Mistakes made during the initial interrogations of Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen


I found a very interesting blog about the Assange case, it is very well written about the initial interrogations of Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen, the interrogations that started the bizarre Assange case. The blog is in Swedish and I have not translated the complete blog but selected the parts I find most interesting. Swedish grassroots are digging into this case and they try to do what Swedish authorities and media should have done a long time ago. The actions of Marianne Ny is causing as much dismay amongst many Swedes as it does abroad and Sweden and Swedes are so much better than Marianne Ny, Anna Ardin, Sofia Wilen, Claes Borgstrom and other dingbats involved in pushing this case to absurdity.  Here are some interesting facts, presented by a Swedish blogger, translated into English, pls consider it "rush translation":

"The initial police interrogations are the reason to the problems in the Assange case.
During criminal investigations it is of utter importance that everything get right from the beginning. It is the beginning of the investigation that is the most important. If evidence is missed, the crime scene is polluted, interrogations and interviews with involved parties are delayed, bad interrogations of witnesses and victims, if information is not checked it makes it difficult to understand what really happened. What is lost in the beginning is very difficult to recreate.
When I look through the information from the initial police interrogations I get seriously surprised over the amount of mistakes made in such a short time. Mistakes that made the investigation taken on the wrong direction from the first hour. I know that sex crimes are difficult to investigate and that the police spend a lot of time on them. The question is if the policemen that do a good job have proper equipment and if the get support they need from the management.
The police interrogation of the two women in the Assange case.
In the Assange case we know that at 2pm Friday, August 20, two women walk into a police station in central Stockholm, they wanted to talk and get some advice on two prior incidents and they where not sure on how they should proceed. Initially the crime rape was mentioned and both women were supposedly victims of rape.
Once the police had talked to the women, obviously one-by-one, the police made some phone calls to amongst others the unit for Family Violence and the chief of the policestation. Everyone that the police talked to agreed on that is was a rape case. The emergency prosecutor was contacted, she made the decision to arrest Assange in absentia, suspected of one rape and one sexual assault. The decision to arrest Assange was taken before the accusors had been interrogated.
The interrogations.
Woman 2 was interrogated immediately after the complaint was made. The interrogation started at 4.21pm and ended at 6.40pm. By the time the interrogation was over, Assange had already been arrested in absentia for one hour and forty minutes. The interrogation was a so called concept interrogation. It means that the investigator that makes the interrogation makes notes on what he/she thinks is of important to the case.  
When I read through the interrogation notes, I note that there is no information as to why Woman 2 had been waiting almost three days before she reported the rape. Neither is there any information why she came to the police station together with Anna Ardin. Nothing about the relationship she had to Anna and what she talked to her about before she came to the police. There is no information about why she chose to have sex with Assange and how she reacted when she heard that also Anna Ardin had had sex with Julian. What seems to be central to the case is that Woman 2 claims that she was woken up by Assange having sex with her. Sex with a victim that is asleep. That's the central point. And also that it was unprotected sex.
The interrogation with Anna Ardin is done on Saturday, August 21, beginning at 11.31am ending at 12.20pm. It is held over the phone and is a concept interrogation, the investigator makes written notes on what she/he remembers and finds important from the interrogation. The suspicions in this case is rape or sexual molestation. This interrogation does not include any information about the contacts between Anna Ardin and Woman 2, if they talked to each other about the alleged assaults or when Anna Ardin found out that Assange had had sex with Woman 2. And why Anna Ardin waited a week before the reported the crime. Neither has Anna Ardin's activities with Assange after the alleged rape been investigated. Nothing is mentioned about the crayfish party, the tweets or the fact that Anna Ardin chose to become Assange's and WikiLeaks Press Secretary in Sweden two days after the alleged rape. Neither is it mentioned that the Pirate Party sent a press release on August 17 where Anna Ardin is named the press secretary of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. There is no mention of a witness that can verify Anna Ardin's story or how she behaved after the alleged assault. It looks like the circumstances of the alleged crime were badly investigated. After the interrogation the alleged rape is considered a sexual molestation.    
Problems with interrogations
I want to point out that I have only read parts of the interrogations. But from them I can draw certain conclusions.
There are several problems with these interrogations. They are concept interrogations. Nothing of what the women said during the interrogations is registered. It makes in impossible to, later verify what was said. Neither can another investigator make an assessment of the womens' claims and reliability and what must be further investigated. There are two different investigators. This means that it was not possible for one investigator to ask control questions to the woman this is being heard, about what the first woman said. It makes it more difficult, or actually impossible, to find out if the women actually in any way cooperated when the came to the police station to file their complaints. Something that would be plausable and should have been investigated when two women come together to report that they have been raped by the same man. It is also impossible to find out if the information was the result of the womens' own story or if it was as answers to questions from the investigator. And we cannot find out their reaction to certain questions. If they hesitated when they gave their answers, if something in their breathing or voice changed when they aswered tough questions. Neither do we know which questions the investigator asked and can therefore not say what the investigator found important. It makes it difficult to know how to plan coming interrogations. By using concept interrogations  you risk that every interrogation will concern the same questions. Over and over again."

Post A Comment (comments are moderated before posted)

:-D:-o:-p:-x:-(:-):-\:angry::cool::cry::emb::grin::huh::laugh::lips::rolleyes:;-)

Follow Us

Facebook.pngspace.png twitter.pngspace.png rss2.png

Get the blog sent to your inbox by entering your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

svtworld.jpg

Showcase your Scandinavian business here

translate.jpg