There's a demonstrated lack of understanding around important details of this case in your responses. The accusation you raise is a key part of the interview w

There's a demonstrated lack of understanding around important details of this case in your responses. The accusation you raise is a key part of the interview with Melzer. The original witness statement was intentionally destroyed, and the supervisor of the policewoman who conducted the questioning wrote an email telling her to rewrite the statement. (The original copies of the mail exchanges between the Swedish police are actually displayed in the article.) The statement that forms the basis of that claim "was edited without the involvement of the woman in question and it wasn’t signed by her. It is a manipulated piece of evidence out of which the Swedish authorities then constructed a story of rape." As to your attempted lazy smearing – it doesn't really do you any favours here. As a final plea, perhaps read-up on the details so you can get a better understanding of the case: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...