In an interview with The Guardian, Claes Borgström, the lawyer for the two women, has said that the rumours and conspiracy theories were a convenient way for Assange to divert suspicion from the actual allegations.
One of the women, ‘Miss A’, is said to have worked in the Swedish Embassy in the US and had written her university thesis on a vision of Cuba after the death of Castro. This has led to widespread allegations that she is a CIA agent.
Speaking to London’s Evening Standard earlier, Assange’s UK lawyer Mark Stephens said he was convinced that the affair was politically motivated.
According to Assange’s lawyers the dispute was over “consensual but unprotected sex”. From information gathered in press reports it appears that Miss A’s allegation is that while having consensual relations with Mr Assange he deliberately damaged the contraceptive device that was being used. The other complainant, ‘Miss W’ claims that after a night of consensual relations an unprotected act of sex in the morning had been without her consent.
The two women, who did not previously know each other, reportedly went to the police together to seek advice on making a complaint.
They were both apparently concerned that they could have got HIV. At the time they were advised by police that the allegations amounted to rape against Miss W and sexual molestation against Miss A.
Later a second prosecutor who conducted a preliminary investigation dismissed the charges saying what had occurred did not amount to rape or sexual molestation. Borgstrom was successful in having the case reopened, by which time Assange had left the country.
According to Borgstrom the probability of the prosecution going ahead is perhaps a little more than 50-50.
The Guardian quotes an acquaintance who met Assange and both women in Stockholm as saying that he had warned Assange that his behaviour towards women was going to get him into trouble.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 10th, 2010.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ