Skip to content

The Lab Results

These are the lab results presented to Chief Inspector Mats Gehlin on Monday 25 October 2010. At this point, only one interrogation remained (that of Marie Thorn).

Gehlin had submitted two condoms to the state crime lab SKL (Statens kriminaltekniska laboratorium, on 25 August, exactly two months earlier, which was quite the feat, as one came from Sofia Wilén – even though Chief Inspector Eva Finné, who was in charge of both Sofia Wilén and Anna Ardin’s cases at the time, had demonstratively closed the more serious part relating to Wilén, stating that ‘no crime had been committed’; and she expressly ordered Gehlin to keep his ‘hands off’. Nonetheless, Gehlin submitted Wilén’s condom under Ardin’s case number.

The lab results, available two months later, seemed to have perplexed the good inspector. He’d not asked the lab to check for DNA, only to see if they could determine how the condoms had been torn. But they did a DNA test anyway, and came up with some rather shattering results, results the Swedish media have done their best to hide from the citizenry ever since.

The condom submitted by Anna Ardin showed no traces whatsoever of chromosomal (genomic) DNA – meaning the condom cannot have been used for sex.

Designation Object
AB/7525-10/G001 Condom
Number: 2010-0201-BG20840-2
Client ID: AB/7525-10/G001
SKL number: 201001231101
Handling of materials: returned separately
Methods used: B-SF02*, B-M55*, B-SF03*, B-M56*, B-M71*, B-M72*
Condom Part of condom
Number: 2010-K246314-10
Client ID: Condom
SKL number: 201001231102
Handling of materials: returned separately
Methods used: B-SF02*, B-M55*, B-SF03*, B-M56*, B-M71*, B-M72*


The objective is to investigate in which way condom AB/7525-10/G001 and the part of condom ‘Condom’ have been damaged.

Related Information

Investigation of damages is not part of the accreditation of the laboratory according to ISO/IEC 17025. The results of the DNA tests are returned separately.

Investigation and Conclusions

AB/7525-10/G001 Condom
Investigation of damages Condom AB/7525-10/G001 was thoroughly damaged in the front. The edges of the damage were studied under microscope. No traces were found that could have been caused by tools. On the other hand, small scratches were found in the area close to the damaged area, perpendicular to the length of the damage.

Test damage was achieved on the back part of the condom with a knife and with scissors and by ripping off the back part. The surface of the damaged area was similar to that of the torn part, whilst the surfaces damaged by the tools showed a number of small scratches. The appearance of the front torn part of the condom is seen in picture 1.


The results indicate that the damage in the front part of condom AB/7525-10/G001 has been achieved by tearing the condom (Grade +2).

Condom Part of condom
Investigation of damages The condom part ‘Condom’ was the front part of a condom, see picture 2. The ripped edge was studied under microscope. No traces that could have been made by tools were seen at the edges. Small scratches were observed in some areas near the ripped edge and perpendicular to the ripped edge. The appearance of the ripped edge was reminiscent of the ripped edge of condoms that were ripped in the laboratory.


The results indicate that the ripped edge of the condom part ‘Condom’ have been achieved by tearing the condom (Grade +2).


Investigation Investigator
Investigation of damages First forensic scientist Lennart Jonasson (chief inspector) forensic scientist Bengt Forsby

Assessment Scale

SKL grade assessments on a scale from -4 to +4. The assessment given to the results for the two condoms submitted by Mats Gehlin is therefore the third highest. Following are the top assessments available from SKL.

Grade +4 The results indicate with certainty that…
The possibility of achieving these results if another hypothesis is true is assessed to be nonexistent.
Grade +3 The results indicate strongly that…
The possibility of achieving these results if another hypothesis is true is assessed to be very small.
Grade +2 The results indicate that…
The possibility of achieving these results if another hypothesis is true is assessed to be small.
Grade +1 The results to some extent indicate that…
The results lend somewhat more support for the proposed hypothesis than for other hypotheses.
Grade   0 The results are indecisive
The results do not lend more support for the proposed hypothesis than for other hypotheses.

Three Days Later

A perplexed Mats Gehlin contacted the crime lab three days later on Thursday 28 October 2010. Gehlin’s report was added to the case file at 15:24 that afternoon.

Conversation with SKL

I spoke with forensic scientist Anders Nilsson at SKL to get a clarification about the results of the DNA tests.

In an earlier memo, I’ve written that the condom used by Anna Ardin didn’t have DNA. This is not true according to Anders Nilsson. He said he saw something but couldn’t make out what it was. They’ve decided to test the condom with a more sophisticated method. This method will take approximately two weeks. I didn’t speak with Anders Nilsson last time.

Anders Nilsson explains that it’s not the amount of DNA that’s decisive in their ability to detect DNA. There can be many reasons they can’t detect better.

- Something disturbs the analysis. Such as dirt.
- Too small quantities of DNA.
- People emit different quantities of DNA.
- The object has been altered after use by being washed, wiped off.

These were some examples of what can influence the analysis of DNA but there are further factors as well.

Mats Gehlin

Five Days Earlier

Mats Gehlin filed a separate report five days before the lab results were returned. He’d evidently been in contact with the lab at that time. His filing is stamped 15:08 20 October 2010.


A conversation with SKL yielded the following.

The condom from the residence of complainant 2 [Ardin] had no traces of DNA.

Vaginal swabs from complainant 1 [Wilén] had DNA from complainant 1 [Wilén] and a man.

The bit of condom found in the residence of complainant 1 [Wilén] had DNA from complainant 1 [Wilén] and the same man found on the vaginal swabs.

Complainant 1 [Wilén] did not notice that a condom broke as it was dark in the room, and when the suspect put on the condom, she heard a noise as if he were pulling on a balloon. The bit of condom was found under the bed, under the part of the bed where the suspect was lying when he put on the condom.

The above is an excerpt from Assange in Sweden: The Police Investigation, available at booksellers worldwide. Get your copy now.

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.