Sweden's Keystone Kops vs NYPD's SVU

I found a post about how the NYPD's SVU work on rape cases.

https://www.flashback.org/sp31030027

Parts of that post are so staggering that I'm going to run though them. This is what the NYPD say:

• If the woman asks to be interviewed by a policewoman, statistically the story will turn out to be fake in nine cases out of ten. [AA and SW not only picked a policewoman - they picked a specific policewoman at a specific police station.]

• It's important to take note of how quickly the rape is reported. [No rape charge to today's date.]

• Did they cry when interviewed? [SW didn't, not until she was told that JA was arrested in absentia.]

• Do they stick to the same story? [If the police only interviewed SW once, there's no way to measure consistency.]

• Is their first version [the 'outcry'] the same as what they told the police?

All complaints are taken seriously. But the last thing the police want to do is brand someone a 'rapist' and then discover later that it's not true. Once branded 'rapists', those accused are stuck with it for the rest of their lives.

If the man denies the accusation, the woman's testimony is studied in great detail.

When they interrogate the woman, they go through the details as going through a movie frame by frame, looking for discrepancies in her story. There are many interviews, and everything is of course recorded.

The filings from Stockholm on 20 August 2010 are, according to NYPD SVU guidelines, typical fake complaints.



SW was interrogated three times before JA left the country on 27 September 2010. The second interrogation takes place almost two weeks after the first, and with no other work being done on the SW case during that time.

So two weeks were wasted with nothing being done. If this had been the NYPD SVU, they'd have interrogated all nine witnesses in a matter of days. Concerning the rape case in Spain I reported on, they had 27 (twenty-seven) interrogations in the first sixty (60) hours after the complaint was filed (and it turned out to be a fake complaint).

By the time Marianne Ny held the third interrogation with SW, she'd also interrogated a support witness for SW - but no one else. The whole point of the critical review of a complaint is to see if what the support witnesses say actually supports what the complainant has said. But the testimony of SW's support witnesses is 100% based on what SW told them. And the accused has still not been interrogated five years later.

No One Expects It!

This is Marianne Ny's standard operating procedure in sex crime cases. Her ideas are taken directly from the Spanish Inquisition. Weak or nonexistent evidence is compensated by incommunicado incarceration at our infamous Kronoberg remand prison, now condemned as torture by the United Nations, in order to soften up the accused into vegetable form, until he begins to think he actually has done something 'wrong' (angst) and then when he appears in court, he'll look torn and guilty. The MSM finish things off, even if he's not convicted.

This is dramatically different from the way the Special Victim Unit of the NYPD go about things. All complaints are taken seriously. But the last thing the police want to do is brand someone a 'rapist' and then discover later that it's not true. Once branded 'rapists', those accused are stuck with it for the rest of their lives.