|Home » Industry Watch » The Technological
The Astoundingly Twisted Massi Fritz
She's written something. Again.
UNDERLAND (Rixstep) — Perhaps it was only a matter of time. Hans Linde, considered one of the Swedish Left Party's most promising MPs, tweeted today that a new op-ed by Elisabeth Massi Fritz presented 'relevant thoughts'. This is highly disappointing, as it shows how little time Linde has spent studying the Assange case.
Yes, folks, she's back again. This preferred legal eagle of the Reinfeldt family - the Reinfeldts, you know, the ones with the PM post, a PM whose greatest claims to fame are essays such as The Sleepbrains and Diary of an Awake Human Being, a clown of a politician who's never once had an ordinary job in his life, who is personally coached by that scourge of democracy Karl Rove, and who once berated none less than Carl 'Lundin' Bildt for being too soft. That Reinfeldt, those Reinfeldts - and their personal attorney has taken over the representation of one Sofia Wilén. But seems to have no clue how to proceed. Mostly she rants and stomps incoherent babble in the media, then off-camera looks to the prime minister for a nod of approval.
She's done it again.
Julian Assange's attorneys - say what you want about Julian - are by far the best in the land. And that's not saying 'fy skam'. Thomas Olsson was once the premier attorney for sex cases, exposing case after case of widespread collusion, opportunism, and corruption much as Pelle Svensson years earlier. Things got so bad - the stench of injustice so pungent - that Olsson declared he'd be leaving that speciality behind: he couldn't take the ugliness of it any longer. Olsson works, by the bye, for Sweden's premier law firm, that of Leif Silbersky, Julian's first attorney. But lest one think Silbersky is better in this case: no. Olsson's dogged persistence is unmatched - he doesn't stop until he gets justice. Olsson's the one who dragged all the stinky cases of Thomas Quick back to court - you know, the faked serial killer cases where Claes Borgström burned his nose - to have each and every one, all eight of them, overturned. (Coincidentally the first of those was adjudicated by Eva Finné, the highly respected prosecutor who tossed out the case of Sofia Wilén on the grounds that even if the story were true, no crime had been committed, despite what the police tried to make of it. For Eva Finné, there are bounds; for Eva Finné, no corruption is tolerable.)
And Per E Samuelson - for anyone who listened to the trial of The Pirate Bay, that name is etched in their memory forever. A smooth operator if ever, author of a classic on cross-examination, the mild-mannered Samuelson showed the world that you don't need Hollywood melodramatics to totally destroy the credibility of a star witness - all you do is ask the right questions, slowly and methodically, and wait for the coins to drop in the slots with the court judges. Unfortunately, as we all know, those judges in the trial of The Pirate Bay had decided far in advance what the verdict would be - plaintiff attorney Monique Wadsted was out telling the media what a good report the court had written only minutes after the verdict was released, clumsily revealing she too had been involved in the corruption - but that doesn't take from the brilliance of Per E Samuelson - in any other court in any other country, the people would have been laughing at John Kennedy.
Thomas Olsson and Per E Samuelson: Sweden's two finest attorneys - by a mile - and totally incorruptible.
Now lets look at what the Reinfeldts' 'gun for hire' has been up to. Mostly it's the 'same old same old' - buckshot splattered all over the place, as if she's hurling a handful of fertiliser against a barn door to see what sticks. The woman seems incapable of rational thought. But that's only a chimera, for what's really happening is far more sinister. Massi Fritz is counting on her readers being incapable of it.
Take her rant about Julian 'suddenly' not liking Sweden:
'One can ask why Assange in August 2010 applied for residence in Sweden when he now claims that he'd never set his foot in the country without a guarantee from the Swedish cabinet.'
Yes, Massi Fritz, you can ask. But you need to either research the matter yourself or stop pretending you don't know. The application for residence came after the 'sex crime' initial blowout, not before. And yet came before the despicable trick Marianne Ny pulled when she told Julian he could leave the country, waited for word he was actually leaving, then issued a secret warrant against him, making sure the warrant did not reach ports of call so he could truly leave, then waited in ambush for him in early October, with defence attorney commanded to remain in his offices after hours, as she planned to have Julian under arrest that same evening, then going to TIME magazine and lying about the illegality of using European Mutual Legal Assistance, then lying about mostly everything under the sun. Yes, you can know that, Massi Fritz - but then you'd actually have to know something about the case, or at least stop pretending you know nothing. For a woman who complains she was 'railroaded', that she never wanted a police investigation, who herself didn't claim Julian had done anything untoward, you seem to be working overtime trying to make a case where Eva Finné said that, frankly, there is none. One must wonder if you're taking pointers from Claes Borgström; if so, take another look at what happened to him. To cite a well-known Swedish aphorism, 'den gubben går inte!'
Massi Fritz tries again and again to twist what's been written, what's part of historical fact. She claims PESTO (Per E Samuelson and Thomas Olsson) have said that Julian would be free to leave the Ecuadorean embassy if the EAW were rescinded. Fritzie's either really stupid or pretending, once again. For no one has ever made that claim. Only days ago Julian told Amy Goodman that of course he can't leave! As it's more than likely the US will have got the UK to prepare a sealed indictment for that very eventuality! You seriously don't think the FCO tried to storm an embassy over a popping sound, do you? Actually you don't care, as all you're interested in is looking good for the Reinfeldts. You don't care how bad you make women look everywhere with your harridan performance.
Massi Fritz also claims Ecuador must follow British law as their embassy is on British soil. It's providential if she's never taken cases involving international law, for the woman is at this point being downright ridiculous. Asylum always trumps extradition. That's simply a fact. History is peppered with similar situations, and never have they ever turned out the way Fritzie predicts.
Fritzie goes even further, making you wonder who's recharging her batteries all the time:
'[The government of Ecuador] should therefore, as soon as possible, surrender Assange to the British police so they can expedite the extradition request that several British courts have ratified.'
Several British courts, yes - but only one case. Ruling in a single matter no longer recognised by Great Britain. And no, Fritzie, Ricardo and Mashi Rafael are hardly going to listen to you. And you know that. So who's your audience, Fritzie? Is this more than an inside job for your political patrons in Sweden? Perhaps you have your eye on something even more lucrative over the pond?
Fritzie goes on with this gem:
'That the defence attorneys say that Assange is a political refugee protected by the UN convention can no longer be the truth.'
And she leaves it right there. Why it can no longer be the truth is not explained. There's of course no reason to call the UN or the asylum into question. Fritzie's only trying to pull the wool over people's eyes, trying to impress her as yet unnamed taskmasters.
How about Mutual Legal Assistance? Massi Fritz has an opinion there too. Count on it.
'Regarding the oft-repeated demand by Assange and his attorneys about questioning in the Ecuador embassy, it's not in the interests of the complainants to have the prosecutor travel back and forth to conduct interrogations with a suspect who can't be bothered to follow court decisions.'
And what a mouthful that was. Why isn't it in the interests of the complainants? Massi Fritz doesn't say. Of course it is in the interests of the complainants! The case moves forward! Instead of stagnating for years as it's done! Making Sweden look more ridiculous by the day!
As for 'traveling back and forth' - that's what they always do in cases where MLA is used! Why is it suddenly no good in this case? You'll have to ask Elisabeth Massi Fritz.
The rest of Fritzie's argumentation follows the same lines. Fritzie's to write a piece for the conservative morning daily previously owned by Carl Bildt's 'Moderates', as they're now in a real predicament, with the mounting outrage about how they're effectively holding Julian Assange hostage. Fritzie somehow got charge of Sofia Wilén, without Wilén ever being interested in pursuing a case, with claiming so early on, and further protesting she'd been 'railroaded' by the authorities who did want to make a case out of it... Fritzie's otherwise perfect for the job, as she's the new generation of Greek dramatists Pelle Svensson and Thomas Olsson noticed corrupting Swedish courtrooms from Treriksröset to Smygehuk... Just write something, Fritzie! We're in trouble! We're in deep shit! We're up the creek without a paddle! We're in the sommarstuga outhouse! Write something, goddammit!
To the bane of women everywhere, she did. Just as the entire case makes a travesty of real rape victims.
So Elisabeth Massi Fritz wrote something. It remains to be seen if she'll have different versions for the Swedish duckpond and for the more observant global media as before. But she's definitely written something.
Update: Thomas Olsson's gone on to found his own law firm.
Industry Watch: Assange's Dream Team
Industry Watch: The Many Faces of Massi Fritz
Red Hat Diaries: On the Preposterous and Massi Fritz
Industry Watch: Assange Case: Sofia Wilén Puts on the Fritz