Condom used as evidence in Assange sex case 'does not contain his DNA'

[reorg]

276. there is no such thing as "the terms of consent" in the Swedish rape law

Go to and read the extensive interpretation of the entire case as it is known through the documents here:

http://samtycke.nu/eng/2011/07/sex-lies-no-videotape-and-more-lies-false-accusations-in-the-assange-case/

The author was called as a witness before the magistrate in the UK, he is the one who discovered the deleted twitter messages and other things. He is, however, in no way a supporter of Wikileaks or against Swedish feminism, on the contrary, he is an enthusiastic campaigner for (even) harsher rape laws in Sweden and what he mainly criticises is that they haven't introduced the concept of "consent" yet, like it is (allegedly) used in common law countries.

Fact is, in Sweden just as in most other penal codes, that rape is defined as a violent act, IOW it needs to be proven that the accused has broken the will, through an act of violence, of the aggrieved person. There are other, secondary definitions, like abusing the helpless state of someone and so forth. But the main concept always has been and still is that rape is a violent act, not some breach of contract.

In this particular case, it is alleged that the complainant was sleeping. Until 2005, this act would NOT have been prosecuted as "rape", there was a different paragraph on "exploiting the helpless state" for taking sexual advantage of someone, which carried a maximum sentence of two years. Since 2005, the same act is now considered "minor rape" and carries a longer sentence.

It is, of course, a travesty that the allegation was even brought up since the allegation is not at all about taking sexual advantage of someone, but about condom use.