Why I am Convinced that Anna Ardin is a Liar 2008

 in Uncategorized by

I am slightly updating and reposting this from 2012 because the mainstream media have ensured very few people know the detail of the “case” against Julian Assange in Sweden. The UN Working Group ruled that Assange ought never to have been arrested in the UK in the first place because there is no case, and no genuine investigation. Read this and you will know why.

The other thing not widely understood is there is NO JURY in a rape trial in Sweden and it is a SECRET TRIAL. All of the evidence, all of the witnesses, are heard in secret. No public, no jury, no media. The only public part is the charging and the verdict. There is a judge and two advisers directly appointed by political parties. So you never would get to understand how plainly the case is a stitch-up. Unless you read this.

There are so many inconsistencies in Anna Ardin’s accusation of sexual assault against Julian Assange. But the key question which leaps out at me – and which strangely I have not seen asked anywhere else – is this:

Why did Anna Ardin not warn Sofia Wilen?

On 16 August, Julian Assange had sex with Sofia Wilen. Sofia had become known in the Swedish group around Assange for the shocking pink cashmere sweater she had worn in the front row of Assange’s press conference. Anna Ardin knew Assange was planning to have sex with Sofia Wilen. On 17 August, Ardin texted a friend who was looking for Assange:

“He’s not here. He’s planned to have sex with the cashmere girl every evening, but not made it. Maybe he finally found time yesterday?”

Yet Ardin later testified that just three days earlier, on 13 August, she had been sexually assaulted by Assange; an assault so serious she was willing to try (with great success) to ruin Julian Assange’s entire life. She was also to state that this assault involved enforced unprotected sex and she was concerned about HIV.

If Ardin really believed that on 13 August Assange had forced unprotected sex on her and this could have transmitted HIV, why did she make no attempt to warn Sofia Wilen that Wilen was in danger of her life? And why was Ardin discussing with Assange his desire for sex with Wilen, and texting about it to friends, with no evident disapproval or discouragement?

Ardin had Wilen’s contact details and indeed had organised her registration for the press conference. She could have warned her. But she didn’t.

Let us fit that into a very brief survey of the whole Ardin/Assange relationship. .

11 August: Assange arrives in Stockholm for a press conference organised by a branch of the Social Democratic Party.
Anna Ardin has offered her one bed flat for him to stay in as she will be away.

13 August: Ardin comes back early. She has dinner with Assange and they have consensual sex, on the first day of meeting. Ardin subsequently alleges this turned into assault by surreptitious mutilation of the condom.

14 August: Anna volunteers to act as Julian’s press secretary. She sits next to him on the dais at his press conference. Assange meets Sofia Wilen there.

Anna tweets at 14.00:

‘Julian wants to go to a crayfish party, anyone have a couple of available seats tonight or tomorrow? #fb’

This attempt to find a crayfish party fails, so Ardin organises one herself for him, in a garden outside her flat. Anna and Julian seem good together. One guest hears Anna rib Assange that she thought “you had dumped me” when he got up from bed early that morning. Another offers to Anna that Julian can leave her flat and come stay with them. She replies:
“He can stay with me.”

15 August Still at the crayfish party with Julian, Anna tweets:

‘Sitting outdoors at 02:00 and hardly freezing with the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing! #fb’

Julian and Anna, according to both their police testimonies, sleep again in the same single bed, and continue to do so for the next few days. Assange tells police they continue to have sex; Anna tells police they do not. That evening, Anna and Julian go together to, and leave together from, a dinner with the leadership of the Pirate Party. They again sleep in the same bed.

16 August: Julian goes to have sex with Sofia Wilen: Ardin does not warn her of potential sexual assault.
Another friend offers Anna to take over housing Julian. Anna again refuses.

20 August: After Sofia Wilen contacts her to say she is worried about STD’s including HIV after unprotected sex with Julian, Anna takes her to see Anna’s friend, fellow Social Democrat member, former colleague on the same ballot in a council election, and campaigning feminist police officer, Irmeli Krans. Ardin tells Wilen the police can compel Assange to take an HIV test. Ardin sits in throughout Wilen’s unrecorded – in breach of procedure – police interview. Krans prepares a statement accusing Assange of rape. Wilen refuses to sign it.

21 August Having heard Wilen’s interview and Krans’ statement from it, Ardin makes her own police statement alleging Assange has surreptiously had unprotected sex with her eight days previously.

Some days later: Ardin produces a broken condom to the police as evidence; but a forensic examination finds no traces of Assange’s – or anyone else’s – DNA on it, and indeed it is apparently unused.

No witness has come forward to say that Ardin complained of sexual assault by Assange before Wilen’s Ardin-arranged interview with Krans – and Wilen came forward not to complain of an assault, but enquire about STDs. Wilen refused to sign the statement alleging rape, which was drawn up by Ardin’s friend Krans in Ardin’s presence.

It is therefore plain that one of two things happened:

Either

Ardin was sexually assaulted with unprotected sex, but failed to warn Wilen when she knew Assange was going to see her in hope of sex.

Ardin also continued to host Assange, help him, appear in public and private with him, act as his press secretary, and sleep in the same bed with him, refusing repeated offers to accommodate him elsewhere, all after he assaulted her.

Or

Ardin wanted sex with Assange – from whatever motive.. She “unexpectedly” returned home early after offering him the use of her one bed flat while she was away. By her own admission, she had consensual sex with him, within hours of meeting him.

She discussed with Assange his desire for sex with Wilen, and appears at least not to have been discouraging. Hearing of Wilen’s concern about HIV after unprotected sex, she took Wilen to her campaigning feminist friend, policewoman Irmeli Krans, in order to twist Wilen’s story into a sexual assault – very easy given Sweden’s astonishing “second-wave feminism” rape laws. Wilen refused to sign.

At the police station on 20 August, Wilen texted a friend at 14.25 “did not want to put any charges against JA but the police wanted to get a grip on him.”

At 17.26 she texted that she was “shocked when they arrested JA because I only wanted him to take a test”.

The next evening at 22.22 she texted “it was the police who fabricated the charges”.

Ardin then made up her own story of sexual assault. As so many friends knew she was having sex with Assange, she could not claim non-consensual sex. So she manufactured her story to fit in with Wilen’s concerns by alleging the affair of the torn condom. But the torn condom she produced has no trace of Assange on it. It is impossible to wear a condom and not leave a DNA trace.

Conclusion

I have no difficulty in saying that I firmly believe Ardin to be a liar. For her story to be true involves acceptance of behaviour which is, in the literal sense, incredible.

Ardin’s story is of course incredibly weak, but that does not matter. Firstly, you were never supposed to see all this detail. Rape trials in Sweden are held entirely in secret. There is no jury, and the government appointed judge is flanked by assessors appointed directly by political parties. If Assange goes to Sweden, he will disappear into jail, the trial will be secret, and the next thing you will hear is that he is guilty and a rapist.

Secondly, of course, it does not matter the evidence is so weak, as just to cry rape is to tarnish a man’s reputation forever. Anna Ardin has already succeeded in ruining much of the work and life of Assange. The details of the story being pathetic is unimportant.

By crying rape, politically correct opinion falls in behind the line that it is wrong even to look at the evidence. If you are not allowed to know who the accuser is, how can you find out that she worked with CIA-funded anti-Castro groups in Havana and Miami?

Finally, to those useful idiots who claim that the way to test these matters is in court, I would say of course, you are right, we should trust the state always, fit-ups never happen, and we should absolutely condemn the disgraceful behaviour of those who campaigned for the Birmingham Six.

Liked this article? Share using the links below. Then View Latest Posts

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

2,008 thoughts on “Why I am Convinced that Anna Ardin is a Liar”

1 … 45 46 47 48 49 … 67
  • John Goss

    Axel, I see what you’re saying. Either is a possibility. Treading foot on Swedish soil would be even more dangerous for Assange as Bush treading foot in Europe.

    Arbed and Jemand, is there any way we can get flyers printed and distributed to hand out to cinema-goers? Are there enough Assange supporters nationwide to work a rota on doing this? I’d do my bit locally. The flyer needs careful wording.

  • Jemand

    John Goss, I guess that would depend on how much money you want to spend. I don’t think flyers are very economical tho’. I’m not sure what kind of people the producers expect will pay money to see a doco that rips into JA, so cinema-goers’ preparedness to thoroughly read a flyer prior to entering a cinema is, I think, fairly low. I’m guessing that well-informed JA supporters will stay away in droves, haters will be disinclined to attend because they’ve made up their minds already and the uncommitted are indifferent – I hope that’s how it will pan out.
    . . .

    Arbed, thanks for the link to Reddit. I was also concerned with copyright issues related to publication and distribution of the annotated-transcript – in particular, criminal investigations into copyright violations. Still looking into it.

  • Jemand

    PS – It would be a good thing, I think, if JA himself were to arrange a high quality video discussion about,and rebuttal of, the doco. Such a video can be widely distributed by various means including torrents and direct downloads.

  • Jemand

    There already appears to be a copy of Alex Gibney’s polemical documentary, “We Steal Secrets – The Story of Wikileaks” on the intergoogle.

    The video was made available sometime in the last two days on isohunt.com.

    And there’s a “Democracy Now” interview with a Wikileak’s legal advisor who criticizes Gibney’s documentary.

    I won’t encourage anyone to link to the Gibney doco torrent, for legal reasons. But I do want to encourage discussion, here and elsewhere, of the impact that having a copy available on isohunt can have on the doco’s commercial success at the box office.

  • Arbed

    Hi Jemand,

    Do you have a link for the Democracy Now interview with Wikileaks legal advisor? I know Democracy Now interviewed Jennifer Robinson after the film premiered at the Sundance festival, but they had problems with the transmission signal so only the first few minutes of her interview were broadcast. Or is this a different legal advisor? Or an interview from the last few days?

  • Jemand

    Hi Arbed, the link to the “democracy now” interview is –
    http://isohunt.com/torrent_details/446698957/Steal+secrets+story+wikileaks?tab=summary

    File name is dn2013-0123.mp4.

    I haven’t downloaded it yet (data quota squeezed) just took the available details from the summary. And I’ve only just noticed it is dated 23 Jan, so maybe less relevant than later interviews. There could be a lot more Wikileaks material on that website, need to try various search queries. If you haven’t got a bit torrent client, I recommend reading wikipedia first, look at available clients and if you’re not sure, download bitcomet, it’s free. People might advise another client, there are plenty out there.

    Let us know how you get on.

  • Arbed

    Take a look at the language of this BBC news report on the forthcoming visit of Ecuador’s Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino to Julian Assange:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22746347

    That’s quite some softening from the language and stance of Hague’s ridiculous press briefing last year, isn’t it?

  • Arbed

    And so has Sofia Wilen’s new lawyer. While wilfully ignoring the fact that US prosecutors’ opening arguments in Bradley Manning’s trial all but name Julian Assange as the “classified enemy” of the United States, and mindful that Britain and Ecuador are at last going to have sensible talks, Sofia Wilen is pleading for the Swedish government to intervene to force Julian Assange’s extradition to Sweden for questioning that everybody knows could just as easily – and legally – take place in the Ecuadorian embassy. (article also dated yesterday – use Google translate):

    http://www.svt.se/nyheter/varlden/dodlage-i-assangefallet

    Hands up all those who don’t think this throws a bit more light on who exactly Sofia Wilen is (or who she works for)?

  • Arbed

    Note: Not one word about Julian Assange in that whole Svt.se article linked above, despite the heavy, heavy focus the US prosecutor’s opening address made on close links and active conspiracy between Bradley and Julian – or tried to make.

  • John Goss

    Arbed, the very timing of this article shows that the whole business has nothing to do with law and everything to do with politics. Sofia Wilen has, I must believe, been offered something quite lucrative not to drop these false charges. Why does nobody have anything on her? Is she in a safe house to keep her away from inquisitive journalists?

    I’ve spotted something which I consider to be serious. Look at the list for Bilderberg at The Grove, Watford, starting on Thursday through to Sunday.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10095943/Osborne-Clarke-and-Balls-to-attend-Bilderberg-Group-meeting.html

    Carl Bildt is on it, as is Stefan Löfven, Party Leader, Social Democratic Party (SAP), as is Henry Kissinger (endorser of the Don’t be Evil, and Julian’s article for the NYT) and also there is one of the ‘witch-doctor’ authors, Eric Schmidt. These people together with Osborne and Balls are going to have Julian’s fate as a main item for the rulers of the world (as they see themselves). Is there time to get more of Wikileaks supporters to the Fringe Festival? I’m sure there will be some there anyway.

  • John Goss

    Having had a little time to study the Bilderbergers in more depth these are likely to be involved in how Wikileaks can be stopped from revealing the truth about their activities and those of their friends.

    Stefan Löfven, Party Leader, Social Democratic Party (SAP)
    Carl Bildt, Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs
    Eric E. Schmidt, Executive Chairman, Google Inc.
    Anders Borg, Swedish Minister for Finance
    David H. Petraeus, General, U.S. Army (Retired)
    Richard N. Perle, Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
    George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer
    Peter Mandelson, Chairman, Global Counsel; Chairman, Lazard International
    Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc.

    Kenneth Clarke, Cabinet Minister
    Robert D. Kaplan, Chief Geopolitical Analyst, Stratfor

    Kaplan and his company have had a recent success with the capture of Jeremy Hammond who has pleaded guilty to hacking Stratfor files and could face up to ten years in prison.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22703579

    I was not able to find anybody who might be representing Australia. These are dangerous people where world security is concerned.

  • John Goss

    From Bilderberg’s own website.

    The key topics for discussion this year include:
    • Can the US and Europe grow faster and create jobs?
    • Jobs, entitlement and debt
    • How big data is changing almost everything
    • Nationalism and populism
    • US foreign policy
    • Africa’s challenges
    • Cyber warfare and the proliferation of asymmetric threats
    • Major trends in medical research
    • Online education: promise and impacts
    • Politics of the European Union
    • Developments in the Middle East
    • Current affairs

    My guess is that Wikileaks will be discussed under “Cyber warfare and the proliferation of asymmetric threats”. I am interested too in “Africa’s challenges” since there is scant, if any, representation from any country other than South Africa. There are mineral companies there.

  • Arbed

    From the Oh-Oh Dept:

    Sofia Wilen’s new lawyer – yes, the one who’s been issuing statements demanding Sweden exert pressure on Ecuador to relinquish a political refugee for questioning in solitary confinement in Sweden – is Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfelt’s family lawyer:

    http://www.thelocal.se/42954/20120901

  • Jemand

    Thanks for the links, John. It looks like we can email Sofia at her hotmail account, as displayed in your free-range link. Although, I’m not sure how one would, should or could go about engaging with her. Maybe just put a rudely blunt question to her – “What in hell is going on?”

  • axel

    @jemand 7.58

    you wrote:It looks like we can email Sofia at her hotmail account, as displayed in your free-range link. Although, I’m not sure how one would, should or could go about engaging with her…

    response: Be polite. Ask her to save herself by coming out in an interview speaking the truth. And then visit Julian at the embassy.

    It is unlikely that you will succeed, but I see no better message to give her.

  • Jemand

    Alex Gibney’s tendentious doco “We Steal Secrets: The Story of Wikileaks” isn’t doing all that well at the box office. I don’t think the dvd will do well either. What a shame.

    Gross to date : ~$93K, Budget unavailable
    http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=westealsecrets.htm

    From Wiki –
    Alexa O’Brien, the journalist who for her coverage of the Bradley Manning pre-trial was short listed for the 2013 Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, reviewed the film. She wrote, “If We Steal Secrets or the subsequent Q & A with director, Alex Gibney, revealed anything, it’s that the filmmaker is quite uninformed about the trial of Bradley Manning. He can barely speak on the topic or on that of the largest criminal probe of a publisher and its source in history.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Steal_Secrets:_The_Story_of_WikiLeaks

    From movie’s facebook page, a comment –
    “Moral code? Its about the freedom of the press. You guys do realize Wikileaks is a legitimate news source and are currently the only organization with the balls to report the fucked up things governments do and get away with! Its for accountability.”

    https://www.facebook.com/WeStealSecrets
    . . . .

    @Axel – I don’t normally email strangers under such circumstances and wouldn’t know how to phrase my question above to Ms Wilen. And I guess we can’t know for sure if she set up this account.

  • Arbed

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/343183267215859712

    If I am reading this tweet correctly, Sofia Wilen’s lawyer – shared with the Swedish Prime Minister – has been co-ordinating directly with non-Swedish media in her recent statements about her client. These have included:

    1. That her client is a “victim” who is suffering deep pyschological damage as a result of an “extremely serious assault”.

    2. Confirmation that her client did indeed originally intend to report a rape to police, and was not therefore “railroaded” by anyone or merely seeking “advice” about HIV.

    3. Demands for political and diplomatic intervention from the Swedish government to bring pressure on the government of Ecuador to over-ride their decision to award political asylum to Julian Assange and force his extradition to Sweden for questioning.

    Given that in Sweden all plaintiff’s counsels are directly funded by the State, and given Elizabeth Massi Fritz’ close personal connection to the Swedish Prime Minister and his family, does this direct co-ordination with foreign media amount to a State-run PR campaign over (and political interference in) the preliminary stages of a criminal investigation?

    Answers, please.

  • Arbed

    I should just note that point 2. above completely contradicts everything Sofia Wilen’s friends and work colleagues report in their witness statements to police that she told them at the time. In fact, her own witness statement says she had no idea she’d been the victim of a crime until she had spoken to her friends. Very odd then that instead of accepting a senior prosecutor’s decision that her testimony indicated “that no crime has been committed” she phoned Claes Borgstrom the same day Eva Finne closed the case and worked with him to get it re-opened…

    Hmm… how to square that circle? Completely influenced and “railroaded” by others vs not affected AT ALL by investigators’ assessments, mediation attempts by legal luminaries such as Gareth Pierce, Helena Kennedy and even the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, not to mention international public opinion about the very real threat of lifelong incarceration Julian Assange faces.

    What a Mixed-up, Muddled-up, Shook-up Girl our little Lola is…

1 … 45 46 47 48 49 … 67

Comments are closed.