Radsoft
	`About \| Buy \| News \| Products \| Rants \| Search \| Security`

Home » Rants

Sex & Sweden

What Julian Assange has been up against.

Get It

Try It

'Citizen X' is one of Sweden's best bloggers and news researchers. He recently covered the 'sex torture' case. The story gives insight into how Sweden has changed and what visitors like Julian Assange are up against when crossing the border.

Citizens: A couple of weeks ago we saw black headlines in the jackal media about a 32yo man who was charged with brutal abuse of a 16yo girl. The claim was she'd been the victim of sex torture! This despite the fact they both consented to BDSM together. But prosecutor Ulrika Rogland wanted to test where the boundaries go between consensual sex and criminal sex, even if the girl was the one who contacted the man and voluntarily let him spank and dominate her over a weekend in his flat. But we didn't know this back then. There was an outburst of moral panic in the jackal media and the blogosphere. The man was quickly condemned as a pervert who exploited young girls and the girl was quickly seen to be too young and damaged to be responsible for herself. She had a history of self-mutilation and was too young to be expected to take responsibility for her own sex life. The district court delivered the verdict in a couple of weeks. It turned out the district court believed that violent sex can in fact be consensual! But prosecutor Ulrika Rogland turned immediately to the jackal media and told them the acquitting verdict would be appealed. That sounded right, particularly when hearing the girl couldn't be questioned during the trial because, according to her counsel Kerstin Hedelin, she felt so bad after the event that she began mutilating herself again. Many had a gut reaction to the verdict but most didn't bother reading it. The radical feminist Katarina Wennstam wrote an op-ed for Aftonbladet where she cursed the verdict and that the man was acquitted. She claimed that women have no rights when sex turns to violence and girls are blamed when they're the victims of crimes. Her entire article is based on feminist propaganda and for once she was attacked by both readers and columnist Lisa Magnusson. Lisa Magnusson held that Katarina Wennstam was denying women their sexuality. The verdict made it clear that it was the girl who took the initiative to the meeting with the 32yo man, even if the jackal media didn't bother pointing this out in the slightest. And a closer look at the verdict revealed further curiosities. When the 16yo girl spoke with a friend about what had happened that weekend, she didn't want her sexual proclivities revealed and didn't want to expose the 32yo man either. So she made up a story about how she'd been kidnapped by three men who took turns beating and raping her. Her friend spread the story to another person who in turn went to the police. It didn't take long for the police to send out a patrol to speak with the 16yo girl and her parents. Suddenly she finds herself in the trap of false accusation and didn't know how to get out. But she didn't want to reveal her sexual proclivities for her parents or the police either. She therefore chose to continue to lie about what really happened - she identifies a 28yo man and two unknown friends of his as being guilty of kidnappning, beating, and raping her! The 28yo is soon identified and incarcerated by the police under suspicion of brutal rape! The truth however is that the 28yo never met the 16yo girl. They have however chatted in a web forum for people interested in BDSM. The same forum where the 16yo girl gets to know the 32yo man that she later spent a weekend with. She accused the 28yo because she's trying to protect her lover. She doesn't want to accuse him. But the 28yo is an old rival of the 32yo and the girl knows it. The 28yo sits behind bars for weeks. And interrogated by the police under the supervision of prosecutor Ulrika Rogland. She does everything she can to find the other two men who were to have kidnapped, beaten, and raped the 16yo girl. After a while they get a phone number to the 32yo from the girl's cellphone. He's arrested, given suspicion, and incarcerated. He's questioned but his answers aren't what prosecutor Ulrika Rogland is expecting. The 32yo says he's never met the 28yo but he admits he's had the 16yo girl on a visit at the weekend in question (even if she told him she was 18). He even tells them they played with BSDM but that she was free to stop at any time and leave the flat. All of this was voluntary and consensual! The 32yo also asks the police and the prosecutor to check the chat logs on his computer. There they can see the entire conversation between him and the 16yo girl going back several weeks before they agreed to spend a weekend together. It's also seen the 32yo time and again cautioned the girl about what she was doing, asked her what she expected from such an experience, asked in general terms about her background. Despite it being beyond the shadow of a doubt for prosecutor Ulrika Rogland that the 16yo was guilty of false accusation of the 28yo for kidnapping, abuse, and rape in order to protect herself and the 32yo man, Rogland does not turn her attention towards the girl but tries to save her own backside by bringing charges against the 32yo man instead. The 28yo man is released after spending three weeks in jail. Now it's the 32yo that Ulrika Rogland wants to convict for grievous bodily harm, despite the BSDM acts occurring in agreement and despite the 16yo girl declaring she did not at all want to be a part of such accusations. The 16yo refuses to participate throughout the trial. Prosecutor Ulrika Rogland and the girl's counsel Kerstin Hedelin tell everyone it's because the girl is feeling so bad. They say this in a way to make it sound like it's about what happened with the 32yo. But the truth is it's because Ulrika Rogland is moving forward with the case against her express wishes and exposing her sexual proclivities in the media against her will. Prosecutor Ulrika Rogland rapes the 16yo girl in the name of feminism! Ulrika Rogland doesn't give a shit about the 16yo girl. What's important is a guilty verdict against the 32yo man, in this case for grievous bodily harm. This despite the 'harm' not being grievous and even less having a criminal motivation. For the truth is it was a consensual act. And classifying it as 'sexual' is another matter: when the 16yo girl left the flat, her greatest disappointment was that she'd not had sex with the 32yo all weekend! But she hoped they'd have sex the next time they met! The truth about the 'sex torture' is that prosecutor Ulrika Rogland was spanked by the district court who chewed her whole case to pieces. There was no sex torture at all. The sex torture exists only in the minds of Ulrika Rogland and the feminist writers in the jackal media! On the other hand there's a case of false accusations of rape and a man who sat in jail for three weeks because of this. But Ulrika Rogland doesn't give a shit about things like that and neither will Sweden's prosecution authority. This is how things go in the state-subventioned feminist Sweden of today. No holds are barred in the persecution of men.

Appendix: Court Documents

The 16yo's legal counsel Kerstin Hedelin receives SEK 64,226 ($9,650). The 32yo's legal counsel Bo Petersson receives SEK 82,526 ($12,400) - that's nearly SEK 150 K (over $22 K) wasted by a ruthless prosecutor with a feminist agenda.

The website is identified as darkside.se. The tools the 32yo used to 'spank' the 16yo were a wooden cane and a wooden ruler. There were further stories in the jackal media that were completely made up. As per usual. The 32yo was held in custody from 28 January up to and including 10 February 2010. He received no compensation.

Appendix: Prosecutor's Interrogation

This is part of the police interrogation conducted to help identify the people who raped the 16yo girl. The police try to get the girl to identify her surroundings during the alleged act so they can locate the alleged perpetrators. Prosecutor Ulrika Rogland who is also present disrupts the police in their work and takes over the interrogation, asking leading (and under the circumstances irrelevant) questions of her own.

UR: So you're down on your hands and knees and they take turns mounting you, if I understand you correctly? EH: Mmm. UR: And when you say 'mount' I understand you're talking about sex but you can have that in different ways and I therefore wonder in which ways. EH: What do you mean? UR: Well there's vaginal and there's anal and different places they could have penetrated you. EH: Both vaginal and anal. UR: Both ways? How many times did they take turns? EH: I don't know, I don't remember. UR: You don't? EH: It went on a long time.

'Consider the following scenario', writes legal worker 'Juristens Funderingar'. 'You're contacted by a person of the opposite sex who takes the initiative to your having sex. You accept and the sex is performed consensually. But your opposite party regrets the act afterwards. You're arrested, held in custody, and put on trial. Does this seem reasonable?'

And yet that's exactly what happened in the above case - and it's exactly what's happening to Julian Assange.

'I'm not so surprised anymore after all my years in court', continues 'Juristens Funderingar'. 'The Assange case is still fresh in our memory. So we know that consensual sex without a condom can - by some prosecutors - be regarded as rape.'

Welcome to Sweden, Julian! Do you want sex? You can either pay for it - in which case you (but not the girl) can be tried and sentenced - or you can find someone to do it with consensually - in which case you'll be arrested, jailed, and put in trial for rape. Enjoy your stay!