Why I am Convinced that Anna Ardin is a Liar 1988

I am slightly updating and reposting this from 2012 because the mainstream media have ensured very few people know the detail of the “case” against Julian Assange in Sweden. The UN Working Group ruled that Assange ought never to have been arrested in the UK in the first place because there is no case, and no genuine investigation. Read this and you will know why.

The other thing not widely understood is there is NO JURY in a rape trial in Sweden and it is a SECRET TRIAL. All of the evidence, all of the witnesses, are heard in secret. No public, no jury, no media. The only public part is the charging and the verdict. There is a judge and two advisers directly appointed by political parties. So you never would get to understand how plainly the case is a stitch-up. Unless you read this.

There are so many inconsistencies in Anna Ardin’s accusation of sexual assault against Julian Assange. But the key question which leaps out at me – and which strangely I have not seen asked anywhere else – is this:

Why did Anna Ardin not warn Sofia Wilen?

On 16 August, Julian Assange had sex with Sofia Wilen. Sofia had become known in the Swedish group around Assange for the shocking pink cashmere sweater she had worn in the front row of Assange’s press conference. Anna Ardin knew Assange was planning to have sex with Sofia Wilen. On 17 August, Ardin texted a friend who was looking for Assange:

“He’s not here. He’s planned to have sex with the cashmere girl every evening, but not made it. Maybe he finally found time yesterday?”

Yet Ardin later testified that just three days earlier, on 13 August, she had been sexually assaulted by Assange; an assault so serious she was willing to try (with great success) to ruin Julian Assange’s entire life. She was also to state that this assault involved enforced unprotected sex and she was concerned about HIV.

If Ardin really believed that on 13 August Assange had forced unprotected sex on her and this could have transmitted HIV, why did she make no attempt to warn Sofia Wilen that Wilen was in danger of her life? And why was Ardin discussing with Assange his desire for sex with Wilen, and texting about it to friends, with no evident disapproval or discouragement?

Ardin had Wilen’s contact details and indeed had organised her registration for the press conference. She could have warned her. But she didn’t.

Let us fit that into a very brief survey of the whole Ardin/Assange relationship. .

11 August: Assange arrives in Stockholm for a press conference organised by a branch of the Social Democratic Party.
Anna Ardin has offered her one bed flat for him to stay in as she will be away.

13 August: Ardin comes back early. She has dinner with Assange and they have consensual sex, on the first day of meeting. Ardin subsequently alleges this turned into assault by surreptitious mutilation of the condom.

14 August: Anna volunteers to act as Julian’s press secretary. She sits next to him on the dais at his press conference. Assange meets Sofia Wilen there.

Anna tweets at 14.00:

‘Julian wants to go to a crayfish party, anyone have a couple of available seats tonight or tomorrow? #fb’

This attempt to find a crayfish party fails, so Ardin organises one herself for him, in a garden outside her flat. Anna and Julian seem good together. One guest hears Anna rib Assange that she thought “you had dumped me” when he got up from bed early that morning. Another offers to Anna that Julian can leave her flat and come stay with them. She replies:
“He can stay with me.”

15 August Still at the crayfish party with Julian, Anna tweets:

‘Sitting outdoors at 02:00 and hardly freezing with the world’s coolest smartest people, it’s amazing! #fb’

Julian and Anna, according to both their police testimonies, sleep again in the same single bed, and continue to do so for the next few days. Assange tells police they continue to have sex; Anna tells police they do not. That evening, Anna and Julian go together to, and leave together from, a dinner with the leadership of the Pirate Party. They again sleep in the same bed.

16 August: Julian goes to have sex with Sofia Wilen: Ardin does not warn her of potential sexual assault.
Another friend offers Anna to take over housing Julian. Anna again refuses.

20 August: After Sofia Wilen contacts her to say she is worried about STD’s including HIV after unprotected sex with Julian, Anna takes her to see Anna’s friend, fellow Social Democrat member, former colleague on the same ballot in a council election, and campaigning feminist police officer, Irmeli Krans. Ardin tells Wilen the police can compel Assange to take an HIV test. Ardin sits in throughout Wilen’s unrecorded – in breach of procedure – police interview. Krans prepares a statement accusing Assange of rape. Wilen refuses to sign it.

21 August Having heard Wilen’s interview and Krans’ statement from it, Ardin makes her own police statement alleging Assange has surreptiously had unprotected sex with her eight days previously.

Some days later: Ardin produces a broken condom to the police as evidence; but a forensic examination finds no traces of Assange’s – or anyone else’s – DNA on it, and indeed it is apparently unused.

No witness has come forward to say that Ardin complained of sexual assault by Assange before Wilen’s Ardin-arranged interview with Krans – and Wilen came forward not to complain of an assault, but enquire about STDs. Wilen refused to sign the statement alleging rape, which was drawn up by Ardin’s friend Krans in Ardin’s presence.

It is therefore plain that one of two things happened:


Ardin was sexually assaulted with unprotected sex, but failed to warn Wilen when she knew Assange was going to see her in hope of sex.

Ardin also continued to host Assange, help him, appear in public and private with him, act as his press secretary, and sleep in the same bed with him, refusing repeated offers to accommodate him elsewhere, all after he assaulted her.


Ardin wanted sex with Assange – from whatever motive.. She “unexpectedly” returned home early after offering him the use of her one bed flat while she was away. By her own admission, she had consensual sex with him, within hours of meeting him.

She discussed with Assange his desire for sex with Wilen, and appears at least not to have been discouraging. Hearing of Wilen’s concern about HIV after unprotected sex, she took Wilen to her campaigning feminist friend, policewoman Irmeli Krans, in order to twist Wilen’s story into a sexual assault – very easy given Sweden’s astonishing “second-wave feminism” rape laws. Wilen refused to sign.

At the police station on 20 August, Wilen texted a friend at 14.25 “did not want to put any charges against JA but the police wanted to get a grip on him.”

At 17.26 she texted that she was “shocked when they arrested JA because I only wanted him to take a test”.

The next evening at 22.22 she texted “it was the police who fabricated the charges”.

Ardin then made up her own story of sexual assault. As so many friends knew she was having sex with Assange, she could not claim non-consensual sex. So she manufactured her story to fit in with Wilen’s concerns by alleging the affair of the torn condom. But the torn condom she produced has no trace of Assange on it. It is impossible to wear a condom and not leave a DNA trace.


I have no difficulty in saying that I firmly believe Ardin to be a liar. For her story to be true involves acceptance of behaviour which is, in the literal sense, incredible.

Ardin’s story is of course incredibly weak, but that does not matter. Firstly, you were never supposed to see all this detail. Rape trials in Sweden are held entirely in secret. There is no jury, and the government appointed judge is flanked by assessors appointed directly by political parties. If Assange goes to Sweden, he will disappear into jail, the trial will be secret, and the next thing you will hear is that he is guilty and a rapist.

Secondly, of course, it does not matter the evidence is so weak, as just to cry rape is to tarnish a man’s reputation forever. Anna Ardin has already succeeded in ruining much of the work and life of Assange. The details of the story being pathetic is unimportant.

By crying rape, politically correct opinion falls in behind the line that it is wrong even to look at the evidence. If you are not allowed to know who the accuser is, how can you find out that she worked with CIA-funded anti-Castro groups in Havana and Miami?

Finally, to those useful idiots who claim that the way to test these matters is in court, I would say of course, you are right, we should trust the state always, fit-ups never happen, and we should absolutely condemn the disgraceful behaviour of those who campaigned for the Birmingham Six.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

1,988 thoughts on “Why I am Convinced that Anna Ardin is a Liar

1 65 66 67
  • A.S.

    My question is this – why would a woman EVER go to police to force a man take an HIV test? Post-Exposure-Prophylactics (PEP) has to be taken within 3 days of exposure and she went after that window. There is no reason to force a man take an HIV test unless you want to have more unprotected sex with him – but if so, doing it through police is dumb.

    Once the possible transmission happened and PEP window has past, having a guy test positive for HIV will only make you go unnecessarily mad until your own test-results since chances of transmission for a 1-time contact are low. You should just test yourself 6-8 weeks after worrying exposure and retest 6 month later.

  • A.S.

    Why don’t you include the fact that on Aug 17 (and on Aug 20) Sofia Wilen went to hospital and repotedly rape kit was used?

    It’s completely unbelievable that a woman could be talked into going across Stockholm to talk to police just to maybe “make JA take HIV test” – especially since he already told her that he was tested 3 month earlier. This simply does not compute and someone is lying.

  • A.S.

    [The case now rests solely on whether Marianne Ny thinks she can prove that Assange knew Wilen was “asleep” or “half-asleep” for 30 seconds before she consented to unprotected sex.]

    It doesn’t matter whether he knew it or not. Sticking your uncovered dick into a person who, at best, is not paying attention, with whom you never had unprotected sex before and who insisted heavily on condoms earlier is at least an aggravated sexual assault (though I wouldn’t call it rape) and should be punished. Does JA dispute this version of the story?

  • Jemand

    Current state of play –

    UK police stand ready to arrest and incarcerate Assange to prevent him from doing his work.

    Assange needs, but will not be allowed, any kind of liberty, however temporary, to secretly board a private vessel to travel to a safe port.

    The law is mostly irrelevant and has no impact on the objectives of Assange’s enemies.

    Only in the case of a legal dilemma in which the UK risks losing more for not letting Assange go, will they relent. What dilemma could that be? Currently, there is none.

  • Arbed


    It doesn’t matter whether he knew it or not. Sticking your uncovered dick into a person who, at best, is not paying attention, with whom you never had unprotected sex before and who insisted heavily on condoms earlier is at least an aggravated sexual assault (though I wouldn’t call it rape) and should be punished. Does JA dispute this version of the story?

    We don’t know what JA’s version of events is at all, and neither does the Swedish prosecutor because she has refused to question him about it for 5.5 years. For all we know, Sofie Wilen’s account is entirely untruthful. We just haven’t heard both sides of the story yet.

    Oh. Actually, there was an interview with Assange over Christmas, in which he said (for the first time) that Sofie Wilen was awake the entire time.

    Santiago O’Donnell: Christmas with Assange

    We already know that she had told a friend she was “half-asleep” and apparently confirmed to police in a later statement (which the prosecutor has withheld from both UK and Swedish courts, and Assange’s defence team) and, if you delve back through a couple of pages of comments here, you’ll find lots of discussion about the possibility that Sofie Wilen also, like Anna Ardin, gave police a fake “torn” condom.

    All told, with the differences between the SMS texts she sent while at the police station, her first formal statement, what she has reportedly said in later police statements (she’s been interrogated 8 times) and the very, very, very odd evidence of a torn fragment of a condom and related police note concerning Ms Wilen (whose complaint is supposedly about the non-use of a condom…) she has definitely changed her story a few times.

    Perhaps when Assange is finally allowed to give his version and more of the withheld evidence comes out (the SMS messages, etc) we will find that the version of events we all thought we knew was a pack of lies?

  • Arbed

    Much discussion in Flashback forum regarding Martin Fredriksson – of EXPO and Researchgruppen fame, winner of Sweden’s Golden Spade award for investigative journalism in 2014 and now, we learn, self-confessed paid agent of SAPO:


    The big scandal is, of course, that Fredriksson practically wrote Amnesty Sweden’s 2012 statement saying the government should not issue any guarantees against onward US extradition to Assange, but he has also been closely involved in Researchgruppen’s twitter smear campaign of Assange and close to Anna Ardin’s Prataomdet “Talk About It” ‘grassroots’ campaign against him.


    Now Flashback is wondering whether Fredriksson via his SAPO contacts could have got hold of Wikileaks private emails by cracking the encryption of the laptops stolen at Arlanda airport on 27 September 2010 and used these as part of the “anti-semetic” smears (based around old WikiLeaks emails to Israel Shamir) spread by EXPO in February 2011:


    But there’s a simpler explanation where the timing fits better. While Julian Assange was still incarcerated in Wandsworth in December 2010 Wikileaks intern James Ball was given and/or got access to its press contacts server and mirrored it:


    After this, James Ball became evasive and never returned to Wikileaks, except for one short visit in mid-January. Within two weeks of that, Ball was already signed to start work for the Guardian:


    The most likely date of James Ball’s theft, according to WikiLeaks’ notes of his employment record, is 14th or 15th December 2010. It was on 17th December that the Guardian ran two smear stories that can only have come from access to Wikileaks press contacts archive and its copy of the full police protocol:

    1) A story by its Stockholm-based Religious Affairs correspondent Andrew Brown, which attempted to smear Assange’s best witness in the sex allegations matter, Johannes Wahlstrom, because he was the son of the so-called “anti-semite” Israel Shamir. This story is virtually duplicated in Expressen by its journalist Martin Ljunggren the same day:

    Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/dec/17/wikileaks-israel-shamir-russia-scandinavia

    Expressen: https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&rurl=translate.google.co.uk&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.expressen.se/kultur/ljunggren-ljuger/&usg=ALkJrhi_WEgNYV1cBOYkSC8j4vhc4OjwMQ

    2) Nick Davies’ infamously skewed report on the “leaked” police protocol, 10 Days in Sweden.

    The second wave of “anti-semetic” smearing of Julian Assange and Wikileaks over its supposed “close” links to Israel Shamir coincided with the release of the Guardian book written by David Leigh and Luke Harding, Inside Wikileaks: Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy on 1st February 2011. This second wave is duplicated in Sweden too via Martin Fredriksson’s Researchgruppen and EXPO fronts. Fredriksson, of course, is extremely well-connected amongst Sweden’s media/feminist elite, including being a pal of Anna Ardin.

1 65 66 67