Three Swedish Prosecutors Dismiss All Charges. Part 2 of the Truth on Assange

WikiLeaks, headed by Julian Assange, has released a whole bunch of American government emails showing how America deceives the world. Is he really being hunted by the American oligarchy, with the active cooperation of British and Swedish authorities? Or are the allegations of sexual assault against him real?

Don't just believe what the politicians and the government say, they have their own agenda. Don't automatically believe what you see on television or read in the press either, they want to manipulate you. Don't uncritically accept anything, even this analysis, you need to check things out for yourself so you can come to your own conclusion.

This second article continues to investigate the facts so you can make up your own mind. The first in this series looked at the evidence underlying the rape allegations of Anna Ardin and Sophia Wilen, the two Assange accusers.

All the articles about this matter name Julian Assange, although some do not name Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen. But like his two accusers, Assange is also innocent until proven guilty. Equality demands that either all names or no names be mentioned.

Prosecutors and the Forensic Report Refute their Story
11. Having examined Ardin's and Wilen's allegations, the first Swedish prosecutor decides their stories, contradictory evidence, and subsequent behavior lack credibility, and dismiss all charges against Assange.

12. A second Swedish prosecutor re-examines the evidence, agrees and also declines to prosecute.

13. A third prosecutor concurs and likewise dismisses their allegations. That's three separate prosecutors who could not find any basis for prosecution.

14. The forensic report on the evidence submitted by the two women shows they both handed in "torn" and "used" condoms - one allegedly "deliberately torn during sex," which did NOT have any DNA on it!

15. This damning forensic evidence is suppressed by Marianne Ny, the fourth Swedish prosecutor, although she had known it weeks before she wrote out the Assange extradition order. Its absence from the international arrest warrant speaks louder than words.

16. Assange's London attorney, Mark Stephens, is told by Swedish prosecutors that Assange is not wanted for allegations of rape, as internationally reported, but for something far less serious called "sex by surprise." Yet this allegation - which only exists in Sweden and apparently involves a fine of up to $750 - is deemed sufficiently serious to merit an international arrest warrant.

Controversial Swedish Lawyer gets involved
17. But how did Swedish politicians lawyer Claes Borgstrom and the fourth prosecutor Marianne Ny get involved? Borgstrom is a good friend of Ny who is from Gothenburg, not where the alleged offenses took place. Did Borgstrom persuade Ny to re-open the already thrice dismissed charges against Assange?

18. Wikipedia reports serious allegations of incompetence by Social Democrat politician attorney Claes Borgstrom. Borgstrom's five years as mentally disturbed Thomas Quick's defense counsel is categorized as "the worst defense counsel job in modern Swedish history." Quick's subsequent appeal is successful.

19. The controversial Borgstrom becomes the two women's lawyer, but without charging them for his services. A couple of years later, March 2013, Borgstrom sends an unusually large invoice for plaintiff counsel services to Stockholm District Court. What were his motives for getting involved?

The fourth prosecutor decides Assange needs to answer some questions
20. The evidence is so flimsy that the fourth prosecutor, Marianne Ny, has charged Assange neither with rape nor any other crime. Although she declines to question him in England, which is allowed, she insists she just wants to question him and signs an International Arrest Warrant as well as an INTERPOL Red Notice.

21. Ny is a public prosecutor, NOT an impartial 'judicial authority’. Yet since the judiciary and the prosecution have very separate responsibilities, arrest warrants are issued by an impartial judicial authority.

22. British legal authorities ignored the centuries old legal tradition that to ensure a fair trial, a judicial authority must be impartial and independent both of the executive and the parties. Weakening judicial impartiality in this manner is a very dangerous precedent to make. As one legal expert notes:

"The notion that a prosecutor is a ’judicial authority’ is a contradiction in terms."

23. The international arrest warrant was signed by prosecutor Ny because it had, supposedly, been "impossible" to interview him during the investigation. But Assange was in England, and offered to answer questions the same way his two accusers were interviewed - by telephone.

24. Ny's refusal to allow Assange to answer questions by telephone along with her refusal to interview him in the Swedish and Ecuadorean embassies in England again suggests ulterior motives. But why did she refuse these offers? And why did she decline to give any reason for her refusal?

25. Ny even ignores Assange's repeated requests that the allegations against him be communicated to him in a language he understands.

26. International Arrest Warrants are normally issued for people accused of crimes, not those only wanted for questioning! Is prosecutor Ny's signature and use of such a warrant even legal?

For the first article in this series, see: Consensual Sex or Rape? Part 1 of the Truth on Assange

© Copyright worldwide Cris Baker, www.LifeStrategies.net All rights reserved. Republishing welcomed under Creative Commons noncommercial no derivatives license preserving all links intact, so please +1 and share this widely!

Food for Thought
“Actions speak louder than words. There is a big difference between what people say and what they do.”

- - Alexander Osterwalder, author, speaker, business guru