to lower her guard for what would come next. Then he escalated to suggesting the submarine that very same evening, which on the surface sounds adventurous and exciting, but in actuality it was isolating her in an environment completely under his control. I also get wary when somebody pushes something on someone with a sense of urgency. He might have even made this seem like today's the only day you can do this. Which could really push someone into saying yes to something that they wouldn't have time to critically think about otherwise. He also layered on small acts of reassurance like bringing coffee and cookies for the voyage. And those gestures may seem benign and even kind, but they function psychologically as potential tools of grooming. They lower defenses, they signal normalcy, and they help the other person override any feeling of caution or discomfort even further. And this kind of behavior illustrates how some offenders can blur the line between charm and manipulation. Peter was actively managing Kim's perception of him. And this shows us how calculated behaviors can be predatory. Individuals often don't look dangerous in the moment. They can look generous or charismatic and even disarming. And that's part of why these cases are so tragic. The very qualities that make someone appear trustworthy can be weaponized as part of the plan.

Vanessa Richardson (8:56)

Well, Kim may have trusted Peter, but Ol didn't. And a couple hours later as their party guest started to arrive, she still wasn't back. Ol may have assumed that the ride took longer because the interview was going well. But by midnight, he knew something wasn't right. Kim would never miss her own party without sending a message. So at 1:45am OL called the police to report his girlfriend missing. He told them that she had boarded Peter Madsen's homemade submarine. The authorities were afraid there'd been a technical issue on the vessel. So by 4am A full on search and rescue mission was underway. Helicopters scanned the waters below and authorities tried to radio the Nautilus. They also alerted all nearby boats and ships that a black, privately owned 18 meter long submarine was missing and that the owner and a journalist were on board. Authorities scoured the water for any sign of Kim and Peter. The Nautilus wasn't built for speed, so authorities estimated that even at its top pace, it couldn't have traveled more than 21.5 miles from the dock. But that still left a huge stretch of ocean to cover. There was no way of knowing how long it would take to find them, especially in the middle of the night. Unsure of how much oxygen Kim and Peter had, authorities spoke to workers from Rocket Lab to find out. They claimed that the Nautilus was built to hold up to 30 hours of oxygen, meaning there were still over 20 hours left. But time was running out, because when the sun rose over the bay, people still had no clue where the Nautilus and its passengers were. By dawn on Friday, August 11th, reporters swarmed the docks. Then at 10:30am a breakthrough came. Search and rescue divers spotted the submarine above water near a lighthouse about a 30 minute journey south of where it had originally launched. A nearby boater who had joined the search edged closer to the sub and saw someone standing in the hatch. It was Peter. After he was spotted, Peter ducked back inside for a few moments and when he came back out, the Nautilus began to sink. Peter immediately jumped off and swam toward another nearby boat. The crew on board pulled him from the water and brought him safely ashore. When he reached dry land, reporters quickly gathered around him to ask if Kim was okay. But according to Peter, he was the only passenger at the time of the sinking.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (11:36)

So let's talk about the potential motives for why Peter might have chosen not to say anything to reporters. And the most obvious is self preservation. We see that often. He may not have considered that Kim told anyone what she was doing and with whom, or let alone that there would be photographic evidence of her getting on the submarine. And this Rescue mission could have actually taken him by surprise. So speaking too soon might risk revealing any inconsistencies or details that could later be used against him. So by staying quiet, he bought himself time to think or craft a story and avoid committing to an explanation that he likely couldn't sustain in the long term. Ultimately, though, whatever the motive, it truly boils down to control and to avoid accountability and preserve the image he wanted to project, especially under the spotlight of a national news.

Vanessa Richardson (12:27)

Well, everyone found Peter's statement concerning. But before the media could interrogate him further, authorities whisked him away. As they did, Peter gave a thumbs up to the cameras. Now people were really questioning his claims. Police needed to get to the bottom of Peter's strange return and find out where Kim was. And that's when Peter's story got even more more suspicious. Peter claimed that he dropped Kim back off at the dock around 10:30pm the night before. He said the ride went smoothly and that afterward, he took the Nautilus back out on his own. But while he was alone, the ship had mechanical problems. According to Peter, the ballast system, which is the part of a submarine that controls its ability to float and dive, began to malfunction. And when he tried to fix it, everything went sideways and he had to rush to make it back safely. He didn't even have time to close the hatch, which actually worked out in his favor because that's how he was able to get out. But Peter's story didn't do much to calm everyone's nerves. In fact, it only left them with more questions, especially since Ol had already told authorities that he had last heard from Kim just after she boarded the Nautilus. Peter.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (13:43)

Peter's behavior here is something we see with traits of grandiosity. People who rely on a sense of superiority often assume that they can outwit others. In this case, police, reporters, and even the public. But when pressed for details, their stories unravel. And that's because they often haven't actually thought through the consequences. Because of that confidence. That kind of overconfidence is risky because it not only blinds someone to their own weaknesses, it can also make them careless or appear sloppy. And because he's also viewed as being brilliant in certain contexts, he could have underestimated the ability of others to see through any inconsistencies in his story and then overestimated his own ability to manipulate the narrative. So Peter's attempt to be convincing here isn't just a sign of panic. It could be a reflection of how deeply his identity was built on being exceptional, but whose actual behavior revealed fragility, shortsightedness, and that need for superiority. Peter.

Vanessa Richardson (14:42)

Police felt strongly that Peter was withholding information. But before accusing him of anything, they visited the spot where he claimed he'd dropped off Kim. After all, on a slippery dock. It was possible she suffered an accident once she was off the ship, but they didn't find anything. There was no proof at all that Kim had ever stepped off the Nautilus. Peter was the last person to see her alive. So if something happens, terrible had happened to her, he was the primary suspect. And since his claims weren't adding up, Peter was looking more suspicious by the minute. Once he realized that investigators were catching on to him, Peter changed his tune yet again. Except this time, the cracks in his morbid mind began to show. When the full truth finally came out, the city of Copenhagen realized that a depraved psychopath had been living among them.

Lemonade Pet Insurance Advertiser (15:43)

If you're an experienced pet owner, you already know that having a pet is 25% belly rubs, 25% yelling drop it. And 50% groaning at the bill from every pet visit. Which is why Lemonade Pet Insurance is tailor made for your pet and can save you up to 90% on vet bills. It can help cover checkups, emergencies, diagnostics, basically all the stuff that makes your bank account get nervous. Claims are filed super easily through the Lemonade app and half get settled instantly. Get a'@lemonade.com pet and they'll help cover the vet bill for whatever your pet swallowed after you yelled drop it.

Netflix Advertiser (16:17)

This episode is brought to you by Netflix. Everyone is telling her she dreamt it. But in the woman in cabin 10, Lo Blacklock is determined to uncover the truth in the gripping new thriller coming to Netflix October 10th. Keira Knightley plays a journalist aboard a luxury yacht who witnesses a crime she can't unsee. Adapted from Ruth Ware's best selling novel directed by Simon Stone Watch the woman in Cabin 10 now only on Netflix.

Vanessa Richardson (16:46)

In August 2017, 46 year old Peter Madsen claimed that 30 year old journalist Kim Wall got off his submarine safely after their voyage. But now authorities officially considered her missing. And the more they feared Kim hadn't made it back alive, the more they thought Peter was to blame. Copenhagen authorities knew Peter could be a flight risk, so they quickly arrested him and charged him with involuntary manslaughter. However, some investigators believed there was nothing involuntary about it. Still, this charge was the best they could do until they knew more. It seems like Peter could tell that authorities were still piecing things together. Because two days after his arrest, he tried yet again to get ahead of the narrative. This time he admitted that Kim was in fact dead, but that it was the result of a tragic accident aboard the submarine. Peter claimed that shortly after they sailed away from the dock, the heavy latch used to close the top of the vessel suddenly fell and hit Kim in the head. The Peter said the force of the latch killed her instantly. As for her body, Peter apparently felt that a burial at sea was better than bringing her back to land. So he tied some rope around her, pulled her body to the top of the submarine and tossed her overboard.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (18:10)

This is a classic strategic move in a lot of offenders and something we often see in forensic settings. When the initial denial is no longer able to hold its weight, which is often the case when they truly are guilty of what they've been accused of. Some individuals pivot to a partial confession. They'll acknowledge things that they can no longer hide, but they frame it as a tragic accident or a misunderstanding, or even self defense. This serves two purposes. It preserves their image as someone who didn't intend harm, or in some cases was the victim, when of course, they were not. And it tests what investigators or the public will accept as an explanation. In Peter's case, this explanation, that he did a burial at sea, is an example that he is trying to manage the perception of him. Again, Peter is thinking strategically, but he's also still assuming that he's smarter and more convincing than he really is. And that can indicate just how invested he is in the idea of control.

Vanessa Richardson (19:10)

Peter had finally admitted that he knew what happened to Kim. But things still weren't adding up. And the authorities, along with Kim's family and friends, were starting to see right through him. They were convinced that Peter knew more than he was letting on. Not only that, but they had a strong feeling that Peter had killed Kim on purpose. At the same time, people close to Peter threw their support behind him, including his wife, half brother and many of his colleagues and interns at Rocket Madsen. But then, on Sunday, August 13, Danish police found evidence that Peter was still lying. It started when divers recovered the Nautilus and hauled it to dry land. Authorities stepped inside the vessel for a closer look. Once inside, expert investigators could immediately tell that the ship's sinking was no accident at all. There was no sign of the type of mechanical failure Peter had described. In reality, someone sank the ship on purpose. As far as the authorities were concerned, that person was Peter. And it seemed like he'd done it to destroy evidence about a Week after that discovery, authorities realized how sloppy Peter had really been with the clues he left behind. Because something disturbing soon came to the surface. A cyclist was riding near the area where the Nautilus had sunk when they spotted what looked like human remains on the shore. They got closer and realized it was a torso. Police immediately arrived at the scene to recover the partial remains. They quickly sent a sample for DNA testing. The next day, analysts confirmed everyone's worst fear. The torso belonged to Kim Wall. For a man who was supposed to understand water currents, Peter had apparently sent this crucial piece of evidence right upstream without even knowing it. But Peter wasn't just careless. He was also maniacal. The subsequent autopsy revealed horrifying details about what had happened to Kim. In addition to the torso being dismembered, the medical examiner found 15 stab wounds around the genital region. From there, the ME wasn't certain exactly how Kim died, mainly because her body had been submerged in water for so long. But based on the condition of her remains, the most likely causes were either strangulation or a throat injury. And one thing was clear. Her dismemberment had been premeditated.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (21:49)

So crimes involving dismemberment typically suggest a few possible dynamics. Firstly, dismembering is frequently done to easily dispose of the body or conceal evidence. But psychologically, there's often an element of dehumanization. To commit violence at this level, the victim has to be stripped of their identity, and they have to be reduced to an object to be controlled, disposed of, or even staged. In some cases, also, the act itself can reflect a need for power and dominance. In some cases, it becomes an extension of control and a way of exerting power even after death, it also indicates a very disturbing degree of emotional detachment. The ability to carry out such an act, whatever the main motivation is, suggests a profound lack of empathy and. Or a psyche that has become desensitized to violence. From a forensic psychological perspective, the brutality of the act doesn't necessarily tell us why the murder happened, but it does help us understand the mindset of the person who committed it. And that typically, someone capable of extreme objectification who likely felt entitled to manage another person's life and death on their terms, they have marked disturbances in empathy, morality, and impulse control.

Vanessa Richardson (23:07)

Is it possible that specific types of wounds, like, in this case, stab marks or strangulation, will tell us something about the killer's emotional state or maybe motive at the time?

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (23:18)

Absolutely. While we can't ever know with certainty what was going on in a killer's mind unless they tell us themselves, and we want to trust what they tell us. The type of wounds left behind can give us some clues about their emotional state or possible motives at the time of the crime. So take stabbing, for example. Multiple stab wounds, especially when they're excessive or not all immediately fatal, are often interpreted as a sign of overkill. This can suggest intense emotional arousal, like rage, jealousy, or a personal connection to the victim. And that tells us the crime was likely driven by strong emotion rather than any kind of cold calculation. Strangulation, on the other hand, is a very different type of act. It's up close, it's personal and prolonged. It requires maintaining physical dominance over the victim. And because of that, it often points to control, power, and sometimes sadism. By contrast, wounds that appear more calculated, like a single targeted gunshot or what Peter did here, can suggest planning and instrumental thinking. Those don't usually reflect an outburst of emotion, but rather an intention to achieve a goal quickly, efficiently, and within control.

Vanessa Richardson (24:33)

Authorities now viewed Peter Madsen as nothing more than a sick, twisted killer. They quickly upgraded his charges from involuntary men manslaughter to premeditated murder. They also added charges for the indecent handling of a corpse. Investigators believe that the reason Peter dismembered Kim's body was because submarine hatches are narrow and steep, so they concluded that breaking the body into pieces was the only way he could have moved it. And finally, based on the stab wounds, authorities delivered a third charge for sexual relationship other than intercourse of a particularly dangerous nature.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (25:11)

Based on that finding, this indicates to me that the stab wounds were interpreted as having a sexual component because of where they were located. So, in other words, the violence also appeared to target intimate areas of the body. He stabbed her in the genital area, and that is sexual in nature if you really break it down.

Vanessa Richardson (25:29)

Peter pleaded not guilty on all charges, but to investigators, he clearly had a sexual motivation for the crime. However, they still didn't have a full picture of what had actually happened. And if they wanted to put Peter Madsen away, then they'd have to figure it out. So in September 2017, they sent divers back down to see what else they could find. And they ended up uncovering things that explained the true extent of Peter's evil. Kim's head, clothing, and a knife, believed to be the murder weapon, were found in plastic bags near the shoreline where her torso had been discovered weeks earlier. Divers also found her legs, which were bound together with metal pipes attached, most likely to weigh them down. Authorities presented all of this evidence to Peter, and even when staring down the proof of his crimes. Peter insisted that Kim's death was an accident and denied any responsibility. To some people, this level of denial showed that Peter knew his actions were foolish and that he'd realized he wasn't clever. More importantly, investigators didn't believe a word he said. They did, however, keep trying to understand what had led him to carry out such a gruesome act. And when they seized Peter's laptop and other devices, they realized his twisted sexual fantasies had been been bubbling under the surface for a long time. Peter's personal computer was full of downloaded videos of women who appeared to be strangled, tortured, and decapitated. Each video mirrored the real world horror that had gone down in his submarine, which helped investigators understand that Peter's violent sexual fantasies had not only been his motive for the murder, but for the dismember rememberment as well. From beginning to end, Peter Madsen had carried out something truly inhuman. As news of Peter's arrest and charges made headlines, police started to gain even more insight into how Peter hid his demons in plain sight for so long. Several people that he used to work with told authorities about how he used to leave those disturbing videos open on his work computer for them to see. But that wasn't all. Some of Peter's former sexual partners also spoke to police and described Peter's forceful interest in sexual asphyxiation. As these details emerged, the case shook the city of Copenhagen to its core. Slowly, everyone who once stood by Peter started backing away, including his wife, who filed for divorce. Even Peter's brother, who had defended him, said he could could never forgive what he did. Peter's loved ones were clearly convinced of his guilt. But there was one final tip that helped prosecutors round out their case. One of Peter's former volunteers said that a saw had recently gone missing from the warehouse, and the authorities believed Peter likely used a saw to dismember Kim's body. So divers returned to the area where they'd found the remains and other other clues. Eventually, they spotted the saw and retrieved it. To the police, this was the final nail in Peter's coffin. But even with all the evidence, the disturbing videos and witness testimony, he still maintained his innocence.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (28:57)

I think that often times, especially in situations like these, when someone is adamant in their denial despite the evidence piling against them, that people assume they are clinically delusional. But that's not necessarily the case. Denial is a defense mechanism that many people have experienced. So when it comes to Peter, I think this is likely more about protecting his ego and maintaining control, which is Quite typical in criminal cases. Remember, he was previously willing to give nuggets of truth if it framed him in somewhat of a positive light. But at this point, if he gave them any more nuggets of truth, it essentially be a confession which would only confirm to everyone that he was cruel, depraved, and fully responsible.

Vanessa Richardson (29:41)

Do you think someone like Peter is more likely to experience a break from reality? Or maybe he's building his own version of reality.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (29:49)

So there's no way of knowing for sure. Because psychosis, which involves delusions, can happen to anyone at any time for a number of different reasons. And it's not always related to a severe mental illness. It can be substance induced or even related to medical conditions. Even severe stress or trauma can trigger brief psychotic episodes in some people. What I think is more likely the case here, given his functioning to this point as well as his age, is that he will bend his reality to suit his ego and protect his self image. That's a distortion or detachment. That's self serving and not necessarily a break in reality itself in the clinical sense.

Vanessa Richardson (30:31)

After that, it wasn't exactly surprising when Peter changed his story again. Sometime in October 2017, about. About two months after the murder, he admitted to dismembering Kim's body, But he still didn't confess to killing her. In fact, he had yet another new explanation for how that happened. Peter told police that Kim's death could have resulted from inhaling exhaust fumes on the submarine. He'd completely abandoned his story about the latch that hit her on the head. It was the latest in a series of attempts to frame the situation as a tragic accident. But the explanation didn't hold much weight because no signs of carbon monoxide had been detected in the onboard air filter. At this point, investigators seemed to give up on ever getting Peter to admit the truth. And in their eyes, the premeditated nature of Kim's murder was clear. Peter had stocked the Nautilus with a saw, a knife, and plastic bags ahead of time. Then he waited for an opportunity to get a woman alone beneath the water. But there was still more to be uncovered, because when Peter's case went to trial, the court saw evidence of part of his plan that he didn't get to carry out. And those revelations haunt the city of Copenhagen to this day.

WhatsApp Advertiser (32:02)

When did making plans get this complicated? It's time to streamline with WhatsApp, the secure messaging app that brings the whole group together. Use polls to settle dinner plans. Send event invites and pinned messages so no one forgets mom. 60th and never miss a meme or milestone. All protected with end to end encryption. It's time for WhatsApp message privately with everyone. Learn more@WhatsApp.com so good, so good, so good.

Nordstrom Rack Advertiser (32:31)

Just then, thousands of winter arrivals at your Nordstrom rack store. Save up to 70% on coats, slippers and cashmere from Kate Spade, New York, Vince Ugg, Levi's, and more.

Vanessa Richardson (32:41)

Check out these boots, they've got the best gifts.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (32:44)

My holiday shopping hack join the NordicLub.

Nordstrom Rack Advertiser (32:46)

Get an extra 5% off every rack purchase with your Nordstrom credit card. Plus buy it online and pick it up in store the same day for free. Big gifts, big perks. That's why you rack.

Josh Mankiewicz (32:58)

The guy thought he had a good thing going, a good job and two lovers. That is, until this triangle got complicated and somebody had to go. I'm Josh Mankiewicz and this is Deadly Engagement, an all new podcast from Dateline. It's a story that's sure to keep you guessing as lovers turn on each other in a desperate bid to avoid prison.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (33:25)

Listen now.

Vanessa Richardson (33:30)

For seven months after Kim Wall's death in 2017, 46 year old Peter Madsen continued to deny that he had killed her, despite mountains of evidence that suggested otherwise. He insisted that she had died accidentally and that he'd only dismembered her body in order to bury her at sea. But Peter's claims didn't account for why he'd lied about Kim's whereabouts immediately after he returned to land, or why he kept lying about it for two days after his initial arrest. But Peter didn't seem to think that constantly changing his story made him look bad at all. Which might be why, when the 47 year old's trial began in March of 2018, he did it again on the stand. Peter admitted that he dismembered Kim's body, but he maintained that he did not kill her. As for the 15 stab wounds on Kim's torso, Peter claimed that he inflicted those after she was dead to prevent her body parts from inflating with gas after he tossed them overboard. When questioned about why he lied to police and changed his story so many times, Peter claimed that he wasn't trying to hide anything. He said he was trying to spare Kim's family from the full horror of what really happened and what he had to do to her body.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (34:53)

This is a really calculating level of manipulation and he is once again attempting to frame himself in a sympathetic light. He continues to want people to believe he is selfless or protective, which fits with his pattern. Thus far of needing to control the narrative and how he wants to frame himself. Because even if his claims were true, it doesn't erase the reality of the crime. He admitted to dismembering Kim's body and then stabbing it multiple times to ensure she wouldn't fill up with gas. How is that being sympathetic to the family? There are a number of more respectful ways he could have handled Kim's body if he truly cared about how her parents would feel and if his claims were, in fact, true. So to me, and I'm sure to everyone listening, this is just more evidence that the person he's interested in protecting is himself. And this is all, once again about managing perceptions.

Vanessa Richardson (35:47)

If Peter was trying to garner sympathy, all hope for that was about to go out the window. Because next, prosecutors showed the court the disturbing pornographic content that was found on his computer. There were more than 40 clips of violent but staged death scenes. However, there were also about 100 videos showing actual murders, beheadings and sexually motivated torture. Upon seeing everything, numerous people in the courtroom were brought to tears. To many, it was unimaginable that someone would have any interest in these kinds of films. In response, Peter's attorneys argued that the videos didn't prove anything about whether he had murdered Kim. But then prosecutors explained that the videos suggested something even more sinister about Peter. According to them, he didn't just like watching these films. He wanted to make his own. And that was the whole reason he'd lured Kim onto his submarine. As further proof of this theory, they shared anonymous testimony from a woman who claimed claimed that she'd first met Peter by chance. In May 2017, just a few months before Kim Wall was killed. Peter had invited the woman onto his submarine, but she declined. He invited her again, and she declined again. That second invitation came just two days before Kim's murder. In another chilling account, a male witness who had known Peter since the early days of of Copenhagen suborbitals told the court about a conversation they'd had nearly a decade earlier. During that conversation, Peter had casually mentioned that the bay where Kim's remains were found was a, quote, good place to hide a body. Another acquaintance backed up the claim, recalling that Peter had also spoken to him about different methods that could be used for getting rid of a corpse.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (37:47)

I touched on this briefly earlier, but it begs repeating. Research and case studies show that individuals with violent sexual fantasies sometimes practice in small ways before committing a crime. And that can look like seeking out violent pornography or making dark jokes to test how people will react, or rehearsing scenarios in their mind until they start to feel more real to them. Some even stage opportunities, like inviting people into risky situations or controlled environments, almost like trial runs, which arguably Peter did when he brought the sex worker on his submarine before. Each step thins the barrier between his fantasy and reality. So each of these were small escalations. If Peter was indeed looking for a victim before Kim, that shows intent and persistence. But also another common pattern emerges. If he had tried with someone else and was unsuccessful, then he targeted Kim because he could exploit her professional interest in a story as a way to lure her in. And the fact that she had reached out first gave him the opening he needed to frame the encounter as legitimate, making it much harder and less likely for her to say no.

Vanessa Richardson (39:00)

What about Peter's offhanded comments to those people? What did they suggest about him as a killer?

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (39:06)

It's another example of him testing the waters. He's showing how comfortable he is with violent ideas, and that tells us he escalated from fantasizing privately to testing them in public spaces. It also reflects a lack of empathy because he's so detached from the impact that these kinds of remarks could have on other people. Even if he does try to package them as jokes, they still are uncomfortable for most people to hear.

Vanessa Richardson (39:30)

The way the court saw it, Peter's behavior wasn't a coincidence. It was a pattern. On April 25, 2018, six weeks after his trial began, Peter Madsen's case came to an end. He was convicted on each charge and sentenced to to life in prison. In Denmark, a life sentence doesn't mean what it does in the US there, life typically starts as a 12 year term. After that, the sentence can be extended if the person is still considered a danger to society, which would be determined in a parole review. So, in theory, Peter could be a free man in the year 2034. But based on the psychiatric evaluation that Peter underwent spent in prison, he has a long way to go before convincing anyone he's not a danger to society. Peter was labeled as a narcissistic psychopath, someone with no empathy but full awareness of their actions. The report also made it clear that Peter wasn't delusional or mentally ill in a way that would cloud his judgment. In other words, Peter Madsen knew exactly what he was doing when he killed Peter. Kim Wall.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (40:40)

I can't speak to how Denmark classifies mental disorders and diagnoses since I have not practiced there. But in the us, psychopathy is not a diagnosis, it's considered a construct, and it's used to describe A cluster of affective and interpersonal traits that meet the threshold of that construct. So a comparable diagnosis here in the US Would be antisocial personality disorder with narcissistic traits. And if he had met the criteria for a label of psychopathy, that would also be indicated. So when they described him as a narcissistic psychopath, they were attempting to capture two things, his grandiosity and need for admiration, alongside his lack of empathy, callousness and manipulativeness. This profile fits not only with Peter's crimes, but with patterns that we've seen throughout his life. In his business ventures, he displayed grandiosity. He was making big promises, needing to feel superior, becoming hostile when criticized. He struggled with collaboration. He dismissed others when they did not fall in line and and consistently put his own vision above the team. And those same traits, entitlement, hostility, and lack of regard for others, later emerged in their more extreme and destructive form in his criminal behavior.

Vanessa Richardson (41:53)

How do courts weigh psychiatric evaluations when considering sentences and parole?

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (41:59)

They play a major role in how courts approach both sentencing and parole. But the way they're weighed depends on the legal system and the purpose of the evaluation. They don't guarantee a certain outcome, and the ultimate decision as to what happens next is left to the court to decide, regardless of an expert opinion. That being said, judges are not trained in the way experts are, and they need their input to help interpret whether someone poses an ongoing risk, has a treatable condition, or shows signs of rehabilitation. And when it comes to the safety of the public, they very strongly consider our input.

Vanessa Richardson (42:36)

Peter immediately appealed his sentence, but not the guilty verdict itself. It looked like he was no longer denying what he did. He just didn't want to serve time for it. He was unsuccessful. The court denied his appeal and upheld the original ruling. But even though Peter was behind bars, it didn't put a stop to his desperate need for attention, especially from women. By August of 2018, just a few months after he entered prison, 47 year old Peter reportedly started a relationship relationship with a female guard at the facility. Then in December of that year, he suddenly married a woman who'd been sending him letters since his arrest. The relationship was short lived and ended a few years later. But Peter's biggest post conviction headline grab came in October of 2020 when he actually tried to escape using a fake pistol and explosives. How exactly he got his hands on those items isn't clear. But in the end, his escape attempt was just another failed venture. Police found him in a nearby residential neighborhood and quickly brought him back to prison. After that, Peter earned another 19 months on his existing sentence. Once again, he proved to be his own worst enemy. To many people, Peter's erratic behavior is a sign that he'll never change, and that even though he cultivated an innovative, rebellious reputation for decades, he was really nothing more than a common criminal because he couldn't control his own violent urges. An innocent woman lost her life, and the death of Kim Wall is a huge loss. In many ways, Kim was the kind of person Peter could only ever hope to be. He talked a big deal game, but all he ever did was hole himself up in his warehouse and never achieved his singular goal of winning Denmark's space race. Kim, on the other hand, traveled all over the world, scoping out interesting stories and shedding light on actual rebellion and innovation. She wasn't afraid to form connections with people, and because of that, she had people who truly loved her, which is something Peter Madsen will never understand. Thanks so much for listening. Come back next time for a deep dive into the mind of another murderer.

Dr. Tristan Ingalls (45:17)

Keller Murder Minds is a Crime House original. Powered by Pave Studios. Here at Crime House, we want to thank each and every one of you for your support. If you like what you heard today, reach out on Instagram at Crime House. And don't forget to rate, review and follow Killer Minds wherever you get your podcasts. Your feedback truly makes a difference and.

Vanessa Richardson (45:37)

To enhance your listening experience, subscribe to Crime House plus on Apple Podcasts. You'll get every episode of Killer Minds ad free, along with early access to each thrilling two part series and exciting Crime House bonus content. Killer Minds is hosted by me, Vanessa Richardson and Dr. Tristan Engels and is a Crime House original. Powered by Pave Studios. This episode was brought to life by the Killer Minds team. Max Cutler, Ron Shapiro, Alex Benedon, Lori Marinelli, Natalie Pertzofsky, Sarah Camp, Kate Murdoch, Markie Lee, Sarah Batchelor, Sarah Tardiff and Carrie Murphy. Thank you for listening. Twisted Tales with Heidi Wong is perfect for spooky season. Dive into the real events behind the world's most terrifying blockbusters and beyond. Twisted Tales is a Crime House original. Listen wherever you get your podcasts. New episodes out every Monday.