|Home » Industry Watch
Julian's & Anna's Molecular Biology
There's but one explanation. All others are highly unlikely.
DUCKPOND (Rixstep) — Mainstream duckpond media have never been particularly concerned with details of the Assange case. They made up their minds long before Julian Assange came to Sweden. But the people at Flashback have been intrigued since 21 August 2010. They're still intrigued.
One of the most intriguing things is the bit about the condom supplied by Anna Ardin. The report from the state forensic lab was confusing to say the least, save in one regard: the 'condom' submitted by Anna Ardin as the 'evidence' needed to reopen the case wasn't used for sex.
Flashbacker Ollenblau, very versed in molecular biology, now took things one step further with the help of his girlfriend and a colleague who works in a molecular biology lab at one of Sweden's universities. He and his girlfriend gave his colleague five condoms for testing.
Not to forget: the condom submitted by Ardin had only mitochondrial DNA - no chromosomal DNA whatsoever. More information on DNA can be found at Wikipedia for those who need it, or one can simply consult the previous articles on this subject at this site (links below).
'I've wondered a lot how a condom can be free of human DNA. Yes it's very curious that no (or extremely little) DNA was found on the condom Ardin presumably ripped apart herself. If our information is correct, what exactly is corroborated?'
So Ollenblau performed an experiment with the help of his girlfriend and a colleague at a molecular biology lab at one of Sweden's universities. Ollenblau gave his colleague five condoms, each treated in a way according to the list below. He clipped a bit from the top third of each and carried out a PCR test on each for human DNA.
'The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a scientific technique in molecular biology to amplify a single or a few copies of a piece of DNA across several orders of magnitude, generating thousands to millions of copies of a particular DNA sequence.'
The five condoms and their PCR results.
- Used for sex by Ollenblau and his girlfriend. Copious quantities of both male and female DNA.
- Put on an erection, then removed. Quite a lot of DNA.
- Taken out with fingertips, handled a bit. Some DNA found.
- Taken out carefully, held by one end, placed in a plastic bag for a few hours. DNA not found. Can be because the part analysed wasn't the part touched.
- Taken out with gloves in the lab, PCR carried out immediately. DNA not found.
'If my experiment is representative (which it needn't be but most likely is) and if the results are extrapolated to Ardin's bogus ripped condom, then it would seem, I think, that Ardin, either as instructed by someone or on her own initiative, went home or bought a new pack and carefully opened a condom wrapper, ripped the condom, placed it in a previously unused plastic bag or something similar, and immediately brought it to the police station.'
'Or perhaps it was done with the collusion of the police who immediately placed the condom in a plastic bag. The crime lab most likely clipped the bit of condom from a part that hadn't been touched. It's highly unlikely that any fakery occurred at the state criminological lab. But again: the logic builds on the supposition that the leaked information about the condom is correct and that the PCR run by the state criminological lab was carried out according to 'lege artis' which it surely was.'
'Very interesting. Shows clearly that Ardin's condom wasn't used and whoever submitted it hadn't thought it'd be turned over for DNA testing, only that the damage to the condom would be documented.'
Police inspector Mats Gehlin has previously suggested the lack of DNA might be because the amount of DNA available varies greatly between individuals (?) but that doesn't explain why there's no chromosomal DNA found at all.
Flashbacker 'the saint' commented several days beforehand:
'How can a condom completely lack chromosomal DNA? You'd have to take it out of its wrapper, manipulate it so it broke, then put it in plastic bag - and all without leaving a trace of DNA on it! This can hardly occur unless extreme caution is used: rubber gloves, mouth guard, sterilised clothing, etc. Very strange!'
'DanceBaby' suggests a sixth experiment: a condom where the tip is ripped off right before ejaculation, then left laying about for a week, then rinsed with water.
'It's a plausible explanation of AA's behaviour. Perhaps AA used rubber gloves or something similar when she handled the condom out of fear of putting compromising fingerprints on it when she ripped it - which is logical: it's possible today to get fingerprints from condoms.'
Ollenblau is back.
'The condom's material itself can't skew the results. Lubricant and flavouring can't either. Sophisticated methods are used to extract the DNA, and only the DNA is extracted - nothing else that could skew the results is extracted. Rinsing the DNA off a condom is highly unlikely.'
Anna Ardin's condom is of no use for the claimants anyway. Assange hasn't denied having sex with Ardin. All Anna Ardin's condom is good for at this point is getting Ardin into trouble for having falsified evidence, something the Flashbackers seem to be eminently aware of.
Batuta with an interesting insight or two. First:
'Borgström wasn't trying to prove Assange had sex with a condom. And Ardin's condom wasn't used for sex anyway. What Borgström was most likely trying to do was show Assange had a bad habit of ripping up condoms - which would have been criminal if he'd had a major STD.'
'But it turns out the condom wasn't used for sex. Ardin can't have understood the condom would be tested for DNA.'
'This whole condom story stinks to high heaven, for both Ardin and Wilén. Ardin didn't talk with her friends about any condom until she'd been to the police. [And met Borgström the same weekend. Ed.] The interrogation of SW's half dozen 'support witnesses' mentions nothing about a condom. The police interrogators don't ask about a broken condom.'
'And if JA was a serial condom saboteur, there'd have been stories surfacing in other countries by now.'
I'm so sick of it all. Will it never end? At any rate I want to say the other girl's just as much to blame.
- Anna Ardin
Apparently Swedish laws are unique. If you have a penis you're half a rapist before you even get through customs.
- Scott Adams
If I am able to reveal what I know, everyone will realise this is all a charade. If I could tell the British courts, I suspect it would make extradition a moot point.
- Björn Hurtig
I can tell you that the Swedish prosecution still hasn't provided copies of those SMS texts that have been referred to. Those texts are some of the most powerful exculpatory evidence. In Australia prosecutors have a very grave duty to disclose such evidence to courts when seeking the grave exercise of a court's power against an individual. Yet in Sweden in this case, in the first hearings to obtain an arrest warrant, those texts were not submitted to the Swedish court, which is highly improper.
- James Catlin
The prosecutor could achieve this broadening of the law during Assange's trial so he can be convicted of a crime that didn't exist at the time he allegedly committed it. She would need to. There is no precedent for this. The Swedes are making it up as they go along.
- James Catlin
Julian Assange will surely learn that considering what WikiLeaks has published, he's got a few enemies in the Pentagon, the CIA, and the White House. Sweden began an investigation into rape which was later dismissed. Assange was even denied residence in Sweden. One can only speculate to what extent the security agencies of the US were involved. And considering the obvious interest of the US to silence WikiLeaks, is it likely Assange will have an accident of the 'Boston brakes' kind in the coming years? Or will he be snared with compromising information of the 'honey trap' kind?
- 'Drozd' at Flashback 23 October 2010
The truth will out, the truth wins out. Let no journalist ever again speculate into what the protocols say. Six months of digging and the people at Flashback have the actual documents. The sleaze printed by rags such as the Daily Mail, Sweden's Aftonbladet and Expressen, and perhaps above all the toxic Nick Davies of the Guardian, can stand no more. Yet more: these documents are an indictment of the 'news organisations' who've printed deliberate inaccuracies all along or even worse: refused to print anything at all. Nick Davies' account of the protocols was maliciously skewed; both Aftonbladet and Expressen had copies early on and printed nothing. Bloggers had copies but arrogantly kept the information to their Smeagol selves.
- The Assange Police Protocol: Translator's Note
Learning Curve: Let's Talk Condoms
Red Hat Diaries: More About the Condom