3pm: Assange's outside-the-court statement said he hoped his European arrest warrant case would help highlight others in the same position, including, he said, Poles being extradited to Poland

What gives me hope is that we can prove this particular case and not simply draw attention to the difficulties and pressures that we and other people have been under but perhaps we will have an opportunity to set a new precedent about the abuses of the European arrest warrant. We have an opportunity perhaps to draw attention to all those people who do not have the luxury of this press to scrutinise what's happening to them

The statement also raised "some of the problems" in Sweden and pointed out that Clare Montgomery, QC for the Swedish prosecutor, had represented former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in his extradition case (which is legally irrelevant since barristers are forbidden to reject clients they are qualified to represent.)

1.30pm: A summary of today's events:

• Assange's QC, Geoffrey Robertson, said comments from the Swedish prime minister had made Assange "public enemy number one" in Sweden. He asked for an adjournment to call for evidence on the effect this had on Assange's chance of a fair trial, which the judge rejected.

• His closing argument dealt with the lack of an active prosecution in Sweden, the authority of the Swedish prosecutor to issue a European arrest warrant and the lack of "double criminality" – that the allegations made against Assange are offences under both Swedish and English law.

• The QC for the Swedish prosecutor, Clare Montgomery, said the Swedish prosecutor had the authority to issue a European arrest warrant, that she intended to prosecute Assange and, of the "double criminality" issue, said: "If Sweden says it's rape, it's rape."

• Issue of consent were raised by both sides. Robertson, for Assange, said there was no allegation that the acts took place without consent. Montgomery, for the Swedish prosecutor, said consent cannot be presumed when a woman is sleeping. She also told the court: "It's plain Mr Assange is alleged to have used violence."

Robertson's final submission suggested consent was complicated. He said: "Sexual enounters have their ebbs and flows. What may be unwanted one minute can with further empathy become desired."

1.22pm: Assange is to remain on bail. His reporting time has however been moved from 2-5pm daily to the mornings so he is able to attend meetings.

1.20pm: Roberston has now finished and the hearing concluded. A ruling is scheduled for 24 February.

1.15pm: Robertson (GR) responds to Montgomery's "If Sweden says it's rape, it's rape" line:

GR: 'If sweden says that sucking toes without washing them first is rape, then that would make it an extradition offence?' #assange esther addley

estheraddley

He also delves into what calls the "complex human interactions" in sexual relationships and offers the following: "Sexual enounters have their ebbs and flows. What may be unwanted one minute can with further empathy become desired."

1pm: Montgomery closes with a rejection of key defence arguments. She says it is "a parody" to claim Swedish rape trial are held in secret since while evidence is heard in private, arguments, debate and the ruling are all public and has this to offer on claims Assange could end up in Guantánamo (Alhem is the retired Swedish prosecutor called as a defence witness).

CM: 'I take it from absence of soundbites about G'tanamo Bay or torture' that Alhem's evidence has ruled out of defence argument esther addley

estheraddley

Montgomery also tells the court it is for a Swedish court to hear evidence of rape, that today is an extradition hearing.

12.55pm: As Montgomery wraps up her argument, she moves onto consent. She says if a woman says she only wishes to have sex with a condom the other person will know she doesn't consent to unprotected sex, that there is a presumption a sleeping woman cannot consent and that one of the complainant's accounts 'in popular language does mean violence'.

Esther Addley tweets the following from court (CM is Montgomery, JA is Assange):

CM: re: both women, JA alleged either to have used violence or penetrated while sleeping, both qualify as offences esther addley

estheraddley

Montgomery moves on to says that it is not reasonable to expect the prosecutor to interview Assange via Skype since he needs to be in Sweden if he is to be compelled to give DNA.

12.45pm: "If Sweden says it's rape, it's rape," is how Montgomery addresses the the "double criminality" issue raised by Robertson at 12.10pm.

12.40pm: Montgomery is giving the court detailed legal arguments on what she says is the validity of the European arrest warrant in this case.

12.25pm: Montgomery says it is "quite clear" that the purpose of the European arrest warrant is for prosecution.

12.20pm: Clare Montgomery QC, representing the Swedish prosecutor, begins her closing argument. She says the retired Swedish prosecutor the defence called as a witness conceded that Ny issuing a European arrest warrant for Assange was proper and lawful if her version of events was true and refers to Robertson's questioning of her issuing authority as "mischevious".

12.10pm: Robertson moves through the following points in his closing argument: that Assange did not leave Sweden for Germany to avoid arrest; the Swedish prosecutor not taking up offers of interviews via Skype; "double criminality" (whether the allegations are offences in both Swedish and English law and therefore extraditable); and issues of consent.

On the allegation that Assange used his bodyweight to hold one of the women down, we have the following from Robertson (GR):

GR 'It is quite clear that [miss a's account] described what is usually termed the missionary porition' #assange esther addley

estheraddley

He says that there's no allegation that it was without consent. (Some considered Robertson's detailed description of the act untweetable.)

Robertson then says that if Assange is extradited he will be held in prison for months as Sweden has no bail and will then be tried in secret, contrary to the principles of open justice. The hearing then breaks for five minutes.

11.45am: More from Robertson (GR) on the validity of the European arrest warrant in this case:

GR: 'Is this a warrant for prosecution? The answer is no. It is issued as part of the preliminary investigation.' #assange esther addley

estheraddley

He says Ny has herself said the warrant is for questioning and possible prosecution.

11.35am: Robertson's closing argument has moved onto if Ny has the authority to issue an European arrest warrant (he says not) and what he calls the "vexed question" of whether it is valid for prosecution or questioning. He says one of the defence witnesses, retired Swedish prosecutor Sven-Erik Alhem, said there was a specific Swedish word for prosecution that has not been used.

11.20am: Robertson is now into his closing argument, which he says will last an hour. He begins by questioning Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny's statement, which he says can't be "smuggled in" as definitive. He says if it is to be given "evidential weight" then she should be cross-examined as a witness (as did Assange lawyer Mark Stephens outside the court on Tuesday evening).

Esther Addley adds the following:

NY's statement was contested by #assange swedish lawyer on tues, but he had to admit in court that his own account was wrong esther addley

estheraddley

Robertson continues saying he accepts the European arrest warrant should make extradition easier but that it "should always be with careful attention to the human rights of person sought."

He adds that "you can't say" that the European court of human rights would safeguard Assange's rights in Sweden because the court has a backlog of three to five years.

11.05am: The judge rules out an adjournment, saying the case already contains evidence on whether Assange can get a fair trial in Sweden and, also, that there is a need for finality (though he accepts the possibility "perhaps inevitability" of appeal).

11am: Montgomery is now throwing Reinfeldt's comments back at Assange's legal team:

CM: swedish PM responding in part to defence media statements. 'If u fan media firestorm don't be surprised if u get burnt' #assange esther addley

estheraddley

The judge is now running through the arguments.

10.55am: Robertson is asking to adjourn the hearing so he can call evidence to show the effect of Reinfeldt's comment is that there is no chance of a fair trial in Sweden. He proposes another day or half-day in March. Clare Montgomery QC, representing the Swedish prosecutor, objects and says that the statement Robertson says villifies Assange does nothing of the sort. She adds that even if you accept what she calls Robertson's "hyperbole" courts often operate "in this kind of atmosphere".

10.45am: Geoffrey Robertson QC, representing Assange, begins the session with an attack on the Swedish prime minister, Fredrik Reinfeldt. Robertson says Reinfeldt made critical comments on Assange in parliament to the end that the WikiLeaks founder "has in effect become public enemy number 1 in Sweden. We say this is an intolerable development." He continues:

'The real evil of this outburst is that in a small country people will believe it.' Creates 'toxic atmosphere' in Sw for poss future #as ... esther addley

estheraddley

Robertson says he does not have an idiomatic translation of what Reinfeldt said but reports show it is an "inflammatory statement".

10.35am: Assange is back in the dock. Esther Addley tweets he gave "good-natured waves and thumbs up to friends in public gallery."

10am: Julian Assange, his legal team, the QC for the Swedish prosecutor and - no doubt - supporters return to Belmarsh magistrates' court today for the final day of the WikiLeaks founder's extradition hearing in relation to allegations of rape, sexual assault and sexual molestation.

Assange denies all the allegations and has not been charged.

The hearing was scheduled to last two days but overran. When it resumes today at 10.30am, it is expected to be taken up largely with closing arguments.

The case up to now has heard from Assange's Swedish lawyer, a Swedish blogger and, also from Sweden, a retired prosecutor and a retired judge (translation issues have in part made the hearing overrun).

Arguments have centred around whether Assange can get a fair trial in Sweden, the conduct of the prosecutor (especially over her confirmation of Assange's name to the media) and whether the alleged offences are offences at all. Assange's Swedish lawyer, Björn Hurtig, introduced new evidence in the final session on Tuesday: that he had seen text messages from the two women making the allegations that speak of revenge; also that Swedish prosecutors had tried to interview Assange before he left the country, contradicting his legal team's earlier claims.

Esther Addley / @estheraddley will be in the court again, supplying tweets and telephone reports. You can read her full reports from Monday and Tuesday.



• This report is compiled by Simon Jeffery at the Guardian based on the Twitter feed of Esther Addley at Belmarsh magistrates' court