Kenneth Swedberg

We now hear the words of Chad’s brother and neighbor. I think you will be surprised at what he said just hours after his brother was killed.

 

 

 

This is more of a text book police interview: What did you do today? Let us see your guns. Do you know anyone who wanted to harm Chad? They build a timeline for him and try to sort out the gaps. They just want to eliminate him by listing his guns. The cops actually kind of treat Ken as a suspect and make him even a little jumpy. They do not treat him with kid gloves. However, when he does tell them that Tommy Covington threatened to kill Chad at the same funeral of a young relative he had just slain, they cops seem to ignore him and just go on questioning him as if he told them about working with his bees. Are you kidding me? When the brother of a murdered citizen hands you a person on a silver platter and you do nothing except help that person with an alibi and ask him soft ball questions, well, that seems a little odd to me. What if he had said “Well, I think Ken Andersen did it,” would they have also ignored that? The police had every right to go and arrest Thomas Covington on first degree murder charges and I do believe he would have told you what happened to the late Chad Swedberg. 

Another strange fact is that the judge at Ken Andersen’s trial would not allow any references to Tommy Covington. Why? This might provide reasonable doubt in their case to convict Ken Andersen. If you were a juror and heard this, would have still voted to convict? If you were a juror on this trial, I think you know by now that you helped put an innocent man in prison.

Al Baker

For those who have read this blog and know Ken Andersen’s story, you already know who Al Baker is. For those who don’t, let me introduce him. Al is an older man who lives in the same area where the crime was committed and was a friend to both Ken and Chad. He was helping Chad with the maple syrup operation and was supposed to meet him there the morning Chad was killed. He was supposed to be at the maple syrup stand at 8 am, but for some reason he showed up after 10 am, after Chad was found dead. There is never given a verifiable explanation what he was doing or why that morning. Listen to him talk to the police. He sounds very nervous and tries very hard to blame Ken Andersen (Fud) for the murder, but offers no motive or evidence. The police never treat him as a suspect and are eager to weave his nervous ramblings into a now fractured timeline and theory. I will comment after you listen.

I guess if I had to describe this interview with one word, STRANGE, come to mind. He starts right off saying he has no idea who may have killed Chad and in the same breath he accuses “Fud” Ken Andersen, based on nothing more that trying to please the police. Leslie has just called him thinking he was mad at them, or Jessie, and claims they know something suspicious. He says he has been receiving blocked calls and threats, even at the funeral. None of this seems to steer the cops away from their theory now that has Ken Andersen as a suspect. They seem to be listening to him but they are not prone to seek out where these stories were pointing. Al’s memory seems as fuzzy as Leslie and has trouble recalling the events of the murder of a close friend just a week prior. He tells of strange behavior of Leslie just hours after the murder and gives no real insight to any possibility that Ken Andersen killed Chad Swedberg. I talked to Al Baker on the phone a few years ago and he steered me to talk about the mysteries of maple syrup making more than what he said at Ken’s trial. Al told me a tale that he now believes a number of people were involved in the murder. I have unanswered questions about his interview.

1. Why didn’t you go to the maple stand at 8 am like you had planned?

2. Where were you from 730 am to 10 am, and can anyone verify it?

3. Are you lying about what you really know about Chad’s murder and why?

4. Do you have any first hand knowledge that Ken Andersen had anything to do with Chad’s murder?

5 Why are you so reluctant now to talk about any of this?

 

 

 

Leslie Fain #2

 

file0003-page-001

 

Here is another interview:

 

 

Here are my raw notes as I listened to them:

“this concept of time”           “all I remember is that wolf thing”

police are trying to create a timeline          unsure of how many times she called Chad

many long silences as she is either thinking of her answer or stumped

she says she knows the sequence of events but lets the police assign the times to what she is telling them

never once do they treat her with suspicion or as a suspect

the questions see to put pressure on her to come up with an answer, they do not come easy

she claims she heard Chad first went to Ken and Lisa Swedberg’s house before going to the maple stand and left their house at 845 am even though she heard shots before 813 am

the police help her out by saying she is confused and Chad was there the night before

okay, is she lying or telling the truth??????

she isn’t sure of much information

the police have already built a timeline by guessing from what very shaky people told them-how can they ever be sure?????

5,6,7 guns in the house-need to document and test them—–did they?????????????/

POLICE TALK IN MUFFLED TONES FOR A LONG TIME- WHO ARE THEY TALKING TO??? WHY DID THEY LEAVE THE RECORDING ON? THEY MAKE SURE THEY CAN NOT BE HEARD.

 

Check back next Monday for more…..

 

 

 

Leslie Fain

 

Here are some thoughts after listening to her interview. If you had read any or all of the material on this blog and still have any doubts that Ken Andersen did NOT shoot and kill Chad Swedberg, listening to these taped interviews should remove them. There is a large difference between what was said the day and the days after Chad was murdered. By the time of Ken’s trial the police had rehearsed these people into saying a much different narrative than what you will hear on these recordings. The main thing missing is any talk that Ken Andersen had any reason, opportunity, or inclination to have murdered his best friend. So, who did the crime? I really believe the one or ones who were involved are on these tapes.

20110930_leslie-fain2_33

 

This interview took place on April 13, 2007, the same day her husband was killed. Yet, her voice sounds normal and quite a contrast to what they are discussing. Dan Bauman ask her questions about the events only hours before in the same day of things that would be hard to ever forget, yet she can not remember what time she got up that morning. Leslie tells them Chad was watching some show about wolves and didn’t want to stop. Her rather vague account gives the time Chad left the house to go to work at the maple stand at 8:30 am, even though later the police would tell us he had a standing appointment with Al Baker at 8 am. at the stand. She seems sure she heard two blasts from a gun she refers to as “shotgun blasts” several times. All the other witnesses simply calls them gun shots, so I have to wonder how well her discernment of the sounds different guns make to know it was from a shot-gun (it wasn’t).  She thought it might be someone shooting a bear at first and then began the many calls to Chad that were never answered. Remaining unconcerned as she chatted on the internet and got ready for work. Finally, she goes to check on her husband as his phone is still not answering, she hears dogs barking and a mysterious “rattling” may be from a person, and finds Chad laying on his back with his legs askew. She declares he seems to have dead for a while, and begins to think about calling 911, but decides against it. She says they wouldn’t know where she is and decides to call Chad’s brother, Ken. The police never checked to verify much of this story, such as the TV show or whether Chad’s phone did not have voicemail.

This entire interview last almost on hour and left me feeling odd from the huge holes in her story. Couple this interview with her writing a check to double their life insurance that same day, and you come away with the feeling this woman is not telling the whole story here. Reasonable doubt? You bet. Come back next Monday for another installment.

 

Under Blog Construction- New Things Coming Soon!

Construction workers

 

In the next two weeks, this blog will be upgraded to have brand new challenges to the wrongful conviction of Ken Andersen. I will be sharing some new features as well. The NEW EVIDENCE that will appear is audio. For some time I have had many audio recordings that the police made interviewing anyone that had knowledge of the killing of one CHAD SWEDBERG. The tapes were poor and hard to hear and understand completely. I even thought the police may have purposely made them so badly they were of no use. Lately, I have found software to enhance the sound and quality to where they are clear and loud. I have over 40 different tapes and will upload ALL of them in the coming weeks. You will be able to hear what was actually said by those closest to Chad and the questions the police investigators asked. Much of these conversation never made it into the courtroom. What will become evident is that KEN ANDERSEN was not a suspect until the police became frustrated with failure to make an arrest, and then manufactured a theory to railroad him. You can hear their actual voices and the journey they were on. Come back soon!

Talked To Ken

Ken called me on Sunday night and we talked about his week. His job is cleaning the corridors. He sounded upbeat, but I can hear how these days are hard in his voice. The weather is too bad to go outside so he is inside all the time. We talked about the rifle the police “found” in his barn after 3 searches of his property with dozens of cops looking. I have always found it very fishy they finally knew to lift of rafters of the barn to take what they would claim was the murder weapon.

The problem was that when the prosecutors put their own experts were sworn in under oath, they said the following:

1. They really could not determine exactly what caliber of weapon shot and killed Chad Swedberg.

2. The rifle they “found” in Ken’s barn could not be connected to the bullet fragments, so they told the jury to just believe they were right(they did).

My question is how did the rifle get up in the barn? The police found multiple prints on the rifle that included a partial of Ken’s palm. The other prints were ignored. Since the gun was obviously planted, who did it? Where did they obtain the gun?

I talked to Ken about his suspicions and promised to look into it. If the gun was planted and still wasn’t the murder weapon, where is the murder weapon now?

Stay tuned for more…..

Phone Call From Ken

Last Sunday night (1-6-3013), I talked to Ken on the phone from the prison he is being wrongfully incarcerated. He sounded upbeat and positive that he will eventually exonerated and returned to his life and family. We talked about a number of subjects, from the details of the morning Chad Swedberg was found dead, to the West Memphis 3, to the necklace he made me for Christmas.

Ken’s case is at the Supreme Court level again and he is hopeful that at least 4 of them have a conscience and can see his trial was a complete legal mess. The main two elephants in the room are the FACT that the prosecution had no evidence tying Ken to the murder. The second FACT was the lack of any real motive to commit such an act. Ken thinks we may know what their ruling is on a month or so.

Please don’t give up this fight. It could be any of us in the same situation if the police come with intimidation and false theories. What can you do? Share this blog with the complete facts on the actual police and court documents. Write Ken a letter and tell him you support his innocence. Ken’s family is still going through this every single day, just like he is. It’s good to pray, but better to ACT!

KEN ANDERSEN

#226526

7600 525th street

Rush City Mn 55069

Ground G

Candidates for political office love to say they will defend the Constitution and its precepts to the death. This sounds great but is mostly bullshit. One of the intents the writers and supporters were advocating was a rebellion against unfair treatment by tyrants with great power. Our courts have become a place for egotistical bullies to flex their great power and inflict fear on the lesser citizens. We are taught in history classes that we have certain “inalienable” rights that can not be taken away. The story of Ken Andersen shows that in practice that no longer applies. So, those of you that can crow the all the words of the Star Spangled Banner should join this cause and support the release of this innocent man. The courts have done more damage to our freedom than the terrorists ever will.

Here is Ground G, the last item on the list of why Ken Andersen, as an American citizen, should be granted a new trial. The Constitution guarantees it.

File0541     File0542

When Ken was convicted of First Degree Murder he was given a life sentence, that he is serving in a maximum security prison. Under federal and state laws he is guaranteed an appeal. Ken pleaded for a public defender who in turn told him the court would not let his court appointed attorney see any discovery in his case.

The State Supreme Court of Minnesota continues to be fine with this. God Bless America!