Torrentfreak isn't exactly an unbiased source in this case.
While has has been held under restrictions it is not like he has been totally cut off from the world, he has still met some other people, gotten mail, been able to buy snacks etc.
The source of claims he has been kept in solitary has been his mother Kristina Svartholm since the prison officials have refused comment regarding his care.
On the particular issue of whether or not solitary confinement is now used in Sweden, here is a newspaper in Sweden confirming they currently do use solitary confinement for some prisoners in Sweden:
This article quotes Jerzy Sarnecki, a Swedish expert in criminology who teaches at Stockholm University. He states, "Solitary confinement worsens the quality of criminal care. Long term isolation is powerfully destructive. When you consider that many of those who are confined have psychological problems, the effects can be devastating."
The article also quotes Christer Karlsson, Swedish and chairman of the help organisation Criminals Return Into Society, saying solitary confinement "can break prisoners down, physically and psychologically".
The article also notes that Swedish prisons have more hardened criminals as prisoners than before. Thus perhaps one would argue that solitary confinement for non-violent prisoners protects them from being harmed by the hardened criminals. Perhaps the vast majority of prisoners in Sweden are dangerous violent serial killers and rapists and thus it is more economical to put the small number of harmless non-violent prisoners in solitary confinement to protect them rather than put the violent offenders in solitary to protect others from them. It has yet to be demonstrated that this is the case though, that the majority of prisoners are violent and can not be managed. In addition, it is known that solitary confinement is damaging and is a form of torture, thus to force torture upon someone in order to protect them seems counterproductive. Torture as therapy is not an established or recognized way of protecting people, and runs counter to what is known about torture.
I wouldn't call his mother an unbiased source either to be honest but you have very valid points otherwise.
Solidarity confinement is not something I wish upon anyone but it is not like he is in total separation from everyone, he has had access to both "fan" mail and visits from his mother and lawyers.
Torture is indeed not therapy and should of course not be used. As for the less serious crime, If memory serves there are different types of prisons in Sweden and there is a great degree of separation between minor and very serious crime but don't quote me on that - I am not entirely up to date on the penal system in my home country.
That said, He obviously is a flight risk and that must be taken into account when discussing the issue.
Do you have a source regarding the fan mail and visits from his mother other than the sources that you have stated you will not accept because you believe there is bias?
Here is a Swedish press report covering her attempts early on to see her son, which were denied.
She has since reported that she saw was permitted to see him once, on September 18.
On November 10th she reported she was allowed to see him one hour a week, but some weeks it is cancelled because the guard that must listen to the conversation is unavailable.
> "I am allowed to visit him for an hour every week but this week the police men that must go with me to listen to our conversations didn’t have time to do so,” says Kristina.
> “This has happened before. Of course the uncertainty this creates makes his time in isolation more difficult. This is of course also obvious both to the police and to the prosecutor.”
The source here is torrentfreak and his mother, which you have suggested are lying and misrepresenting the situation. Strangely, there are no other sources I can find detailing how often and for how long she is allowed to visit. Given the widespread international interest in Sweden's abuse of human rights here, it is quite odd that there is a near blackout of reliable news on the case from the Swedish press. Since you live there perhaps you have some insights into why this would be so?
Do you agree that she was seeing him at most 1 hr a week, or do you have reason to believe it was more often?
Do you assert that someone held in solitary with the exception of a 1 hr visit each week is not really being held in solitary?
The risk in non-restrictive custody of destroying evidence or tampering with an investigation is something that applies to all prisoners.
The flight risk in non-restrictive custody is zero, there are plenty of inescapable non-solitary cells in prisons.
While these risks outside of prison may be justifications for non-restrictive custody, they are not justifications for restrictive custody, i.e. solitary confinement, which is a form of torture.
> There is a risk the suspect destroys evidence or in other ways affect the investigation. There is risk that the person might flee or avoid a future trial.
I understand your points, however I am having really hard time imagining any single case where those two points do not hold up.
Example: a simple fender-bender. Why shouldnt we keep the one who caused it in solitary because a) he could destroy evidence (for example try to break into traffic control and delete all tapes that are related to this accident, or he could talk with bystanders and offer them cash for telling something else that what they seen, etc etc.), and b) perhaps with psychological problems he could ran away and flee to avoid prosecution even if its such a simple case.
Therefore, every single case falls under the points you made. No?
You are certainly right, every case can fall under those points.
However in this case there is an obvious flight risk, he has already fled the country once to avoid a prison sentence.
As for evidence destruction, I guess it can be argued that since the evidence is electronic and he hardly needs to be there in person to the destroy it he can instruct someone to do it for him.
I don't agree with solitary confinement in general but Torrentfreak has a way of spinning the story like he is some poor innocent lamb while he in reality is accused of a rather serious crime.
That's how the Swedish court system works, he has been accused (with the higher level of confidence if I remember correctly) and won't get formally charged until it is taken up in court. The system is a bit different compared to for example USA.
He was taken into custody while the investigation was being finished up.
Ah yes, that's ringing a bell (I think from the whole Assange debacle). Makes the reporting in torrentfreak guilty of some rather dishonest spin doesn't it?
While has has been held under restrictions it is not like he has been totally cut off from the world, he has still met some other people, gotten mail, been able to buy snacks etc.
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/10pivx/pirate_ba... Offers a pretty good overview of how the Swedish judicial system works.
The key reasons why he has been held in restrictive custody are as follows (From the link above):
There is a risk the suspect destroys evidence or in other ways affect the investigation.
There is risk that the person might flee or avoid a future trial.