Slashdot Mirror
Julian Assange Faces Rape Investigation In Sweden — Updated
mpawlo was one of many readers who have sent news that a warrant has been issued in Stockholm, Sweden for WikiLeaks founder and spokesman Julian Assange. The investigation apparently involves "one report of rape and one report of harassment." The story was broken by Swedish tabloid Expressen (original in Swedish), and later picked up by more reputable sources like CNN and the BBC, who say the warrant has been confirmed by Swedish authorities. The WikiLeaks Twitter feed has commented three times about the charges so far, first saying they were warned of 'dirty tricks,' then that they hadn't been contacted by Swedish police, and then a statement from Assange saying the charges are without basis.
Update: 08/21 15:58 GMT by S : Multiple sources are now reporting that the warrant for Assange's arrest has been withdrawn. Aftonbladet has coverage in Swedish. Chief prosecutor Eva Finne said, "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape."
Update: 08/21 15:58 GMT by S : Multiple sources are now reporting that the warrant for Assange's arrest has been withdrawn. Aftonbladet has coverage in Swedish. Chief prosecutor Eva Finne said, "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape."
The US Government plays dirty when you expose their secrets
moox. for a new generation.
Something like this was to be expected. I have read as much as there is but I cant see any details of victim(s) or of the crime itself. But surely surely surely he would have to be as stark staring mad as a bottle of chips to commit a crime like while running the worlds biggest whistle blowing web site. It stinks to high heaven.
In space no-one can hear your vuvuzela.
Well, the BBC story says "Swedish police have been trying to contact Mr Assange, but have not yet been able to" while Wikileaks says "No-one here has been contacted by Swedish police". Pity you can't serve someone over Twitter. I agree that the timing is suspicious as hell, but after the Reiser fiasco I'm going to wait and see.
No statement is true, not even this one.
When you are hiding from FBI in another country you don't go raping and harassing people.
Maybe Julian is crazy, but he is not stupid.
Furthermore, one has to remember that even if the accusations are true, it does not in any way invalidate Assange's work or "pro-leak" arguments. Doing so would be a simple, straight ad hominem.
In some ways it doesn't matter if he's never convicted of these charges. Mouthpieces like Rush Limbaugh will be able to call him a "rapist and molester" and convince many that any information from Wikileaks is a lie.
If this is a false accusation, and I believe it is, I would also suspect that agents would be assigned to astroturf media sites with posts supporting the accusations and charges.
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
In other news, accused rapist, Julian Assange, has released new documents on his WikiLeaks website...
Notice that then, as now, a large number of posters have decided that there is just no way he could have done it. With Reiser when the guilty verdict was handed down there were still plenty of people who decried how stupid the jury was, how there clearly wasn't enough evidence to find him guilty and so on... Until he confessed and gave the location of the body.
Same deal here, people have presupposed Assange's innocence because they like him. I don't mean given him the benefit of the doubt and said "Well let's see what evidence comes up," I mean saying that this is clearly an evil government plot, even though there is, of course, no evidence of that at this point.
It is just how it goes here. Geek heroes can do no wrong in the eyes of some and they'll come up with any number of reasons as to why something they did clearly must be a frame job by someone else.
As for this particular case, I'll have to see what, if anything, comes out. It could be a deliberate smear campaign against him, though I'm a bit doubtful of that as the risk of backfire would be pretty large. Could just be someone making shit up, this happens even to people who aren't well known never mind people who are. Could be he actually did it, the guy has a massive ego and questionable morals and may not have even thought he did anything wrong. We'll just have to see if anything comes of this.
Of course, the utter lack of information at this point won't stop a massive number of conspiracy theories from being posted here about how this is clearly a government frame job.
I assumed they were going to nail him with child porn. But I guess when they went to put it on his computer they discovered that his computer security was off the scale.
If I were the judge on this one I would accept no evidence short of a witness such as Nelson Mandela. I hope they solidly investigate his accusers to check what they have been up to for the last while and see if they have any relations to US interests or large payoffs.
That could be. It could also be that paranoia cascades out of control.
Well what it could do, at least for some people, is call motives in to question. Right now you see two major theories at to why he does what he does and in particular why he chose to leak a bunch of classified data which appears to have little to no public value:
1) He really believes in this "freedom and openness at all costs," thing. He is a zealot perhaps, but an idealistic one. He really thinks that the best thing for the world is to have no secrets that all information from any source should be public for all to see. What he does is not at all about him, it is about the greater good, about making the world a better place. He believes that what he does is necessary.
2) He's an egomaniac with questionable morals who likes puff himself up be getting the better of people and exposing them. He leaks indiscriminately, including documents of no real value (like sorority secrets) because it gets him attention, power, and gives him a thrill. All the "public good" stuff is just bullshit, he doesn't really care, it is all about him and his ego.
Well, if he actually committed a rape, it would indicate that #2 is more likely. You obviously have to have some twisted morals to want to rape someone and ego and power are a big part of it. It is as much about exerting your will on another as the sexual gratification. So it would be an indicator that indeed his work on Wikileaks was for self centered reasons.
Now even if he did it all for selfish reasons that doesn't mean that you are required to find it worthless. You could certainly say "I don't care why he did it *I* believe it is valuable and necessary, and a good thing for society." The value needs to be evaluated independent of anything he says or does and nay reasons he has.
I'm just sayin'
Folks here seem to believe that rape is some item on a to-do list, waiting to be ticked off.
Not saying that whole thing is not part of a Dirty Trick, just that if there IS some truth to it, rational thought has nothing to do with it.
The leaks were found to be true not because of the credibility of its founder. In fact, the organization itself has had no credibility at all, only the material being leaked speaks for itself. I really don't care if Julian rapes women as a hobby. If he gets arrested, what is important is that someone must continue his work.
I once had a signature.
This is not limited to Geek heroes. Just look at Roman Polanski and the support got from his peers.
Assange is also the hero of many internet-savvy geeks, some of which who could easily make life very difficult for these women, regardless of whether they were actually raped or not. A lot of people are going to see this as some kind of conspiracy and the women are probably aware of it. You can't dismiss this so easily until we know more.
Even more so is the fact that there are two girls that have been raped. I see two possibilities:
1. The guy went on a raping tour of Sweden. That happens sometimes. Who knows.
2. The girls were given an offer they couldn't refuse by assets of the western intelligence community. That also happens, unfortunately.
JA seems really attracted to standing in the limelight. He may well have a narcissistic tendency. Just my impression from seeing him in video's and pictures. It's unusual for such people to commit rape or violence when facing rejection.
OTOH, this has to be proven first. I find it highly unlikely that these accusations have been fabricated to damage wikileaks. That would be much too obvious in such a case.
It's not the first time someone from the free software/free information movement has been accused of something like this
In regard to rape, it is typically a crime based on power, not sex, and so the accessibility of an alternative willing partner has nothing to do with it.
No, it states that rape does occur here in Sweden and that it is possible for even a "celebrity" to commit such a crime.
I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
The value needs to be evaluated independent of anything he says or does...
Correct, and it nullifies everything you said previously to it in your post.
You illustrated perfectly the ad hominem the poster you're replying to warned of -- "motive" is just another way to say "circumstantial ad hominem."
Thought thinks itself.
Or maybe because it's what civilised societies do - innocent until proven otherwise.
You're assuming the point of rape is to fulfill sexual desire -- it's not, it's about wielding power over someone else. Given this, motive then isn't "heterosexual male" (i.e. horny), but rather "need to assert power over another" which then means opportunity isn't fulfilled by finding a willing participant.
By your argument Mike Tyson would have been innocent of rape purely on his celebrity status granting him a plethora of women willing to sleep with him.
Thought thinks itself.
Well, swedish law classifies a lot of things as "rape" that wouldn't be rape in other countries (this can be seen by looking at swedish rape statistics before and after the relevant changes to the law).
So are you pulling a Whoopi Goldberg and saying that this isn't "rape rape"?
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
people have presupposed Assange's innocence because they like him. I don't mean given him the benefit of the doubt and said "Well let's see what evidence comes up," I mean saying that this is clearly an evil government plot, even though there is, of course, no evidence of that at this point.
Yeah, well, quite possibly that is because the majority of /. readers are from the USA. You know, where you are PRESUMED INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY.
So until there is sufficient proof offered, Julian, in the eyes of most Americans, is completely innocent and the charges are completely bogus.
Likewise, until sufficient proof is offered, the US government is not performing a conspiracy. But /. does tend to draw out the conspiracy theories ;)
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Rape is felt by the victim as an act of dominance and control. We have no reason to believe the motivation of the perpetrator and the feeling of the victim are correlated.
He's too high-profile to be killed off without it being obvious. Terrorists don't tend to care about PR all that much, or would even be glad to take credit for an attack. The US government, on the other hand, has an image and moral high ground to protect. Particularly in this case, where the leak greatly damages their credibility, killing the leaker would make it much worse. Hence the character assassination.
(However, Assange should worry about pissing off Mossad. From what they pulled off in Dubai, they don't seem to care about image issues or international opinion much either.)
Well what it could do, at least for some people, is call motives in to question
- OK, so let's say Assange is found guilty of some crime and in fact let's even say that his motives ARE questionable.
Here is the answer to all of that: his motives don't matter, we must still get all the information that wikileaks provides, it's our information, it needs to be opened.
You can't handle the truth.
Rape against friends or family members who happen to be around in private areas argues against premeditation. When the knives comes out there is usually sadism involved--a crying victim is even more arousing.
2) He's an egomaniac with questionable morals who likes puff himself up be getting the better of people and exposing them. He leaks indiscriminately, including documents of no real value (like sorority secrets) because it gets him attention, power, and gives him a thrill. All the "public good" stuff is just bullshit, he doesn't really care, it is all about him and his ego.
So what? Motivation doesn't matter, result does. Historically, actions have always been evaluated on the result it had, rather than the motivation of the actor. Actions are considered good if it led to the betterment of society or bad if it has an adverse effect
Well, if he actually committed a rape, it would indicate that #2 is more likely. You obviously have to have some twisted morals to want to rape someone and ego and power are a big part of it. It is as much about exerting your will on another as the sexual gratification. So it would be an indicator that indeed his work on Wikileaks was for self centered reasons.
I don't subscribe to the logic suggested here. By this line of logic one single action is enough to elevate a person to heights of purity or to the depths of depravity. It is very much our failing as a society to color a person in either black or white and all their past and future actions in the same light. We are neither purity personified nor evil incarnate, if ever there are such things. No, we are merely human, and which particular shade of grey we are, is a choice every single one of us have to make every conscious moment of our life. Maybe this choice is what defines us as human and all our failures and all our achievements.
Now even if he did it all for selfish reasons that doesn't mean that you are required to find it worthless. You could certainly say "I don't care why he did it *I* believe it is valuable and necessary, and a good thing for society." The value needs to be evaluated independent of anything he says or does and nay reasons he has.
Bingo
Perhaps, but in Assange's case, he wields power by publishing secret documents. Not quite the profile of a rapist.
"Sweden has the highest incidence of reported rapes in Europe"
Highlighted the reason why. Let me make up som example numbers;
Sweden - actual rapes 1,000 - reported 50% = 500 rapes.
Exampleistan - actual rapes 20,000 - reported 1% = 200 rapes.
Which country has the most rapes?
See the problem?
Errr...no, no it isn't. Being in possession of a penis and attracted to women does not make anyone a potential rapist or provide motivation for being one. I simply don't understand this strange correlation you seem to be making here.
--bornagainpenguin
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
America, you should be ashamed of the way your country wages war. Using the accusation of rape as a weapon....
Err, activity performed for the purpose of reproduction and "power" have no mutual causation links whatsoever.
In a "field" that is nearly entirely composed of "feminists" and "social studies" types...
The result of which is constant goal-post shifting of definitions such as "rape" which 100 years ago meant a forceful, violent sexual assault and these days "I, kinda, felt like yes, but in the back of my mind I was like no, but it was like I let him, but then, like, I changed my mind, I am a victim, you see, I always am!" followed by the "social worker" going "You pooooor thing! You deserve millions from that asshole rapist!!!" ... which is what the litmus test is now in Sweden (and getting weaker every day with the predictable result of Swedish "rape" statistics skyrocketing - surpassing most of Africa now, which prompts the screeching "feminists" do demand more broad definitions - lather, rinse, repeat).
Because its "rape", you know... all about power!
Come to think about it, it does seem that it is all about "power" but of the "feminist" kind...
In short there is no coincidence that "rape" is the weapon of choice here. Smart tactics calls for using the most appropriate tool for the job and in modern day Sweden "rape" is most definitely the most likely to succeed.
That's the feminist/social sciences dogma. See Palmer & Thornhill, A Natural History of Rape for a different dogmatic response.
There, fixed that for you. The movement in evolutionary psychology is no less unexamined in its belief that psychology results from evolution than are the feminists and social scientists. Palmer and Thornhill miss a lot in their analysis. What drives male/male rapes? Incest with young children? Rape with objects? In other ports? The science is pretty poor and the solution-- chicks should dress more modestly and try to seem "unavailable."
I was expecting something like this might happen. If this was targeted character assassination that's mission accomplished. Assange's name dragged through the dirt and his as well as Wikileaks' name associated successfully with rape. Now everyone can start using the following in any new press releases on a next wikileaks release: "Julian Assange, who was recently accused of rape in Sweden, has released...."
I am really curious if anyone is going to try to get to the bottom of this and find out what the hell just happened. Where did the accusations come from, why was it decided an arrest warrant should be issued and why has that same arrest warrant been withdrawn not even 24 hours later. This just stinks to high heaven. My guess? Some vague statements will be issued by the Swedish prosecutors office and that's all we'll ever find out.
The surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us.
It is a classic "character assassination" campaign. After the charges have been trumpeted all over the world, the widely-publicized arrest warrant has been withdrawn and a few hours later the Swedish Public Prosecutor announced that "he is no longer even under suspicion"... and yet from now on every time his name is mentioned, the easily impressed by the authority types with limited attention span will go "isn't that the rapist/traitor/terrorist/child-molester guy?"
It also served its job as a final "warning" from the power elite to this guy: "See what we can do? We can destroy you and make you a villain and no one will help you! You are defenseless against our power!"
So congratulations are in order. Now you can proudly consider yourself a honorary member of the dirty-tricks arm of the Pax Americana, unlike the rest of us, "tin foil hat" "conspiracy nuts" who smelled a rat from the get-go ...
Here in the US they've coined a term for the PC way of going about sex: Enthusiastic Consent. It is an outgrowth of the PC version of "No means No!" from the 1980's. In the 80's in the US they counseled college kids that they had get permission at each step of the way. They actually had role-playing seminars where you'd ask "is it OK if I touch you here?" "Is it OK if I kiss you there?" You really got the feeling that these people had never had a real sexual encounter in their lives, and wanted to make sure that nobody else did either.
From the women's rights site on Enthusiastic Consent:
Under this model, the person initiating contact is required to take account of and not exploit a relationship, the other person's intoxicated state, or the power of peer pressure or social conditioning.
So this has morphed into an "anything can be considered rape" model, where even getting an affirmative "yes" to each of these questions is not enough. The "yes" has to be truly enthusiastic to count. So telling a girl that you love her and want to have sex with her is rape - because you are exploiting your relationship. Have a couple of drinks together? Rape. Tell her "it's Ok, everybody does it?" Rape. Know somebody who lives in a society that is OK with casual sexual encounters? Ooops, that might be social conditioning - better not try to hook up. 'Cause that's rape.
As anyone who frequents /. knows, the power of PC thinking is pervasive. It is like fight club - you cannot discuss PC, because discussing PC means that you are not PC - and therefore are evil. So even linking to source material that written by PC people and espouses their PC beliefs requires an AC posting - lest ye be branded un-PC and evil! So yeah, I agree with you: rape does seem to be all about power - of the feminist kind.
First of all I would like to state that I am NOT a racist.
Any time anyone feels compelled to lead with a statement like that, you can pretty much bet that racist bilge is going to follow.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
... soldiers never rape, kill, or pillage anyone. Perfect model citizens, even the thousands of ex convicts and self-described mercenaries are fully law-abiding, high-morals examples. The printed truth is wonderful. Are we in Disney yet?
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Holy Shit Batman! Those are your two options. All good or all evil? How about this as option number 3:
3) He really believes in this "freedom and openness at all costs," thing. He is a zealot perhaps, but an idealistic one. He really thinks that the best thing for the world is to have no secrets that all information from any source should be public for all to see. His personal life however, is a total fucking mess. He is a sex addict who likes BDSM "games" and degrading sex with as many partners as possible. He sleeps with any female that moves whether it is free or paid sex, but his partners are not always (or rarely) prepared for his level of aggressiveness. The only redeeming value in his otherwise pathetic attention whore sex addict life is his idealistic zealotry for freedom and openness from governments at all costs.
You know someone who is flawed but has a redeeming quality somewhere. This is not a Disney fairytale where the choices are Prince Charming, Wicked Witch, or background scenery.
Apologies to all of you who already dismissed this as way too obvious -- the head of Military Intelligence might want to plant a lot of false information about suspected friends of enemies. A really good place to plant it would be amidst incriminating and embarrassing facts and have it leak out to some unsuspecting third party organization like, uh, WikiLeaks! Yeah. Of course a great way to build credibility is to have the FBI and CIA go after WikiLeaks in earnest, even try some stupid dirty tricks like unsubstantiated sexual harassment. As a result, the Taliban or Al-Qaida suspect their friends to be moles and either kill them or torture them or whatever. That is the problem with deceit, you never know where it ends or where it began. In fact, I could be deceiving everyone now. I could be Mr. Gates, either Robert or Bill, planting this suspicion to either further enhance the deception or undermine the evidence or both or neither. Who really knows? BTW, I am neither Gates. However, I can’t be sure that I was not tricked into writing this by some clever inception (yes, I saw the movie).
The decision not to rape comes from the desire not to hurt others or, as a fallback, the worry that you might get caught. That is all.
It is not all. It also comes from the desire for sex being one of mutual involvement. Even if your partner wasn't forced to have sex, but was doing it for some other reason such as to repay a favour, pity or apathy... would you really want to have sex with someone who wasn't interested / enjoying it? I wouldn't.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Does prostitution exist?
That doesn't refute my point. You said the only two reasons why one wouldn't commit rape are a desire not to hurt another and a fear of being caught. I offered a third which is that many of us would get no joy out of intercourse where our partner got no satisfaction. That the third doesn't apply to everyone no more makes it a non-existent reason than that your two reasons don't apply to everyone.
Secondly, I imagine a lot of men want a prostitute they go with to act like they're enjoying it. Even if that is partly or wholely faked, it's still something you're not going to get with rape.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
OK, so that's the fantasy view of it. The reality is far more depressing where very large numbers of cases are dropped despite overwhelming medical evidence from injuries and DNA evidence from sperm. Very few victims want to stand up in court and have the prosecution call them whores, which is still the way a lot of these cases play out. There is still to an extent an almost Taliban style view that the victim deserved it if she was wearing certain clothing or acting in a certain way.
The above post is mistaking some sort of heavyhanded PC attempt at social behaviour modification designed to get inside a distracted football players skull with reality.
Agreed. This was in itself a punishment. Discrediting him. Destroying his reputation. But it was also a warning: "We can get to you. If we can do this think of what else we can do." But they haven't done it yet. But if they ever do (and they will be a lot less obvious about an actual assassination), he will be lacking in public symptathy for being an alleged serial rapist and a hater of women. People who suspect the US of being responsible for the suicide or random traffic accident will just not care as much either way. They have shown some restraint so far. They could have accused him of being a child rapist and a pedophile and then killed him a couple of months later, leaving a long detailed suicide note with his signature. I don't know what I would do if I were Assange. I suspect that at this point he will suffer an accidental death or suicide within the next 6 months no matter what he does. I think that the CIA and NSA is going to work on the issue of the insurance file for a while first.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Right. You remind me of the former Canadian Public Safety Minister who while trying to justify a massive expansion of prisons in Canada (and their completely coincidental privatization) when faced with inconvenient statistics about crime rates went on whining about a "dramatic rise in unreported crime"...
Likewise, you (and a chorus of deranged femi-nazis) bray about a "very large number of cases" ("some people say!") where damning DNA samples are supposedly summarily ejected out the windows of the police stations to the accompaniment of giggles, whistles, cat-calls and exclamations of "whore!", a claim which you make based entirely on your anecdotal, unverifiable "evidence". And so in effect you insist that we should keep reducing the safeguards and the levels of proof required for prosecuting rape until a mere off-hand remark and a dismissive flick of a finger by any annoyed female will lock any male up for 20 years, transfer of all his assets to her and put him on an sex-offender list for life.
Right, and the supposedly abundant DNA evidence is of no use because? Next you will claim that all these rapes are committed by a globe-spanning gang of hooded, masked men dwelling in really dark alleys, no doubt.
Oh quit with the bullshit. A "depressingly small number", as in "we are depressed by our inability to fabricate credible statistics". I can't help but notice that you keep failing to point to any sort of independent analysis of these supposedly staggering waves of rapist activity but that does not stop you from using phrases like "depressingly small" and "very large number" in an effort to give an impression of some indefinable looming vastness being squeezed via an ear of a needle...
Nonsense. You were talking, at best, of self-interested parties claiming to witness some astounding numbers of supposed crimes which somehow fail to make it to court but which, naturally, demand increased funding for these poor overworked "therapists", "pathologists" and other "medical practitioners".
For your information: a "rape" with no actual police claim and associated investigation "crime" does not make for the simple reason that anyone can claim anything without credible verification by an unbiased third party and in case of "rape" one can do so even with semen present in the uterus, since it is quite possible for a female to use intercourse as a tactical weapon. Even reported and investigated "rapes" that go to trial turn out bogus (although it is a miracle that a male manages to defend himself given current conditions).
You can "suggest" whatever you want but your clear insistence on using nebulous and unquantifiable phrases while trying to assign some great value to unverifiable and one-sided "reports" can only lead to the conclusion I already made in the previous post.
Grow up and read my other post where I replied to an adult and you'll understand you are projecting all kinds of bullshit from your own baggage instead of writing anything connected to what I've written above. You are arguing with what other people have said and rambled in all kinds of directions instead of addressing the few words I've written above.
You are writing about theoretical borderline cases that might exploit loopholes in lax laws that might not even exist as if they are the norm. I'm writing about women in morgues, hospitals or undergoing medical treatment that have without question suffered from something considered a crime everywhere and it would have still been considered a crime where you are with laws a century or two old. Spare me the bullshit of pretending it's all connected to PC weirdness. Crime happens and not everyone that commits it gets caught. One of the problems with rape cases is that victims are reluctant to testify - I did not make that up and you know it.
Consider that it would be very silly to pretend the murder rate is lower just because you can't find or convict all the murderers. All I really said a couple of posts above is that the conviction rate is a lot lower than the rate of reported crimes, and then I gave one of the reasons (if the victim won't testify it becomes as hard to prove as a murder with no witnesses).
Errr...no, no it isn't. Being in possession of a penis and attracted to women does not make anyone a potential rapist or provide motivation for being one
Large swathes of the population would disagree with you. Male sexuality is the growing target of a moral panic that sees all males as potential sexual predators.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face