Hazel Press

On 25 August 2010, Stockholm's Chief Prosecutor Eva Finné, who was in charge of both Sofia Wilén and Anna Ardin’s cases, stated: "I don't think there is reason to suspect that [Julian Assange] has committed rape." While the Swedish Prosecution Authority's spokesperson, Karin Rosander, said Assange remained suspected of molestation in relation to Anna Ardin's allegations.

 

Chief Inspector Mats Gehlin, in the course of investigating Anna Ardin's allegations decided to submit a 'torn' condom fragment (provided by Sofia Wilén as evidence to support her allegations) to the Swedish state crime lab SKL (Statens kriminaltekniska laboratorium) under Ardin's case tag (Ardin has also submitted a complete 'torn' condom into evidence).

 

Precisely two months later, on 25 October, the SKL lab presented the results of their investigation into two torn condoms to Gehlin .

 

However, five days earlier Gehlin had contact the lab and filed a report time-stamped: 15:08 20 October 2010.

The Swedish Prosecution Authority, Censoring the Last Paragraph

A conversation with SKL yielded the following.

 

The condom from the residence of complainant 2 [Ardin] had no traces of DNA.

 

Vaginal swabs from complainant 1 [Wilén] had DNA from complainant 1 [Wilén] and a man.

 

The bit of condom found in the residence of complainant 1 [Wilén] had DNA from complainant 1 [Wilén] and the same man found on the vaginal swabs.

 

Complainant 1 [Wilén] did not notice that a condom broke as it was dark in the room, and when the suspect put on the condom, she heard a noise as if he were pulling on a balloon. The bit of condom was found under the bed, under the part of the bed where the suspect was lying when he put on the condom.

The torn condom submitted (12 days after the alleged incident) by Anna Ardin showed absolutely no traces of chromosomal (genomic) DNA, this proves that the condom was not used for sex.

 

While Anna Ardin's submitted condom raises a host of troubling questions, it is (contrary to first impressions) Sofia Wilén's evidence that alarms the most.

 

The charge based on Sofia Wilén allegations made against Julian Assange in the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued by Marianne Ny (Head of the Public Prosecutor's Office, Gothenburg, Sweden) over 7 weeks after Mats Gehlin contacted the the SKL lab is as follows:

 

17 August 2010: In the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state.

 

It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange. who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity.

 

This charge (and it is the only charge stemming from Sofia Wilén's allegations) does not mention; "a condom broke, a noise as if he were pulling on a balloon. The bit of condom was found under the bed." The charge is about events that happened the next morning, not during the previous night: "it was dark in the room".

 

In fact, Sofia Wilén police statement does not mention these events and none of the statements by Sofia Wilén's friends mention it.

 

Sofia Wilén made her statement on 20 August to Irmeli Krans, a political associate of Anna Ardin, while Ardin was present. Ardin made a telephone statement on the 21st. Wilén's statement was not recorded and was instead based on Krans's memory of her testimony. The statement was amended on 26 August and it is alleged that Krans embellished it.

 

The next day (27th), at the request of Ardin, the politician-lawyer Claes Borgström submits a formal request for the reconsideration of Eva Finné's decision. On 18 November, Marianne Ny issues a Swedish warrant for the arrest of Julian Assange and on 20 November the EAW is issued. Both of these warrants refer to Ardin's condom and her allegation that it was deliberately torn, but Wilén's evidence (which actually contained DNA) and associated allegation, is absent.

 

This is despite the fact that (according to Mats Gehlin's report) Wilén's condom was torn under precisely the same circumstances as Ardin's. In both cases, the 'tearing' of the condom was not seen, but heard. In both cases, this event was only discovered afterwards, when the damaged condom was found. During Wilén's interview at the police station, Anna Ardin intervened “I believe Sofia is telling the truth because a similar thing happened to me”. According to witness Donald Bostrum, Ardin stated that after her intervention "it became  [a matter for investigation] and thus became a formal complaint, even though we had not filed a complaint.” But in Wilén's case, the allegation was dismissed and censored. Perhaps this is because such an astonishingly consistent dual claim would stretch the credulity of anyone observing the case - to breaking point.

 

 

Note: Some elements of this story were first reported in the comments section of the UK newspaper The Independent. The entire comments section was censored.

August 12, 2013