The district court considered that the evidence was sufficient and that the testimony given by the boy was strong enough to convict the sports leader of rape.
The Court of Appeal did not agree and considered that the boy was not credible enough when he changed his testimony between the two interrogations during the preliminary investigation and that other evidence was too weak - and therefore acquitted the man.
The lawyer and prosecutor Fredrik Karlsson, who works at Umeå University on a daily basis, tells SVT why he believes that the Court of Appeal's assessment is correct.
Hear him in the video.