Rixstep
	`About \| ACP \| Buy \| Industry Watch \| Learning Curve \| News \| Products \| Search \| Substack`

Home » Learning Curve » Red Hat Diaries

The Daily Quack

News from Sweden 23 October 2011.

Get It

Try It

THE DUCKPOND (Radsoft/Rixstep) — Swedish morning daily SvD published an op-ed yesterday, tailing into the abortive prosecution of a doctor at the world famous Astrid Lindgren hospital. The case has been dropped after three years of torment for all involved. Why? Because the report from the RMV - Rättsmedicinalverket or the National Board of Forensic Medicine - was an inexcusable amateurish mess.

SvD introduced the article as follows.

The National Board of Forensic Medicine must take the blame for the prosecution of the doctor at the Astrid Lindgren children's hospital. If they'd expended more due diligence to get the actual facts in the case, there would never have been a trial.

Olof Borgå, lecturer in pharmacokinetics, wrote the op-ed for SvD.

The Incompetence of the RMV Led to the Trial

The verdict has come down in the Astrid Lindgren case, the lower court dismissing the charges. As an expert in pharmacokinetics, the study of how medicines behave in our bodies, I've been able to establish that RMV must accept the blame for a single laboratory test leading to prosecution. A single test - not like in cases of doping where they have both an 'A' test and a 'B' test. And in addition, as the RMV could themselves ascertain, a test with a result many times higher than ever previously recorded, in fact five times the real world record. A test from a decomposed cadaver, a test that cannot really be called a blood test. But no one sounded the alarm at the RMV.

No - what the RMV did instead was supply the police with misleading information and didn't bother informing them of any facts that spoke for the accused - amongst other things that thiopental and morphine are not compatible, that is to say they cannot be administered together, then cannot be mixed together.

If you inject thiopental in the same needle in the arm used for administering morphine, the thiopental will drop out as crystals and block the passage. This is information anyone can find online in one minute. But that didn't stop the 'experts' at the RMV from writing a letter to the police investigators suggesting that thiopental was administered in a morphine drop.

The only way thiopental could have been administered is as follows. First you stop administration of morphine. Then you inject ordinary cooking salt to wash away the morphine solution. Then you inject thiopental. Finally you inject cooking salt again so as to remove the remaining vestiges of thiopental. The rinses are necessary because the morphine and thiopental must not come into contact with one another. So three injections are needed for such a procedure. And you also need two syringes: one with cooking salt and one with thiopental.

So because no one in the vicinity saw the doctor do anything remotely resembling such a complex procedure, there should never have been a case.

If the RMV had expended more due diligence in obtaining the actual facts of the case, there would never have been a trial - and an innocent doctor would not have been smeared as a criminal.

Cutting edge (not to say typical use of) technology in the Duckpond™. But why is this important?

Ask the denizens at Flashback.

trenterx:

That was severe criticism if ever. 'If the RMV had expended more due diligence in obtaining the actual facts of the case, there would never have been a trial.' If Marianne Ny is really going to try to prove Assange used that broken condom that Anna Ardin gave the police and that SKL tested, it'll only be a repeat of incompetence. But this time it's Mats Gehlin who's trying to curry favour with prosecutors. For he carries on despite the condom not having any chromosomal DNA when he should instead have investigated whether Anna Ardin fabricated evidence. His report says the results detect something, evidently mitochondrial DNA. Ollenblau and Batuta have previously demonstrated the impossibility of a condom being used for sex and then not having chromosomal DNA. The mitochondrial DNA can be from the technician who tested (and ripped) the condom or from Ardin herself. And I'd really like to know when our Old Media are going to start writing about this completely astonishing story? This is a big scoop if ever there was one.

the saint:

a) Why couldn't they find any DNA? Not JA's, not AA's? When it comes to AA, I don't mean because she touched the condom when she gave it to the police. We have no information that the police actually went to her place and picked it up. But if that's the case, then AA's DNA wouldn't have to be on the condom. BUT b) Why isn't there any DNA from AA or JA on the condom at all? This simply cannot be explained if the condom was used as claimed by AA! And now we're not talking about mitochondrial DNA but instead chromosomal DNA. AND c) WHY haven't the police looked into this blatant attempt at fabrication by Anna Ardin?

MoLoK:

Don't forget that SKL are not in any way empowered to investigate how condoms break. I've written several times about how they should have conducted the investigation. Their method was to simply destroy the condom they'd been given by pulling at it and cutting it to pieces, without consulting the expiry date, the size of JA's penis versus the size of the condom, and so forth. The condom is likely the 'new evidence' that gave Marianne Ny the chance to reopen the preliminary investigation. As I remember, no new interrogations took place during this time. All that popped up were two condoms roughly between 25 August and 1 September?

Juxtaposition666:

Have we ever discussed penis size and condom size in this thread?

BaalZeBub:

According to Torbjörn Tännsjö, Astrid Lindgren prosecutor Peter Claesson can himself be prosecuted for wrongful prosecution. I think this situation matches Marianne Ny's perfectly. Perhaps she'll be sent to prison for her handling of the Assange case? One can hope! Now I'm uncertain exactly what the law says, but Marianne Ny is processing a case into the absurd despite there being no prospects of it going to court. She's obviously doing this as part of a political agenda and because of political pressure from rabid feminists, the government's focus on the US in foreign policy, and so forth. She will soon have broken every last judicial principle of rule of law, protection under the law, reasonability, and proportionality that we have in the European Union. This should be sufficient for a few years behind bars and dismissal from her office. But in 'reality' she'll probably win an award for it.

jimaz:

I'm convinced: Sweden IS the Saudi Arabia of feminism!

Batuta:

It's a crime no matter what if one fabricates evidence to convict an innocent. So it doesn't matter if the condom's been used or unused as in Anna Ardin's case. Ardin's case is about getting someone previously considered innocent later convicted of rape by submitting fabricated evidence. Ardin can be convicted of fabricating evidence as her intention was to get an innocent person convicted.

hoppsan:

I too hope Marianne Ny ends up behind bars. But who would dare charge her? She has some very powerful people behind her! Then too she's cleverly avoided actually bringing charges. Perhaps there's some kind of proscription against sending out 'embroidered' EAWs? Yes of course she's processing the case into the absurd. But she's not alone. The prosecutor alone decides to bring charges. But now with the EAW there's also a Swedish court involved that approved it. And I doubt court magistrates can be prosecuted in this context.

Juxtaposition666:

Sofia Wilén's probably upset it became a police matter and was classified as 'rape'. And now they have the same lawyer who also wants to call it 'rape'. There are a lot of people who want it like that because 'it's important to highlight the *issue*'.

Pentatonic:

Yeah and Anna Ardin was really pissed JA had sex with the 'cashmere girl'.