Hazel Press

When the politician-lawyer Borgström re-opened the Assange case, he was in the midst of an election (he would later become the publicly-financed representative of Ardin and Wilén). At this time, Borgström's re-election prospects were in difficulties; the political tide in Sweden was shifting decisively towards the centre-right Alliance Party and he had been heavily criticised for failing to protect his mentally disturbed client's interests (Thomas Quick) in a case that was rapidly becoming known as Sweden’s most infamous miscarriage of justice. Recently Anne Ramberg, Secretary General of the Swedish Bar Association, investigated e-mail conversations (regarding a media campaign seeking to mitigate the depth of the Quick scandal) between Borgström, Supreme Court Justice Göran Lambertz, prosecution lawyer Christer van der Kwast and interrogator Seppo Penttinen. The Bar Association board has decided to refer the case for trial in the Disciplinary Committee.


Thomas Bodström, the Swedish Justice minister responsible for the CIA renditions and subsequent torture of Ahmed Agiza and Muhammad al-Zery (two Egyptians citizens seeking asylum in Sweden), and Borgström are business partners in a law firm (Borgström & Bodström Advokatbyrå). Borgström is a friend of Ardin's, Krans's and Ny's; he is the Social Democrat Party's spokeperson on gender equality, he claims that all men carry a collective guilt for violence against women and has in this context supported Gudrun Schyman's "Man Tax".


Bodström, Borgström, Ny, Krans and Ardin all have political ties to the Social Democrat Party. Bodström and Ardin are members of a Christian faction of the Social Democrat party, the “Brotherhood Movement” (Bröderskapsrörelsen). On Krans homepage she has published pictures of herself together with the retired leader of the party, Mona Sahlin, and the former minister Bodström.


Both the EAW and the Interpol Red Notice were issued for Assange by Sweden just before Wikileaks began to publish Cablegate.


There is no bail system in Sweden, Assange would be held in a remand prison throughout any proceedings and at any time the United States can file their extradition warrant. He would then remain in prison until extradition. Once in Sweden, Assange will no longer be able to seek political asylum.


Very little attention has been given to the temporary surrender (sometimes called 'conditional release’) mechanism that Sweden established bilaterally with the United States in their 1984 treaty (TIAS 10812) which supports the contention that an extradition from Sweden would be rather more straightforward than from the UK.


Tony Kevin, Australian ambassador to Poland (1991–94) and Cambodia (1994–97): “If he is soon extradited from the UK to Sweden, as now seems likely, he faces the danger of early 'temporary surrender' from there to the US, under a Swedish-US arrangement for transferring people charged with crimes in both countries. This enables the two governments to avoid procedural requirements and opportunities for appeal that exist under normal extradition arrangements. Assange could then face very serious charges in the US. Cables recently obtained by the Sydney Morning Herald under Freedom of Information from the Australian Embassy in Washington confirm that since 2010 the US Justice Department has conducted an 'active and vigorous inquiry into whether Assange can be charged under US law, most likely the 1917 Espionage Act'”. 


The Stratfor files published by WikiLeaks indicates the existence of a secret indictment against Assange. In one of the leaked emails sent to intelligence analysts on 26 January 2011, the company's vice-president, Fred Burton, wrote, "We have a sealed indictment on Assange", while the vice-president of public policy, Bart Mongoven wrote that Assange should face, “whatever trumped-up charge is available to get this guy and his servers off the streets.”


ABC Four Corners Andrew Fowler (23 June 2012):  "Four Corners has obtained a copy of a subpoena from a grand jury which is examining evidence for possible charges relating to 'conspiracy to communicate or transmit national defence information' and obtaining 'information protected from disclosure from national defence'. Critically, the subpoena (Grand Jury case number: 10GJ3793) contains the identifying codes 10 and 3793". Michael Ratner: "There's a grand jury currently sitting in Alexandria, Virginia, and it's interesting the grand jury's number is 10, standing for the year it began. (There's) GJ, which is grand jury, and then 3793. Three is the conspiracy statute in the US and 793 is the espionage statute. So what they're investigating is 3793; conspiracy to commit espionage."

Julian Assange case


Anna Ardin, Rick Falkvinge, Julian Assange, Glennfiddich restaurant,


788177-marianne-ny Claes-Borgstrom-006

Marianne Ny

Claes Borgström

The allegations in the EAW.


1. Unlawful coercion

On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm. Assange, by using violence. forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.


2. Sexual molestation

On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. 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, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.


3. Sexual molestation

On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.


4. Rape

On 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.


Update: On the 27th September 2012, The Age, an Australian newspaper, reported that documents obtained through the US Freedom of Information Act from the Pentagon disclose that an investigation by the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, a counter-intelligence unit, of a military cyber systems analyst based in Britain who had reportedly expressed support for Wikileaks and had attended a demonstration in support of Assange, refers to the analyst as having been “communicating with the enemy, D-104.” The D-104 classification refers to an article of the US Uniform Military Code of Military Justice which prohibits military personnel from “communicating, corresponding or holding intercourse with the enemy,” a military crime that carries a maximum sentence of death. The al-Qaeda terrorist network and the Taliban insurgency are in the same legal category.


The full list of US law enforcement agencies that are confirmed to still working on the Wikileaks Grand Jury case: Department of Defence (DOD): including CENTCOM, SOUTHCOM. The Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA). The Defence Information Systems Agency (DISA). Headquarters Department of the Army (HQDA). The US Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) for US Army Cyber Command and the 2nd Army and US Forces Iraq (USFI). The US Army Computer Crimes Investigative Unit (CCIU). The Department of Justice (DOJ) Grand Jury. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The Department of State (DOS). The Diplomatic Security Service (DSS). The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). The Office of the National Counter-intelligence Executive (ONCIX). The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Investigations into WikiLeaks have also been conducted by the House Oversight Committee, National Security Staff Inter-agency Committee and the PIAB (President's Intelligence Advisory Board).


Comment: Sweden's former Chief Prosecutor, Sven-Erik Alhem "As a prosecutor, (to understand why further questioning is sought) you must regard that the evidence is very much dependent on what will be said by Mr Assange. I would have asked the British authorities for permission to have him questioned in London. The only way of furthering the investigation is that you can foresee a situation where you have evidence to reach the essential point of 'beyond reasonable doubt', if the preliminary investigation can't be furthered to that end, then.. you have to dismiss it all. And then there [would be] no reasons at all to have Mr Assange extradited as I see it."


Swedish Supreme Court Judge, Stefan Lindskog “I would like to comment upon the possibility of the prosecutor to go to London. It is possible that the prosecutor could travel to London and interrogate him there. I have no answer to the question why that hasn't happened.”


The day to day work of WikiLeaks:



November 27, 2012