The Swedish Assange prosecutor should read this

A picture named M2

In an article published on the Daily Beast, several of the detectives of the NYPD:s Special Victims Unit are interviewed regarding the Strauss-Kahn case. Obviously they will not speak about the case itself but they talk about their methods and experiences and here I find some interesting remarks that would be of interest for the Swedish police and prosecutor that handle the Assange case.
It was obvious that the detectives that heard the maid's accusations believed in her story and acted quick and efficient by arresting Strauss-Kahn who is now in house arrest in New York.  Note that it took the New York law enforcement hours to put Strauss-Kahn in arrest but months, and millions of Swedish kronor, for the Swedish law enforcement to arrest Assange.

So how does the NYPD know when a rape accuser is telling the truth? What signs are they looking for, I can tell you right now that Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen's story would not have been deemed trustworthy by NYPD's Special Victim Unit for several reasons, one is the fact that they asked for and planned to see a female police, according to the SV detectives "nine out of ten times, when a woman asks for a female detective, the story is going to be untrue.....The operative theory is that women who are lying think female cops will be more receptive to their stories". Obviously this theory worked for Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen. Other factors that are of importance when judging the credability of the alleged victims is how soon they report the abuse, are they telling the same story over and over, are they crying. In the Assange case, the Swedish cops and prosecutor do not even know if Anna Ardin or Sofia Wilen were crying or if they tell the same story over and over again as the first reports weren't even recorded, the first interview was only captured as subjective notes jotted down by the female cop and friend of Anna Ardin.  

Another interesting experience of the NYPD that obviously is unknown or ignored by Swedish law enforcement is the so called outcry. This is the first person the alleged victim tells about a sexual abuse. So the did the outcry hear the same story as the police? If the outcry's story doesn't match with the story told to the police, there is a reson to suspect someone filing a false police report. In the Assange case there are enough different versions of what happened and who did what when to at least make the NYPD suspicious, but maybe Marianne Ny has another magic formula on how to evaluate the story of an alleged rape victim?  

The detectives of the Special Victims Unite are thorough and take all rape allegations seriously "the last thing any detective wants, says Lt Robert Johnson of Brooklyn Special Victims, is to paint someone with that rapist brush and find out they are not, because the paint never comes off". The cops look for a second-by-second account of everything that happened down to the smallest details such as the smell of the alleged rapist, and every contradiction is recorded in repeated interviews, recorded of course. "When people come in to make allegations.....they don't realize we are going to go frame by frame".

It would be interesting to see for how long Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilen's story would have survived with the NYPD's Special Victim Unit.
Download File


1 - Good comment!

I think the Swedish justice, law, Assange and the women are terrible or wrong. In this case there are a lot of mistakes. But now Assange is the main victim, because Sweden has not a open district court for this matter and also a jury with members picked from political parties. May be there are enough jury men and women from Anna Ardin's party to decide to convict him.

Post A Comment (comments are moderated before posted)


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


Showcase your Scandinavian business here