|Home » Rants
On the Preposterous and Massi Fritz
End it. Now.
According to Swedish state radio, Elisabeth Massi Fritz has taken over the role of plaintiff counsel for Sofia Wilén in the Assange blowup. In a press release, Massi Fritz came out demanding 'tougher measures' by Sweden to procure the extradition of Assange to Sweden from the Ecuadorean embassy. No mention is made of Mutual Legal Assistance.
Massi Fritz also describes Wilén's condition as 'psychic symptoms every day' because Assange left 'deep scars' in her.
Really, enough is enough. All who've studied the police documents in the case know that's preposterous. Massi Fritz is obviously a creature of bombast inflating a bill with Swedish taxpayers and trying to impress her increasingly psychotic clients.
No one has a 'right' to a day in criminal court, and certainly not Anna Ardin or Sofia Wilén. They can always take their 'complaints' to a civil court, but not even in Sweden is the criminal justice system an object of whimsy: it requires a preliminary investigation by the police, a study by a prosecutor, and a decision by a prosecutor that there really is a case. And the prosecutor must apply judicial ethics to a decision to prosecute. Prosecutors are duty-bound to not pursue preposterous cases such as this one.
This one is all about unseen and unchecked tales of sounds of popping balloons, that and no more. It's preposterous, and a good prosecutor would have tossed the whole thing out three years ago. In fact, one already did.
The 'preposterousness' is part of the reason Chief Prosecutor Eva Finné once dismissed the allegations against Julian Assange. What we've seen since is a shameless hysterical political agenda without sense or reason.
We've seen a hunt for a condom, something that ultimately was shown to have no bearing on the case. We've seen an unprecedented show trial against the accused. We've seen smear campaigns orchestrated by friends of the plaintiffs. We've seen highly suspicious behaviour on the part of both plaintiffs, something that would have alerted police and judicial systems in most other countries to something being seriously wrong.
And now lawyer Massi Fritz, recently appointed to represent Ardin or Wilén or both, has come out with a statement, obviously an attempt to show work for the high fees she'll be exacting from Swedish taxpayers.
Her outrageous statement that Sofia Wilén was 'scarred' by her encounter with Julian Assange falls on its own melodrama. Anyone having read the police docs knows that Sofia Wilén was deeply scarred already before stalking Julian. This was evident already from her own testimony and further supported by the testimony of her associates. What's missing here of course is the frivolous attitude of Wilén - she and a friend plotted to exploit the situation and profit financially from it.
A study of rape accusations in the university town of Lund was released not too long ago. For a reported 43 rapes for that year, only one was outdoors. The suspect could not be located and the case was closed.
The remaining 42 complaints were all indoors cases. All were dismissed, and this after much more investigation than is used for any other crime. The portent of what was going on was quite clear.
√ One girl fell stone drunk to the floor in her student corridor. She woke in the morning to find a boy sleeping next to her, stone drunk as well. Going on no more than that, the girl filed a complained against the boy for rape.
√ A girl partaking in a sex orgy was having sex with two men simultaneously. A third man asked her if he could participate. She referred the gent to her husband who was nearby. The husband gave his approval on the condition #3 used a condom. He agreed. The girl later filed a rape accusation against #3. The police asked the obvious question: why didn't you stop? The girl explained that the sex with the first two was so great, so she didn't want to.
√ A woman and man decide after many years of marriage to divorce. They begin the search in a difficult country to exchange their bigger flat for two smaller flats. The process takes about 18 months. The woman files a rape complaint against her husband once they've moved, insisting her husband 'raped' her every night for 18 months once they'd decided they would divorce. She couldn't say for certain she'd ever said 'no' to him, but suggested she might have.
The eminent Claes Borgström once said that people couldn't say for certain they were molested because they're not jurists. The same applies when reporting crime: the complainants do not know. It's the job of the police to help a prosector decide. This system can work reasonably well, even in a wobbly judicial system like Sweden's. But it doesn't work when outside forces deign to corrupt a system with their own agendas.
What needs to happen in the Julian Assange case is to appoint a prosecutor who can override the mad woman Marianne Ny who is chiefly responsible for the 'mess', as a Swedish supreme court justice described it. Eva Finné is a highly praised prosecutor who once dismissed the allegations against Assange. Anyone reading the police documents which Finné also read will swiftly come to the same conclusion: no crime committed.
Any other conclusion is preposterous. It's time to remove the sheen of the 'unworldly' from this case so everyone can get on with their lives. And let the hysteria of the filthy tabloids, the rabid fringe groups, and the opportunistic lawyers be damned.