The "sex crimes" against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange that led to an international manhunt, and, now, his arrest, have always seemed, if not false, lame.

Basically, it seemed as though two Swedish fans that Assange charmed into the sack were mortified to discover that he actually wasn't that into them.

But then Interpol launched its manhunt, rendering Assange a cross-border fugitive. So it seemed the "sex crimes" might be more serious than initially thought.

But what are they?

They're not "rape," everyone agrees (at least as of a few days ago)--because the sex was consensual. They also aren't unspecified "molestation."

What they appear to be is a violation of a Swedish law against "having sex without a condom."

Interestingly, even that charge doesn't appear to precisely apply in this case.

A condom was apparently used--initially. But it broke. So the dispute is about whether it broke "accidentally" (he said) or it broke "on purpose" (she said).

That DEFINITELY sounds like a job for Interpol.

See Also: Check Out The Amazing Bombshelter Fortress Where Wikileaks's Servers Are Now Stored