learning · Russian — bilingual opening

The Crime That Gave Rise to One of Psychology’s Most Dangerous Myths

The story of the 1973 Stockholm bank siege suggests that “Stockholm syndrome” was less a clinical discovery than a convenient myth that shifted blame away from the authorities and onto the hostages themselves.

Опасный миф психологии используют более 50 лет
Kholod · By Peggy Lipton · 8 June 2026 · read the original in Russian →

Многие слышали про термин «стокгольмский синдром» — именно с помощью него часто объясняют, почему заложники могут начать испытывать симпатию к тем, кто их захватил, а жертвы абьюза — к своим мучителям. Однако мало кто знает, что этот термин придумал психиатр, ни разу не пообщавшийся с женщиной, которой он поставил такой «диагноз». Эта история началась с ограбления банка — а закончилась романом одной из заложниц с преступником. И все было не так просто, как кажется на первый взгляд. «Холод» рассказывает историю преступления, породившую один из самых опасных психологических мифов.

Many people have heard the term “Stockholm syndrome”: it is often invoked to explain why hostages may begin to feel sympathy for those who have taken them captive, or why victims of abuse may feel attached to their tormentors. Yet few know that the term was coined by a psychiatrist who had never once spoken with the woman to whom he assigned this “diagnosis.” The story began with a bank robbery and ended with one of the hostages having an affair with a criminal. And nothing about it was as simple as it might seem at first glance. Kholod tells the story of the crime that gave rise to one of psychology’s most dangerous myths.

Утром 23 августа 1973 года жительница Стокгольма, 23-летняя Кристин Энмарк пришла на работу в крупный государственный банк в центре города.

On the morning of August 23, 1973, 23-year-old Stockholm resident Kristin Enmark arrived for work at a large state bank in the city center.

Everything was as usual. Around ten in the morning, Kristin stopped to chat with a colleague she liked. Then suddenly someone burst through the bank’s main entrance, and a deafening crash rang out: a burst of automatic gunfire.

The robber shouted, “The party starts now!” Some people managed to run out into the street; others began dropping to the floor. Kristin tried to hide under a desk. She simply could not believe what was happening. Later she would say, “I thought things like that only happened in America.”

The robber had a peculiar appearance: he was wearing a woman’s wig, toy glasses, and a dyed mustache. His behavior was unusual too; Kristin described him as nervous and “jittery.” It was later suggested that he had been under the influence of drugs.

Soon a police inspector appeared inside the building. The robber noticed him and fired again. The attacker hit the officer in the hand. It became clear that any careless move could lead to wounds and deaths.

At last the robber stated his demands. First, he wanted three million Swedish kronor, the equivalent of about 200 million rubles today.

Second, he demanded that an acquaintance of his, the prisoner Clark Olofsson, be brought to him from prison. Olofsson was a well-known criminal, frequently written about in Swedish newspapers. He was often called the “king of escapes,” because he slipped away from the police with virtuoso skill.

Third, the attacker wanted weapons and a car, and he wanted himself and Clark Olofsson to be allowed to leave, taking the female hostages with them. In this way he hoped to guarantee that the police would not shoot at the car.

The assailant waved his submachine gun around, kept threatening to shoot, and was in a state of extreme agitation. He made it clear that if his demands were not met, one of the captives would soon die.

Crowds of journalists gathered outside. Through the windows they could see the robber brandishing his weapon, pointing it now at the captives, now at the police negotiators.

In the end, cornered, the police met one of his demands: part of the money was brought to the criminal. After that he allowed the people lying on the floor to get up and leave, keeping only three female hostages in the bank. Kristin was among them.

Despite the tense situation, at one point the captives had a chance to escape. One of the women, Birgitta, asked to use the toilet, and the robber let her go there unguarded. On the way she saw that a whole group of police officers had gathered in the corridor outside the banking hall. She could have gone to them, and they would have led her out through a back exit. But Birgitta was afraid: if she did not return, the assailant would shoot her two colleagues.

She came back, and after her Kristin also went to the toilet, and also saw the corridor through which one could leave. But she too returned to the criminal.

Kristin herself later said that she was simply too frightened to run; besides, she could not bear the thought that the other hostages might be killed because of her. They were in this disaster together, and a sense of solidarity and responsibility for one another had arisen among them.

Soon Olofsson was finally brought to the bank. He later said that he was greatly surprised by everything that was happening and did not even immediately understand who this robber was who had demanded that he be taken out of prison.

At first, the police had not wanted to play along with the assailant at all by bringing him a well-known criminal. But the hostages’ lives were at stake. Besides, the police thought Olofsson might even prove useful to them. On the way to the bank, they asked him to help persuade the gunman to surrender and promised that, in return, his remaining sentence would be reduced.

Once he arrived, however, Olofsson did not behave quite as the police had expected. He did indeed begin acting as a negotiator, only on the criminal’s side. Instead of persuading him to surrender, Olofsson embraced him and immediately joined him in demanding that they be given the money and a car.

He also began taking charge of the bank premises, inspecting every corner and finding one more person who had been hiding there since morning: a bank employee named Sven. They decided to keep him as a hostage too, so now there were four captives.

The police were still stalling and had not brought the rest of the ransom. Meanwhile, snipers had already taken up positions on a neighboring building. So the criminals decided to move into the bank vault, a small windowless room where it was easier to control the entrance.

Thus six people, two bandits and four captives, barricaded themselves in a small room, surrounded on all sides by police.

They had no idea that over the next several days they would enter history, and that their captivity would generate one of the most harmful myths about psychology.

The Strange Behavior of the HostagesСтранное поведение заложников

As soon as news of the bank seizure spread through Sweden, police and journalists poured into the city center. Television crews reported from the scene, and the whole country was glued to its screens. Newspaper circulations soared, and crowds of people kept vigil near the bank for days, hoping to learn or see something. Yet no one really understood what was happening inside.

The siege lasted more than five days, and all kinds of rumors circulated. At one point, for example, people began saying that the bandits were torturing and raping the female hostages. Some police officers believed they needed to launch an armed assault immediately and try to free the women at any cost.

But then the captives themselves began behaving in a way that many found strange, even blameworthy. One day, for instance, the chief of police demanded that the hostages be brought out of the vault, if only briefly, so he could make sure they were all right.

The criminals agreed. Clark Olofsson led the captives one by one out onto the stairs, putting an arm around some of their shoulders. At the same time, the hostages seemed to speak contemptuously to the police chief: they said they were fine and, as he later recalled, generally behaved as if in this situation they were not victims but supporters of the robbers.

Gradually, the situation grew stranger and stranger to those observing from the outside. From inside the bank, the hostages were constantly speaking by telephone with journalists. They asked that the building not be stormed and said that the police should meet the criminals’ demands.

At one point Kristin even called Sweden’s prime minister, Olof Palme. She said, “I trust Clark completely, and the robber too; I’m not afraid of them in the least. They haven’t done anything to me and have been very kind. Do you know what I’m afraid of? That the police will do something, that the police will storm the place.”

She asked to be allowed to leave together with the criminals and repeated many times that she trusted them more than the police. Kristin did not know that her conversation was being recorded. Soon the whole country heard it and began discussing it. Kristin’s mother even called the bank and scolded her daughter for allowing herself to speak so rudely to the prime minister.

No one understood what was happening to the hostages. Why were they asking the police not to rescue them and praising the robbers? A rumor emerged that Kristin was having an affair with the bandit Clark Olofsson, or even that she was his accomplice.

In truth, Kristin herself later said, everything had been entirely different. Years later she wrote a book called I Became Stockholm Syndrome. In it, she described in detail what had happened inside the bank.

“There Are Enough Dead Heroes”

Kristin said that neither journalists nor police understood what the situation actually looked like to the captives. In addition, the police behaved with extreme carelessness and irresponsibility and made a great many mistakes, so the hostages realized there was no point hoping for help from the guardians of law and order.

This, according to her, is what happened in the bank during those five days.

As soon as the police negotiators brought Clark Olofsson in, the atmosphere began to change quickly. Olofsson calmed the robber down; he also untied the female hostages, hugged them, and told them not to be afraid.

“Clark talked to us; he behaved like a human being. He seemed like a hero to me when he came into the bank,” Kristin recalled.

Olofsson allowed all the captives to call home and tell their families that they were alive and well. He also said that he did not want to hurt anyone. If the police behaved calmly and did not begin an assault, he said, no one would touch Kristin or her colleagues.

“In hindsight I understand: Olofsson was building trust with the hostages, instilling the idea that the police were interested only in putting an end to this drama and did not care how many people died,” she later reflected.

For several days the criminals and their captives stayed in the vault. They had to sleep on the floor, and the room was cramped and unheated. At first the police passed in food, drinks, and cigarettes, and the hostages could use the telephone freely and continued communicating with journalists.

But all this led to mass criticism of the authorities in the media. Olofsson was telling journalists that his actions were a protest against the system and the police. He also argued that the police were in no hurry to meet the robber’s demands because the state supposedly did not care about human lives at all.

The female hostages said the same thing: they told journalists they had become disillusioned with the police, who refused to pay the ransom and seemed in no hurry to save them.

The media broadcast this point of view, and as a result real public pressure began to build on the police and politicians. Then law enforcement decided that the hostages’ free communication with journalists had to be brought to an end, and a real siege began.

The criminals and captives were locked inside the vault from the outside. Two of the women began having attacks of claustrophobia. Food stopped being brought to them, and all six began to go hungry; they relieved themselves into wastebaskets. Telephone contact was also restricted. The captives asked permission to contact their loved ones, but the police refused.

The result was that criminals and captives suffered together, and together they criticized the police and grew angry at them. Before long, a kind of mutual understanding arose among them.

It was cold in the vault, and the robbers gave the female hostages their jackets. When food began to run short, they gave them their own portions. The captives gradually calmed down a little, and since there was nothing to do in the vault, they began talking with the bandits: taking turns telling stories, playing tic-tac-toe, and so on.

Kristin recalled that the most frightening moments came when the police tried to do something. If a shootout had begun in the vault, the hostages could easily have been killed. Especially since the police had carbines loaded with expanding bullets, which are not normally used against people because they cause particularly severe pain and grievous wounds.

Kristin believed the best outcome would be to avoid a police assault and simply allow the robbers to leave with the female hostages. She believed the criminals would not kill them, but would simply drop them somewhere out in the back of beyond.

This was exactly what Kristin tried to convince the prime minister of over the phone. But he responded that he could not negotiate with criminals and also suggested that Kristin herself persuade them to surrender. She found this proposal absurd; she later said that at that moment she became definitively disillusioned with the government.

“I listen to those recordings, and they shock me. I hear a frightened little girl begging for her life to be spared,” she said.

Kristin also claimed that during the conversation the prime minister asked her, “Don’t you want to die at your post?” implying that this would be heroic.

That phrase is not on the recording; Kristin believes it was cut out. At the same time, there is indeed a moment in the conversation where something has clearly been edited, followed by Kristin’s line: “There are enough dead heroes as it is.” For that reason, many find her version plausible.

Kristin later explained that, in the situation as it had developed, the criminals who had taken them captive began to seem safer and more humane to the hostages than the police.

They Risked a Teenager’s LifeРискнули жизнью подростка

Overall, the government and the police were clearly unprepared for the bank seizure, and journalists later noted that their actions had been chaotic and ill-considered. One of their mistakes could even have cost a teenager his life.

The problem was that for a long time the police could not identify the man who had seized the bank, since he was wearing a wig and glasses. They assumed he was a former accomplice of Olofsson’s named Kaj Hansson.

The police tracked down Hansson’s brother, a 17-year-old boy, and brought him to the bank to help with the negotiations. When he was led into the building, he began shouting, “Kaj, it’s your brother!”

But the bandit’s name was not Kaj at all. In fact, his name was Jan-Erik Olsson. And when he saw an unfamiliar teenager calling himself his brother, he did not understand what was happening and began shooting, not at the boy himself, but at the floor near his feet.

For Kristin this was further proof that the police had no idea what they were doing and were prepared to endanger the life of a teenager who had nothing whatsoever to do with any of this.

“Gas Is Coming!”

On the third day of the siege, the police began drilling into the ceiling of the vault. They insisted that this was how they would pass food into the room, but in fact they intended to pump gas inside.

Given that the captives were in a small enclosed space, this could have killed them or seriously harmed their health. Kristin recalled that the roar of the drill seemed unbearable, and water from the drilling mechanism ran down onto the vault floor. Psychologically, it was like torture. The captives shouted and begged the police to stop drilling, but no one listened to them.

By that point the hostages already had a firm sense that the police did not care about their lives and that even the criminals cared for them more.

To stop the police, Olsson decided to resort to blackmail. He put rope nooses around the hostages’ necks and tied the ends of the ropes to bank cabinets. The result was that if gas was released, the hostages would lose consciousness and suffocate in the nooses.

Kristin recalled that Jan and Clark explained to the captives that they were not actually going to kill them, but were only bluffing so the police would not risk using gas. And if gas was released after all, they would immediately cut the ropes. In any case, the hostages soon grew tired of standing, and the nooses were removed.

Now, however, the captives were certain that if the police released gas despite the bluff with the nooses, it would be a deeply cynical act: it would mean the police had sacrificed their lives in order to arrest the criminals.

And then, on the sixth day of the siege, the light in the room abruptly went out, and tear gas really was released. “We heard it pouring in with a hissing sound. Someone shouted: Gas is coming. And we shouted for them to stop gassing us. We panicked,” Kristin said.

At that moment the robbers did surrender. When the gas began coming in, Olsson said he was not prepared to sacrifice the hostages, and together with everyone else he began banging on the door and asking to be let out. But the police did not open it immediately: they kept the captives locked inside until the criminal pushed his weapon through the drilled hole. And all that time, gas kept entering the room.

In the end everyone was allowed out of the vault. As they parted, some of the hostages embraced Olsson. Those who had been freed were terribly angry at the police and the authorities.

When Olofsson was seized and they began beating him, Kristin shouted, “He didn’t do anything!” It seemed to her that her anger was entirely justified and that she had the right to criticize the authorities and the police.

Speaking with journalists, she also sharply criticized the actions of psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, the very man who had advised the police and proposed some of the controversial ideas. For example, it had been his notion to bring the 17-year-old boy to the bank, and it was with his approval that food stopped being given to the captives.

Bejerot, in turn, told journalists that Kristin was suffering from a certain “Norrmalmstorg syndrome,” a term he appears to have invented on the fly and named after the square where the robbery took place. Later, for simplicity, it was recast as Stockholm syndrome.

According to Bejerot, Kristin was criticizing him and the police not because they had made mistakes. She simply did not understand what she was saying; she had a particular mental condition. Many believed the psychiatrist, and the myth of so-called Stockholm syndrome began spreading around the world.

“Are You in Love with Olofsson?”

When the hostages were freed, the first thing that happened was that they were placed under medical observation. Kristin recalls that she was emotionally traumatized and needed real help. She was extremely agitated, could not sleep, and asked for someone to hold her hand. At night she kept jumping up and looking around, as if she could not believe she was finally safe.

At the same time, she recalled that the first question a psychiatrist asked her was: “Are you in love with Olofsson?” According to Kristin, the doctors were far less interested in her condition than in her attitude toward the criminal.

Soon she learned that many people were saying she had some syndrome that the psychiatrist Bejerot had been discussing on the news. Yet Bejerot himself had never once spoken with Kristin or asked why she had defended the criminals.

“I felt as if I were in the dock. Many people thought that what had happened was my fault. I had the feeling that I had to justify myself,” she wrote.

Later, Kristin began suffering from claustrophobia and flashbacks. Although she herself suspected she had PTSD, she was never given that diagnosis.

“Later I understood that Stockholm syndrome was being constructed. This diagnosis was able to explain everything that had happened in such a way that the police could not be blamed for anything,” Kristin reflected.

…the essay continues at the source.

Y done · S save · G great · B bad · N not for me