跳到内容
现在

司法 · 威胁罪起诉

埃利亚斯·巴克仍可能因涉嫌威胁而受到惩罚吗？

巴克否认两项加重非法威胁罪指控。辩方称，涉嫌行为的追诉时效已经届满——这一质疑取决于如何对这些消息定性。

文字 阅读需 5 分钟 · 39 个来源

HeyDex

原语言视频

译自英文原文。

埃利亚斯·巴克仍可能因检方称他于2023年5月发送的消息受到惩罚吗？这是瑞典两项加重非法威胁罪指控背后的问题。他的辩护方称，他没有威胁任何一名投诉人；而且，如果对涉嫌行为作出恰当定性，追诉时效已于2025年5月届满。因此，这场争议不只是关于可能判处多重的刑罚。它可能决定法律上是否还可以施加处罚。⁠1

《晚报》（Aftonbladet）于2026年11月14日报道了这些指控。这是报道发布日期，并非已确定的检方提起诉讼日期。现有报道无法确认有任何判决或司法裁定解决了辩方提出的时效异议。可以确定的是，此案涉及几个存在争议的环节：确认是谁写了这些消息、判定这些消息是否构成非法威胁，以及确定其是否属于加重情节。⁠1

手机聊天记录据称显示了什么

这些指控涉及2023年5月据称发生的两起事件和两名投诉人。根据《晚报》报道的检方说法，巴克发送消息称某人住址将发生炸弹爆炸。他还被指控威胁称，除非两人按他的命令挪车，否则就要开枪射击他们。这些是关于通信中提及可能致命暴力的指控，并非认定发生过爆炸或枪击。⁠1

警方和调查人员取得一部手机的使用权限后，调查随之展开。他们发现了涉及一个化名的聊天记录，并称巴克曾使用这一化名。检察官卢卡斯·蒂格斯特兰德称，证据是嫌疑人与投诉人之间的对话。但检方仍须证明巴克使用了该化名，且相关消息确由他发送。已发表的报道没有说明调查人员如何确认身份，也没有刊出完整对话。⁠1

蒂格斯特兰德称，聊天记录中的描述与调查人员所知、确实发生过的事件相符。这是他对佐证情况的说法；报道并未说明哪些独立证实的事件支持了哪些消息。缺少这些细节，读者无法评估周边证据在多大程度上将巴克与涉嫌威胁联系起来。⁠1

双方对这些通信的含义也有另一处分歧。蒂格斯特兰德承认，一名投诉人不认为对方曾构成威胁，而他持相反看法。他的表述指的是一名投诉人，并未证明两名投诉人都不接受检方的解释，也没有说明这名投诉人为何如此认为。报道没有依据可供推断存在恐吓、撤回陈述或拒绝配合。⁠1

检察官还称，调查显示巴克认识相关人员，而且他们可能曾共同犯罪。这种可能存在的共同犯罪活动属于调查层面的判断，并非对投诉人已作出的认定。这是蒂格斯特兰德对聊天记录相关人员关系的说明，并不能据此确定消息作者或其含义。⁠1

为何加重情节的定性很重要

检方主张，涉嫌威胁因暗示具有实施暴力的能力而得到显著加强，性质严重，且行为特别残忍、危险。《晚报》称巴克与福克斯特罗特网络有关联。这一报道所述的关联有助于解释检方为何认为这些消息具有威慑力，但不能证明消息是他写的，也不能证明他犯下了其中任何一项罪行。⁠1

辩护律师约纳斯·格兰费尔特否认了指控的核心内容。《晚报》引述他的话称，以下为瑞典语原话的译文：

他没有威胁过两名投诉人中的任何一人。

约纳斯·格兰费尔特 1

格兰费尔特还称，按照以往法院判决衡量，涉嫌行为不应被合理地认定为加重情节，并表示对提起指控感到意外。他和巴克坚持认为，相关行为的追诉时效已于2025年5月届满。这是他们的法律立场，并非经法院认定的时效届满日期。这也不意味着加重非法威胁罪必然在两年后超过追诉时效。⁠1

定性与时效之间的关联具有实质意义。瑞典议会司法委员会在2025年2月对当时有效规则的说明中指出，追诉时效取决于该罪名可判处的最高刑罚。委员会还说明，在相关期限内将嫌疑人还押或送达起诉书，可能阻止这种时效届满。回顾这一历史框架有助于说明为何罪名定性至关重要，但它本身不能解决巴克案。⁠13

另一个重要的日期界限是：瑞典威胁罪法律修正案SFS 2023:257于2023年5月11日颁布、5月16日公布，并于7月1日生效——晚于涉嫌发送消息的月份。该修正案规定，普通非法威胁可处以罚款或最高两年监禁，加重非法威胁可处一年至四年监禁。不得将这些后来的刑罚幅度替代涉嫌发生于5月的行为所适用的历史法律。它们也不是对巴克可能面临刑罚的经核实说明。⁠24

因此，法院的任务不只是判断这些措辞听起来是否严重。法院必须依据适用法律评估涉嫌行为，解决对罪名定性的争议，并处理时效异议。辩方的论点使这些问题无法分割：若加重情节不成立，后果可能不仅仅是刑罚减轻。

从机场被捕到指控尚待解决

巴克自突尼斯自愿返回，并于2026年10月在斯德哥尔摩阿兰达机场被捕。《晚报》10月14日的报道中，蒂格斯特兰德称并没有引渡请求：巴克是自行回国的。报道说，他在前一周因涉嫌两项加重威胁罪、达到有充分理由怀疑的程度而被还押，拘留理由包括可能逃跑或干扰证据。他反对拘留并否认有不当行为。这些是10月报道所述的情况，并不能确认他目前的羁押状态。⁠3

他此次返瑞典之前，曾于2023年秋季在突尼斯与其他瑞典人一同被捕。《晚报》报道称，突尼斯反恐部门最初负责这项调查，据报道案件于2024年10月结案。这段背景解释了他返回瑞典的经过，但不能证实瑞典方面的威胁指控。⁠1⁠3

10月的报道将2026年10月23日列为提起指控的期限。11月14日的报道证实指控已提出，但既未给出提起指控的日期，也未解释此前期限是否延期。这个信息缺口不能证明期限已错过；它意味着已发表的时间线无法回答这一程序问题。⁠3⁠1

现有材料无法确认审判日期、案件编号或有关时效异议的裁定。目前，检方提出了关于严重威胁的指控，而辩方同时质疑事实和依法施加处罚的依据。指控使案件得以推进，但并未确定是谁发送了消息、这些通信构成了什么，或法律是否仍允许对此施加处罚。⁠1

来源23

在此处引用的来源中，Google News Sverige (SE:sv)最先发布，比本报道播出早22小时。 随后还有1家媒体发布。
  1. Google News Sverige (SE:sv)
  2. Australia
  3. HeyDay News

16篇早期文章作为背景资料参阅。12家媒体未注明日期：Åklagarmyndighetenlagrum.seRatio LexStraffbart.sesverigesradio.seLagar.se

按媒体查看所有来源

来自 23 家媒体的 39 个来源· 引用最多的优先

播出原貌
  1. A complainant disputes that a threat was made in Elias Bäck's case.
  2. Bäck faces two aggravated unlawful-threat charges in Sweden and denies wrongdoing. His defense says the prosecution has run out of time, potentially putting punishment beyond reach. Can prosecutors prove the messages were aggravated threats that can still be punished?
  3. The two counts concern alleged incidents in May 2023 and two complainants. Prosecutors allege Bäck sent messages saying a bomb would explode at someone's address.
  4. They also allege he threatened to shoot two people unless they moved cars as he ordered. Police found the chats after gaining access to a telephone. Investigators identify one participant's alias as a name Bäck used.
  5. That identification is part of what prosecutors have to prove. Prosecutor Lukas Tigerstrand says the conversations were between the suspect and the complainants. He says descriptions in the chats fit events investigators know happened, but hasn't specified which events support which messages.
  6. Tigerstrand acknowledges that one complainant doesn't think a threat was made. He disagrees. That puts the meaning of the communications in dispute, alongside the question of who wrote them.
  7. Tigerstrand also says the investigation suggests Bäck knew the people involved and that they may have committed crimes together. That's the prosecutor's assessment. Bäck has been linked to the Foxtrot network, and prosecutors argue the alleged threats drew force from an implied capacity for violence.
  8. They describe the threats as serious and the alleged conduct as particularly ruthless and dangerous. Those are their reasons for seeking the aggravated classification.
  9. Defense lawyer Jonas Granfeldt says Bäck hasn't threatened either complainant. He also argues that the alleged conduct couldn't reasonably qualify as aggravated when judged against previous court decisions, and says he's surprised charges were brought.
  10. Granfeldt and Bäck say the opportunity to prosecute expired in May 2025. Their argument links the disputed classification to the time limit. If the court accepts that argument, the consequence could extend to whether Bäck can be punished at all.
  11. Subscribe to this channel to follow the threat case and the defense's challenge to its timing.
  12. The defense places the claimed expiration in May 2025, two years after the alleged incidents. A court still has to resolve that objection. The defense's date depends on its legal argument about how the conduct should be classified.
  13. Sweden changed its threat penalties shortly after the month of the alleged messages. The amendment was issued on May eleventh, 2023, and published five days later. It took effect on July first.
  14. That later law set ordinary unlawful threats at a fine or up to two years in prison. It set aggravated threats at one to four years. Those later ranges can't simply be applied to Bäck's alleged conduct in May.
  15. The court has to assess the alleged acts under the applicable historical law. The aggravated label and the rules on time limits therefore need to be considered together.
  16. Bäck returned voluntarily from Tunisia in October 2026 and police arrested him at Stockholm Arlanda Airport. Tigerstrand says he came home on his own. His return followed no extradition request.
  17. Bäck had been arrested with other Swedes in Tunisia in autumn 2023. Tunisia's terrorism authorities initially handled that investigation, which reportedly ended in October 2024.
  18. In Sweden, Bäck was remanded in custody during the week before October fourteenth, on probable-cause suspicion of the two aggravated-threat offenses. The detention grounds included a risk of flight or interference with evidence. He opposed detention and denied wrongdoing.
  19. The charging deadline had been set for October twenty-third. Bäck now faces charges, but their filing date isn't clear. The court still has to decide whether the aggravated classification holds and whether punishment remains legally possible.

译文更新于

近期播出