Att fånga en "gädda": hur brottsprovokation rättfärdigas av Dumpen och institutionella aktörer

Sammanfattning

This study examines how provocative investigative methods in cases of child sexual abuse are presented, negotiated and justified across different contexts, with particular focus on institutional texts and material produced by the non-institutional actor Dumpen. The aim is to analyze how such methods are justified, how risks are managed, and how arguments and problem representations compare across the materials. The study is based on a qualitative content analysis of the Swedish governmental inquiry (SOU 2025:109), associated consultation responses from institutions and columns published by Dumpen. The analysis draws on theories of moral panic and the risk society, enabling an understanding of how threats, risks, and social responses are framed. The findings show a shared understanding across materials that child sexual abuse constitutes a serious societal problem, thereby justifying more far-reaching measures. However, the materials somewhat differ in how the problem is defined and how risks are understood. The institutional material is characterized by a logic of balancing risks such as due process and personal integrity against the need for effective crime control. In contrast, Dumpen’s material presents a more morally charged and emotionally amplified problem framing, emphasizing the severity and urgency of the threat while largely downplaying or omitting potential risks. Overall, the study shows how the boundaries of acceptable crime control are continuously renegotiated in relation to social norms, perceived threats and action demands. The study thus contributes to a deeper understanding of how legal principles are challenged and reinterpreted through the interaction between formal and informal actors.