Odd Stories: Tenants Banned from Laundry Room

Karlstad, Sweden - A Swedish landlord said he had to ban a couple from using their building's laundry room because they were tying up the facilities too often.

The landlord told the Hem & Hyra newspaper he had to change the locks on the laundry room in the Karlstad apartment building because the couple, who he said have their own laundry facilities inside their apartment, were using the communal machines up to eleven times per month, The Local reported Friday.

The landlord said he initially spoke to the couple and they agreed to use the communal machines only once per month, but they did not abide by the agreement.

The man said he had to change the locks on the laundry room because the couple refused to surrender their key.

The couple lodged a complaint with the Rent and Tenancy Tribunal, but the panel sided with the landlord.

Anonymous Hacks FBI/Scotland Yard Calls

United States/Great Britain - Like a scene from a movie, the FBI and Scotland Yard were shown to be fools when it comes to hacking groups.

Anonymous, the infamous hacking group which has taken on credit card companies, cybersecurity firms, the Church of Scientology, and even the music industry, has taken on two of the world's top investigative agencies and won.

A 15 minute long recording has been released which revealed a plan to track and prosecute the collective hacking group and another, the lesser-known LulzSec.  Saying the hack "was intended for law enforcement officers only and was illegally obtained [and] a criminal investigation is under way to identify and hold accountable those responsible," the FBI has said it is unsure exactly how the hack happened.

It seems Anonymous somehow intercepted an email from an FBI agent to other law enforcement agencies throughout the world, including Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and France.

So what's the conservation about? In case you don't have time to listen to it, it's about 15 minutes, I will sum it up for you.  They talk about two people who are supposedly linked to Anonymous - British citizens Ryan Cleary and Jake Davis - and the details they gathered against them and a few other unnamed suspects.

Odd Stories: Sweden Gives File-sharers Sanctuary

Stockholm – There is now a safe-haven for those of you who love to download your media. The only catch isthat you have to move to Sweden.

The home of the famous file-sharing site PirateBay has recognized the Church of Kopimism, Swedish for “Copy me”. It's website makes it clear it supports downloading and uploading in all forms and sees copyright laws as a violation of freedom of information.

The spiritual leader of the group, Isak Gerson, says about Kopimism “"We believe that information is holy. We do not think that copying is stealing or can ever be stealing.".

The head of the Swedish recording industry International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), Ludvig Werner, didn't have anything to say but did mention 1.5 million people out of the country's population of nine-million are file-sharers.

"This means Sweden is one of the most active countries in Europe for file-sharing. So we still have a problem, even if the legal streaming of music has helped limit it,” he added.

Assange Extradition Fact Sheet

 

15 Overlooked Facts About the Assange Extradition Case 

1)  Julian Assange is not charged with anything in Sweden or any other country.

[Source: @wikileaks]

2)  Julian Assange did not flee Sweden to avoid questioning. He was given permission to leave the country on the 15th September 2010, after remaining 5 weeks in Sweden for the purpose of answering the allegations made against him.

[Source: Undue delay for Julian Assange’s interrogation]

3)  The case against Julian Assange was initially dropped, and deemed so weak it could not warrant investigation. After the intervention of a Swedish politician close to American diplomats, it was revived by a different prosecutor. [Source: Why is Julian Assange in jail?]

4)  In all instances, the 2 plaintiffs consented to sexual intercourse, which they did not take the initiative to stop: they never expressed non-consent and afterwards declared to not have felt threatened by Julian Assange. [Sources: Swedish Police Report and The offences described in the EAW are not extradition offences]

5)  A condom submitted as evidence by complainant AA, who claimed it had been deliberately torn by Julian Assange during sexual intercourse, contains no chromosomal DNA from either the complainant or Julian. [Source: Overlooked evidence in the Assange trial]

6)  Text messages exchanged between complainants and their friends contradict the factual allegations in the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued for Julian Assange and cast doubt on the allegations.

[Source: Brief to Canberra Meeting of MPs]

7)  After the date of the alleged sexual misconduct: a) Complainant AA created then deleted evidence (tweets) indicating she was enjoying Julian Assange’s company; b) AA went as far as suggesting one of her friends (Witness C) should be intimate with Julian as well.

[Sources: AA: The Twitter Trail, Göran Rudling Witness Statement and Police Statement of Witness C]

8)  The law firm hired in the Assange investigation is ran by Claes Borgström (politician and legal representative for both plaintiffs) and by former minister Thomas Bodström. Both are members of the Social Democrat Party in Sweden. Bodström is a friend of police interrogator Irmeli Krans, who interrogated complainant SW.  [Source: Irmeli Krans: The Facebook Trail]

9)  Police interrogator Irmeli Krans is, in turn, friends with the other plaintiff, complainant AA, with whom she has political ties (Social Democrat Party). Krans also breached protocol by commenting negatively about Julian Assange on social media. [Source: Irmeli Krans: The Facebook Trail]

10)  Swedish prosecutor, Marianne Ny, refused to provide Julian Assange or his lawyers with information on the allegations against him in writing. This violates the Swedish Code of Procedure (RB 23:18) and the European Convention of Human Rights (article 5), and the EU Fundamental Charter on Human Rights.

Prosecution also refused all voluntary offers for cooperation that fit under Mutual Legal Assistance protocol, such as making use of alternative methods to interview Julian Assange.

[Sources: Fair Trial for Julian Assange? and Abuse of Process: Disproportionate use of EAW and INTERPOL Red Notice]

11)  Both the EAW and the Interpol red notice were issued for Julian by Sweden just before WikiLeaks began to publish Cablegate. [Source: Brief to Canberra Meeting of MPs]

12)  The allegations against Julian Assange do not constitute an offense in Australia or in the UK. [Source: The offences described in the EAW are not extradition offences]

13)  If extradited to Sweden: still without charge, Julian Assange would be held incommunicado and placed under solitary confinement. Pre-trial detention would last for an indefinite period. Trial in Sweden would be held in secret. [Source: Fair Trial for Julian Assange?]

14)  The Swedish legal system features lay judges who are appointed because of their political affiliations. They have no formal legal training. [Source: Lay Judges]

15)  Sweden has the highest per capita rate of cases brought to the European Court of Human Rights relating to article 6.1 (right to a fair trial). [Source: Fair Trial for Julian Assange?]

Conclusion and References 

Julian Assange is wanted in Sweden for questioning. According to the law, Julian is not required to be present in the country for the interview to take place. It could instead be conducted using alternative methods, such as a simple phonecall.
On the 13th July 2011, during an extradition appeal hearing, Judges on the case asked why this did not happen:

”Why go through all of this if Mr. Assange offered to be interviewed?”
”Why does judicial corporation not entail… sensible steps to get on with it?”
[Source: 2011-07-13 WikiLeaks Notes]

Prosecution, however, continuously refuses to interview Julian in the UK, insisting he must be extradited to Sweden for interrogation. For this purpose an European Arrest Warrant was issued by Sweden, in disregard for one of its basic restrictions: an EAW is for prosecution purposes only.

The extradition to Sweden insisted upon by prosecution would facilitate subsequent extradition to the US, as Sweden never once denied a US extradition request since 2000. Therefore, the Swedish case against Julian Assange cannot be dissociated from the ongoing US Grand Jury investigation on WikiLeaks. As such, it is extremely important any opinion formed on this specific subject be based on facts.

This list of 15 facts is mostly based on information originally put together by Christine Assange (twitter account: @AssangeC), and it covers crucial aspects about irregularities and political interest in Sweden’s extradition case against Julian Assange. These important details are often ignored or misrepresented by the media.
Another reference document you might wish to read is the briefing note written by WikiLeaks’ legal advisor Jennifer Robinson, a detailed overview of Human Rights concerns regarding Julian Assange’s extradition to Sweden: http://wlcentral.org/node/1418

And over at Justice4Assange.com you will find a lot more information on this case.

Visit the Action page to know what you can do to support Julian Assange:

http://www.Justice4Assange.com/Action.html

To make a donation to the Julian Assange Defence Fund:

http://www.Justice4Assange.com/Donate.html

Odd Stories: Acquittal Questioned Because of Sleeping Judge

Stockholm – A prosecutor in Sweden has one of the best reasons to question the acquittal of a man charged with signing off on fake invoices totalling 36-thousand dollars– the judge fell asleep. Twice.


"I don't know if the [judge] in question was particularly tired or something to that effect. This just simply should not happen," said regional prosecutor Nils-Eric Schultz.

The man was acquitted, and possibly got away with the crime, after the court ruled there wasn't enough evidence to prove the invoices were fake.

Schultz said the judge had been asleep while the defendant was being questioned and each time the judge fell asleep, the trial was interrupted.

Health Inequality in the World

Chicago – Americans with chronic illnesses struggle more to pay their medical bills or need more help than their counterparts in other high-income countries, according to a survey by the Commonwealth Fund.


The survey studied 18-thousand adults not in the United States, but in ten other countries around the world. Past reports by the nonpartisan group have been used by politicians and policymakers who advocate for healthcare reform. Chances are this one will be touted as a strong argument it.


“Despite spending far more on health care than any other country, the United States practically stands alone when it comes to people with illness or chronic conditions having difficulty affording health care and paying medical bills,” says Commonwealth Fund president Karen Davis.


The survey, which took place over the telephone, included those who were in fair or good health, had surgery in the recent years, or treated for a serious illness or injury in the past year.


Forty-two percent of the 1,200 U.S. adults in the survey went without care, visiting a doctor, or not getting a prescription filled, as a result of costs. and more than a quarter (27%) said they couldn't pay, the study found. The comparison with countries like Australia, Great Britain, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland, reveals at the most a 41-point gap. Those countries had between one and 14 percent.


More than seven out of ten people in Britain, Switzerland, France, New Zealand, and the Netherlands were found to be able to get an appointment for their illnesses on the same day or the next. Half of the Canadian and Swiss patients are able to get the same speedy care.


Adults under the age of 65, 51 percent, didn't have care because of the costs when compared to those older than 65, who were under Medicare.


For more information about health inequality, visit the CommonWealthFund website.