Frequently Asked Questions
Here, we collect some of the questions many people have about Robert’s story, and do our best to answer them.
Why is Robert called “The Youngster” (“Ynglingen”) in Swedish?
“Ynglingen”, or “the Youngster”, is a term used in a number of police interviews with witnesses. We can find the term in Anna Hage’s and Göran Israelsson’s testimony, and it’s used for the person who was the first to arrive to Olof Palme’s dead body. Up to this day, many have believed that “the youngster” is Stefan Glantz, but today we know that it was Robert. “The Youngster/Ynglingen” is thereby a fitting name for this page. In English, we have chosen to call this page “The Hidden Witness”, as Robert was hidden from the public eye by the media and the Palme investigators.
Who committed the murder, according to Robert?
The man who pulled the trigger is a man named Gunnar Ställfors, born in 1934 and deceased in 2015. He planned the operation together with a number of other men from Stockholm and nearby locations. We can confirm that these people exists, and that they used to meet. Gunnar had worked as a magician and entertainer, and he knew almost everything about the nightlife and entertainment in Sweden, according to Robert. He was polite and well-mannered, but sometimes showed a side that was everything but pleasant…
Are there any evidence confirming this story?
In Göran Israelsson’s police report, he talks about a “youngster” (“yngling” in Swedish) that stands next to Olof Palme’s body. If this had been his friend Stefan Glantz, it is likely that he would have used his name. In a report from the restaurant Bohemia, Robert’s version of the events at the stairs leading up from Tunnelgatan appears. This version is almost word by word the same as in Robert’s story. Robert also has a clear memory of the event, and in which places they took place. This can be heard and seen in recordings from the murder scene from 2024.
Who is behind this page?
Robert Barestrand is responsible for the information on this page, and owns the copyright to the material, unless stated otherwise. A number of reseachers, journalists etc. helps him with everything from trying to validate the story to find documents etc. that can help Robert. A new lead in the Palme investigation is somewhat controversial to many Swedes, so the group behind Robert has chosen to be anonymous.
Where can I find more information about Robert’s story?
Robert has released a book with his story. You can find it here: https://bokshop.bod.se/ynglingen-aer-aterfunnen-robert-barestrand-9789180576369. Please note that we are working on an English version. The version above is in Swedish.
Documents that can verify Robert’s story can be found at Palmemordsarkivet and wpu.nu.
If you want to know more…
Below, you will find a little bit of the appendixes from Robert’s book, that verifies his story.
To start with, we can confirm that the term “Youngster” or “Yngligen” in Swedish was created by witness Anna Hage. Many was lead to believe that she was talking about another witness, Stefan Glantz. But if you read the police reports thoroughly, you will soon find that this assumption is unlikely, at best. Witness Lena Bäsén traveled in the same car as Glantz, and the police report from the interview with her states:
“As soon as the taxi stops, Bäsén jumped out of the car and ran towards the man laying down. At the same time, another woman arrived, later identified as Anne, as well as a man in a grey jacket.”
– police report 860516
In other words, Lena Bäsén was the first person to arrive to the murder scene. The guys in the backseat hadn’t seen anything and had no reason to jump out of the car as soon as it stopped.
The man in the grey jacket has to be someone that Bäsén doesn’t recognize. Otherwise, she would have said his name. In other words: It can’t be Stefan Glantz, a person she knew well.
We can see something similar in the police report from the interview with Göran Israelsson.
“He can only say that there was a lady and a guy. The guy had apparently done CPR, as he had blood all around his mouth. When he arrived at the scene, two more girls arrived. They tried to help with the attempts to save the injured man. The guy with blood around his mouth said that a person had ran off from the scene of the crime.”
– police report from interview 880203
He knew Stefan Glantz well, but still says “the guy”. For this to be Stefan Glantz, Israelsson must have missed that his buddy has opened the car door, jumped out, ran out and performed CPR on Olof Palme’s body. That scenario is simply not plausible. If he had missed all those things, he would still have recognized his friend when he was near Palme’s body, even though he had blood around his mouth.
Simply put, we can rule out that Stefan Glantz was the person that arrived first to Palme’s body.On top of that, Stefan Glantz says that he arrived to “the man laying on his back”. In other words: Someone had already turned the body over from laying on its stomach to laying on its back. The conclusion from all this is that someone arrived at the scene before Glantz.
On the 2nd of March, 1986, Anna Hage was interviewed by Länstidningen in Södertälje. She says about the victim:
“A woman and a young man were crouching over him, and I understood that something had happened just a short time ago.”
– Länstidningen i Södertälje 860302
So, there were some sort of an operation at the scene, or at least the beginning of one, when Hage arrived at the scene.
In court, Anna Hage states that she was the first person to arrive to the body, a statement that contradicts what she had said earlier (see above). In court, she also says that Stefan Glantz arrived later, and that part is actually correct. But she fails to mention the “youngster” she told the police about in the first interview.
Let’s also quote a few lines from Anna Hages autobiography, “30 år av tystnad: Mitt liv i skuggan av mordet på Olof Palme” (“30 years of silence: My life in the shadow of Olof Palme”). She states that she was called to a meeting in a coffee shop in 1988. At the scene, she meets a military in uniform, who gives her a warning:
“It is very important that you don’t focus on the wrong things. Some things are not meant to be known.”
– “30 år av tystnad: Mitt liv i skuggan av Olof Palme”
Is it possible that “the youngster”, or “The Hidden Witness”, was one of the things that wasn’t meant to be known? It may sound a bit far-fetched, but if you meet the main witness, in a uniform with a lot of medals, maybe to gain som respect, and you deliver a message like that – is it really that unlikely that “the youngster” is one of the things they shouldn’t talk about?
Robert says that it is so, and a lot of evidence seem to support his claim. What do you think? Please feel free to read the documents and make your own decision!
Finally: Robert says that he was at a restaurant to but cigarettes to the men responsible for the murder. In these testimonials, there is one thing that mirrors Robert’s story very well.
Robert says that he ran up and down the stairs on Tunnelgatan, ordered to do so by one of the men. The explanation was that they were rehearsing for an upcoming movie. Robert says, spontaneously, that he meets a man in the middle of the stairs and says something like “hi, you!” (“hej på dig du!” in Swedish).
Robert has not studied the police reports, nor has he been interested in them. He couldn’t name the restaurant. But with the help from him and also photos and documents from 1986, one of the researchers managed to find a police report from restaurant Bohemia, the restaurant in question.
Here is an excerpt from a police report:
Translation: “After the purchase, [REDACTED] leaves [REDACTED] and walks the stairs up to Malmskillnadsgatan. When he has around 20 meters left to Malmskillnadsgatan, a ‘guy’ between 20 and 25 years-old runs past him. [REDACTED] says to the guy “Hi, you!”. The guy doesn’t reply and continues upwards and disappears towards David Bagares Gata”.
In other words: In a obscure police report, unknown to Robert as well as the researcher, someone meets a young man in the stairs, even though he estimates Robert to be a bit older. An almost identical change of words appears. It is impossible that this could happen by chance. Moreso, the description of “the guy” matches Robert’s appearance at the time.
When Robert was told that this police report existed, he wasn’t exited or tried to convince the researcher that “the guy” was him. Instead, he just said: “There it is. That’s exactly what I said”.
According to Robert’s entourage, this reaction is just another thing that adds to Robert’s credibility. Feel free to read the documents and make your own decision!