Slashdot Mirror


Sweden Defends Wiki Sex Case About-Face

crimeandpunishment writes "Mistake? We didn't make a mistake. That's what Swedish prosecutors said Sunday as they defended their handling of a rape allegation against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. The Swedish Prosecution Authority said the prosecutor who issued the arrest warrant Friday did not make a mistake, even though a higher-ranked prosecutor withdrew the warrant the next day. A spokesperson for the Authority said: 'The prosecutor who took over the case yesterday had more information, and that is why she made a different assessment than the on-call prosecutor.' Assange, who was in Sweden seeking legal protection for the site as it prepares to leak more Afghan war documents, told a Swedish tabloid newspaper, 'I don't know who's behind this but we have been warned that for example the Pentagon plans to use dirty tricks to spoil things for us.'" We covered the warrant being issued and withdrawn yesterday.

29 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Foreshadowing. by cosm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They will get him. Eventually. I hope not, but I believe they will. Through defamation, assassination (character or otherwise), I just want to forecast now, that as a pessimist / realists / tinfoil hat wearer, they will get him.

    --
    'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
    1. Re:Foreshadowing. by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At this stage it's going to take one hell of a trick to pull that off though. Assange's opponents don't have all that much credibility left, so even if someone does have major legitimate dirt on the guy it's gonna be a heck of a job getting public opinion on their side.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    2. Re:Foreshadowing. by bsDaemon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe they can put it on WikiLeaks. That'll show him!

    3. Re:Foreshadowing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, just like there isn't anybody left to believe Obama is a muslim, or wasn't born in the US.

    4. Re:Foreshadowing. by Cutterman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "If you give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest of men, I will find something in them which will hang him."
      Cardinal Richelieu

    5. Re:Foreshadowing. by xaxa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You give the public way, way, way too much credibility. I'm sitting in a coffee shop right now surrounded by about 20 people, if you had to guess, how many of them do you think know who Julian Assange is? Know what wikileaks is even?

      It's been front page news in the UK in the last few days (there's a picture of the Guardian's front page in the Fox News article).

      It's currently on the front page of the websites of the Guardian, Independent, BBC, Times, Daily Mail and Telegraph -- that's all the major UK news papers except the Sun, which won't report on Assange until he's sleeping with Victoria Beckham.

      The American news sites I checked have quite different stories and headlines. Is the US government behind all the anti-Wikileaks headlines I see?

  2. Assange and his team are doing great things by FuckingNickName · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wish I had his skill and his balls. He, at least, is going some way to watching the watchers.

    And if there are any times that attention whoring is absolutely warranted, it is now.

    I just hope he's not David Kelly'd.

    Before I go, let me just accuse every /. commenter below me in this article of rape. I hope you judge Assange for the accusations against him as you'd hope people treat mine against you.

    1. Re:Assange and his team are doing great things by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>>let me just accuse every /. commenter below me in this article of rape

      Worse: Accuse them of child rape. Even if you are found "not guilty" you'll still be treated as a pariah. We need to stop assuming someone is guilty upon mere accusation, and instead assume they are innocent until the Lords have proved their case.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    2. Re:Assange and his team are doing great things by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sorry. In this day and age of hyper-feminist(and yes it is womens groups who are at fault for this), with any and all hits of anything relating to rape, child rape, pedophilia, child abuse, etc. You're already screwed, because the law has already decided in various countries that you have the hint of guilt, you're already guilty. Leaving in some cases may not even counter your accuser, because they're required to be protected to the fullest, even from questioning.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:Assange and his team are doing great things by FuckingNickName · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So, which results of Assange's "data thieving" (those bits belong to me! stop putting them in the same order!) are most offensive? Does it concern you most that he might help stop Americans being sent to kill and to die unnecessarily, or simply that he uncovers incompetence and corruption?

      releases it without any effort put into finding out if theres anything of value

      You clearly haven't read them.

      or wrong actually IN it.

      Even if you don't believe that he asked for help redacting data, and even if you don't believe that the delays in release are to check for problems with content, you're forgetting:

      1. It doesn't matter. He's publishing credible leaked source material, not vouching for its 100% accuracy. Funnily enough, no publisher of compendia of source material has vouched for the 100% accuracy of that material. This is fortunate, because otherwise we'd have no information on anything published ever. He reports, you decide.
      2. It's already leaked. Once he has it ("he" being the community of Wikileaks workers), you can assume that everyone who can do anything useful with the information has it. There are no operational disadvantages whatever to his publishing it, except perhaps that you might reduce the morale of a few military grunts who disobey orders omg and download it on their home computers. Well, good news for you, the US military is fighting for the freedom (among other things) to criticise, lampoon and otherwise laugh at the US military. When that dirty hippy is putting a flower in your rifle, you can be smug that - at least in theory - it's thanks to you that he gets to do that without someone like you blowing his brains out.
  3. Not a mistake? by loteck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If a man can be publicly accused of rape, a warrant issued for his arrest, and his name splashed all over the international media PRIOR to you being 100% sure you want to bring him in on those charges, then I would say something is seriously wrong with your system of justice.

    1. Re:Not a mistake? by funkatron · · Score: 4, Informative

      The statement only says that the bureaucrats did their job according to the protocol. Changing the justice system is not something they can do, you need to buy politicians for that.

      --
      "Welcome to our world. We are the wasted youth. And we are the future too." Yes, I know these are stupid lyrics.
    2. Re:Not a mistake? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You might want to read up on the pirate bay trial, if you really want an insight in how well the system here works. There have been plenty of fucked up cases before that, but it's unusually well covered in English. It's pretty much par of the course though when things get political or when prestige gets involved.

      TL;DR: You have no idea how fucked up the system really is, and you don't want to know, just remember the next time you hear about how fantastic we are that we're really a banana monarchy under cover, without bananas.

    3. Re:Not a mistake? by Kidbro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is nonsense. There is nothing wrong with the justice system. They did not "publicly accuse" anybody of anything. They did exactly what they should do in this case. Two women contacted the police and informed them of a crime that had been committed. They needed to speak to the accused, and since it's a matter of a foreign citizen that is expected to leave the country soon, they chose consider him "anhållen i sin frånvaro", something that has somewhat wrongly been translated to "arrested", as that's the closest counterpart in English speaking nations. This, they did in order to give the police authority to actually detain him long enough for an interrogation.

      The "publicly accusing", "name splashed over international media" and whatnot is the work of media, and has absolutely nothing to do with the justice system.

      What would you have them do? Ignore the accusations? Interrogate the witnesses more thoroughly so the suspect had plenty of time to leave the country? Keep in mind that ill treatment (e.g. harsh interrogation shortly after the crime) of rape victims is not something that's particularly popular around here (for good reasons).

      For the record, I am convinced that Assange isn't guilty (although I believe the whole thing is the result of a pair of very confused women, rather than a military conspiracy), but I honestly don't see how a justice system would become better by ignoring self proclaimed victims reporting crime to the police...

    4. Re:Not a mistake? by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 5, Informative

      Warrants are public

      No in Sweden they aren't.

      But somehow in this particular case the information found its way to the media and the police felt compelled to immediately confirm it instead of doing what they should have according to Swedish law, refusing to comment on the identity of the person accused.

      --
      There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
  4. Re:Obama acting like Bush again by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

    >>>Obama just signs his name giving them permission

    Interesting argument for why Obama is innocent. Does the same reasoning apply to Bush to forgive his actions from 2002 through 2009? I suspect not..... then neither does it apply to Obama.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  5. Re:Follow this story! by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There can be only one suspect for who was behind it: the U.S. government.

    Why do you say that? Assange has pissed off a lot of world governments, and it does not take CIA level resources to have someone file a false report. The fact that the charges were withdrawn on the same day they were filed suggests that the CIA may not be involved after all -- they would do a better job than that.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  6. They will launch a "Stop Julian Assange" campaign. by elucido · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Very similar to this http://www.stopthechamber.com/ where the amount of money in rewards which lead to the arrest and conviction of Julian Assange will reach into the millions, or tens of millions, and once that happens it's only a matter of time before somebody accuses him of something. Or maybe they don't have to accuse him of anything, there are enough laws and enough ways to entrap people that anybody can be taken out if enough informants agree to take them out.

    Confidential informants working in teams can entrap or find evidence on anybody. If the money is big enough and the government agrees to look the other way on the quality of the information, they could get him for some esoteric unknown law that he probably doesnt even know hes breaking and never heard of. And once hes arrested it's all over.

  7. Re:On-Call Prosecutor?! by humphrm · · Score: 4, Informative

    Most big US cities have prosecutors on duty 24 hours a day.

    --
    -- "In order to have power, I must be taken seriously." -Mojo Jojo
  8. Re:It's Pretty Obvious What's Going On Here by cptdondo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or... Maybe he did it himself? Now he's more bulletproof. The first charge was baseless; any additional "character assassination" charges will be met with tin-foil skepticism.

    Can you think of a better way to make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen?

  9. Re:Follow this story! by roman_mir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you think CIA has magic powers? It consists of people and it is a government bureaucracy, it is mostly shuffling papers around, it's glamorous as in movies. And yes, the same problems that are found in most government organizations and large corporations are present there - various power struggles, inefficiencies, idiots, everything.

    I wouldn't put it past CIA to make any sort of mistake at all, actually it's a surprise when they do anything right.

  10. No Formal False Accusations by andersh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh, and they are not "criminals" [the accusers] never claimed rape, they actually asked police for clarification if the alleged "actions" were criminal!

    Under Swedish law false accusations of rape would most likely have lead to one year in prison, these accusations were less clear and the prosecutor would be looking for more information from Assange.

    You see that's the beauty of the charges, they're not likely to lead to punishment for the accusers, the only damage would be to Assange's good name and standing. He could try for damages, but what would that help his name? It's perfect [for the people looking to smear him]!

  11. Donate by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, then, it's time to start donating lots of money to wikileaks. Fight money with money. There is a lot of big talk talk about ideals here so it's time to back that up with action.

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  12. Set for life on the excuse front. by 6350' · · Score: 4, Funny

    In other news, Julian Assange gets parking ticket, blames vast Pentagon conspiracy to sully his name!

  13. OTOH by jav1231 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This could easily go the other way. What if the accuser was a plant for Wikileaks. Everyone sympathizes with Assuage, conspiracy theories run a muck and suddenly leaking classified material is heralded by more of the mainstream. You know, as opposed to the usual crowd.

  14. Intresting facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The woman that accused Julian Assange has been identified on flashbackforum as Anna Ardin press secretary for the christians in the socialist party in Sweden. She has previously been an active radical feminist and author of articles on how to use the legal system to get revenge on people. She has also identified The Swedish Pirate party as a "problem we have to deal with" She waited several days to report this until the "on call" prosecutor Maria Häljebo Kjellstrand was on duty.

    1. Re:Intresting facts by 49152 · · Score: 4, Informative

      BZZZZTTT WRONG!

      and author of articles on how to use the legal system to get revenge on people [googleusercontent.com].

      Did you use Google language tools or something to get at that conclusion?

      I am not Swedish but as a Norwegian with a very similar language (to me Swedish seems more like a strange dialect of my own language) I can read and understand swedish pretty well.

      The link is not about how to use the legal system to get revenge on people, in fact the legal system, police, prosecutors or lawyers is not even mentioned in the article. Neither does she suggest making false charges or anything similar. The only use of the Swedish equivalent for "legal" (läglig) is to say that your revenge must be legal, making false charges is not legal in Sweden and may in fact be punished with jail time.

      The article is more about how to be systematic when you planning your revenge by listing your ideas and ranking them by probability of success and that your revenge should be comparative to the offense you want revenge for.

      At worst the article is childish and a sign of some underlying psychic instability or immaturity in this woman. The worst thing she suggest as an idea for revenge is to make sure your ex-boyfriend/girlfriend gets a lunatic on his/her tail. That is at least of very questionable ethics and may perhaps be illegal depending on how you go about doing it, but she gives no details at all about how to accomplish such an act. In fact she is very vague on ideas for revenge at all.

      I have no idea about the rest of your claims, they may very well be true.

  15. Re:Riddle me this by rhizome · · Score: 4, Informative

    But how does Assuage have any credibility either way? How do we know that everything he posts on Wikileaks is legit and he didn't make the shit up?

    Do you have any evidence that anything on the site is made up, or are you just concern-trolling conspiracies? I mean really, be serious, wouldn't he have egg on his face by now? I'm sure the Pentagon and Obama administration would have publicized any irregularities, but the only thing they've been able to come up with is a fake rape charge and an unsupported charge of him having "blood on his hands." Guess what? The Pentagon itself said this week that there isn't any evidence that any Afghans named in the War Diaries have been harmed.

    --
    When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
  16. Re:Come on folks... by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Informative

    The better comparison is Scott Ritter. Weapons inspector, major Bush embarrassment. He was picked up in 2001 for suspicions of arranging a meeting for underage sex with an undercover cop posing as a young girl. He wasn't charged which to me seems kind of odd since there aren't too many good explanations for showing up at a sting like that. Whatever. The documents were sealed and not public record. They were leaked anonymously when he started becoming a pain in the Bushie behind.

    Of course, the dumb shit went and got caught again in 2009. Just goes to show that being an expert in a given field does not mean you won't make stupid mistakes in some other area. People do fall for the trick of discrediting the messenger if they don't like the message. Your least favorite person at work tells you there's a mistake in the budget numbers, you may as well see if she's right.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne