Slashdot Mirror
Assange Secret Swedish Police Report Leaked
letsurock writes "The 68-page confidential report prepared by Swedish police got leaked which tells the police version on the alleged sexual misconduct by the Julian assange. The Swedish report traces events over a four-day period in August this year when 39-year-old Assange had what he has described as consensual sexual relationships with two Swedish women."
You know what, actually, after writing the title, I can't bring myself to do this. You all deserve better.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
So its apparently been leaked...
And there's no link in Slashdots Article. And googling for it brings up hundreds of news sites and blogs who all talk about it but also don't link to the police report.
Is it being hosted somewhere? Is it possible to get a copy of the police report and not rely on what people say it says?
... until I see it on Wikileaks.ch!
it must not be that important.
If only there was some internet repository where leaks of this kind could be shared. It could even be made into a wiki, for easier access.
What the hell is an assange, and why is there only one? Any relation with the Julian calendar?
I'm not trolling -- I mean, seriously?
Over the course of 4 days someone keeps saying that they are wearing a condom and they keep accepting this without proof? At some point the liability has to transfer to the foolee rather than the fooler.
I went to battle M.C. Escher, but drew a blank.
On of the accusers had been kicked out of Cuba for "anti-Castro" activity and has ties to US funded political groups. It's looking a lot like CIA. Counter Punch reported on it, check it out.
This happened several days ago. The Guardian has the story here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden I think The Times also had a story. No point looking for the original document -- it was in Swedish.
Lucky there's no link on an official site, we could have /. the server.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
So in Sweden you are guilty until proven innocent? I know that women's groups in Sweden were trying to make rape a "guilty until proven innocent" crime, but I thought the Swedes sensibly rejected that unjust notion.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
in Sweden if the woman withdraws consent during the act it is still considered rape, with prision terms.
The point of contention is not the swedish law, but whether the consent was actually withdrawn and the credibility of the womens' statement. The women seem to have continued their relationship with Assange, despite the rape and condom-break incident, which makes their claims sound a bit dubious.
Where is this leaked document? I'd like to read it since the media often likes to give the wrong picture.
No wonder the condom broke!
Have gnu, will travel.
>>>in Sweden if the woman withdraws consent
There is no evidence this happened. All we have is two women who were apparently happy with Julian, but then they met each other and discovered he was two-timing, and suddenly the women weren't happy. i.e. We only have their word and their word is suspect, because they have motive to lie (to get back at the creep).
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
If you screw a woman in some countries without their father's approval beforehand it is rape. Under Islamic law if your brother rapes and beats your wife, you have to kill the wife for tempting him and forgive the brother.
You had me until you started spouting drivel.
What other silly stereotypes do you harbor, I wonder?
Beetle B.
They've made the accusation. It's evidence. Not very strong evidence I'll grant you but certainly adeuquate to bring him in and ask him.
Why is the summary not linking to the original article and instead pointing to a blog-post which is supposedly regurgitating a Press Trust of India release based on the NYTimes article? This story is also about 3 days old :S
Although there is no link to the original Swedish document, and I can't read Swedish anyway, the article indicates that Assange is being accused of 2 counts of rape. Both instances seem ridiculous for different reasons. I have had condoms tear and not realize it until I pulled out. So that alone is not a consent issue. In the other instance, how the hell is it possible to have sex with someone while they are asleep, with or without a condom. Would they not wake up before you even had the chance to stick it in? The key issue in both cases is whether or not Assange was in fact told to stop. Either he was or he wasn't. If he was told to stop, and continued anyway then it was rape by US definitions. If he was not told to stop and the women just got pissed off later for various reasons it was not rape by most normal definitions of the term. If Assange was not told to stop then I think CIA involvement becomes quite plausible. The accusers should be thoroughly investigated for secret money transfers etc. If they are Swedish citizens working for the CIA could they be liable for espionage charges under Swedish law? Wouldn't that make them traitors to the Swedish government?
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
None of those mentions rape, so why is Assange being described as an alleged rapist?
The accusation in the fourth point, involving Miss W, falls into the category of rape under Swedish law.
An arrest warrant, issued on 20 August, was withdrawn the following day, when one of Sweden's chief prosecutors, Eva Finné, said she did not think there was "reason to suspect that he has committed rape". On 1 September, Marianne Ny, the Swedish director of prosecutions, overturned Finné's judgment. "Considering information available at present, my judgment is that the classification of the crime is rape," said Ny. link
It's actually rather clever of him to serve as a lightning rod for Wikileaks, while the actual work continues to go on. Right-wing congressmen can call for his assassination all they like; even if it were to happen it would not affect the publication of the leaks. In fact, it would almost certainly trigger the mass publication of the unredacted material. "The personal strengths and weaknesses of a leader are no true indicator of the merits of his cause."
I piss off bigots.
Are you telling me to respect the laws of countries where women get raped and it's their fault so they get killed as a result? In the UK, we live by British morals and British justice, and any stupid Swedish laws about unprotected sex between consenting adults being considered rape don't amount to much. With that said, I will fight Assange's extradition like I would fight the extradition of a woman from an insane Islamic country who came to the UK looking for sanctuary from her murdering husband.
Anna Ardin (the official complainant) is often described by the media as a “leftist”. She has ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups link
Under Islamic law if your brother rapes and beats your wife, you have to kill the wife for tempting him and forgive the brother.
This is categorically wrong. Islamic law has no such injunction, and this is the type of utter drivel and FUD that makes it hard for Muslims and non-Muslims to co-exist. Rape is a punishable crime in Islam, regardless of who commits it.
I challenge you to present any evidence of your claim.
Yeah. If I dared to tell anyone that I didn't think Mohammed was the last messenger from God while I was in Saudi Arabia, and they jailed me for it, oh well. Gotta respect their laws while you're there.
Of course that's absolute bullshit. Any law that denies a person a right to defend themselves from undue process of law is unjust, period, unless it's putting away someone you don't like. I've read through the document, and I do think Assange should submit himself to further evidentiary proceedings once he is assured of receiving the same treatment as someone who isn't on the shitlist of half of the world governments.
Let's all remember why the authorities have decided that he doesn't deserve equal rights:
"He's made it more difficult for us to conduct our business with our allies and our friends." -Joe Biden
This guys fifteen minutes about up
EGOTIST, n. A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.
If you screw a woman in some countries without their father's approval beforehand it is rape.
And I would think they would have tons of trouble having you extradited from the U.S. or the U.K. Not that this has anything to do with the case at hand.
JP http://www.wearerite.com
exactly
assange is a human being with human weaknesses, like all of us
however, this particular flawed man started a movement for transparency which is laudable
the proper response is to pay homage to the man for his good works, and chastise him for his transgressions in the bedroom, at the same time
but apparently people can only process assange as devil or angel. when of course, this is a gross simplification that serves nothing other than to mark the person as an idiot who cannot bring himself to chastise the man (or laud the man)
you who say "assange can do no wrong" or "assange can do no right", which is the starting point for many comments here, you are no better than the chattering monkeys who engage in celebrity worship on TMZ. you are simply no better if you cannot bring yourself to repudiate the man for his transgressions in the bedroom (or if you can't bring yourself to praise the man for his transparency efforts)
the man, honestly, means nothing. but the MOVEMENT he helped start (and will not stop, with or without him) remains a permanent virtue on his permanent record (just as permanent as the rapes)
yes, assange did something good in the world. he also did something wrong. it is possible for you to acknowledge both. so do it, and free yourself from shallow pointless celebrity worship, which is what you do when you mindlessly defend assange on an UNRELATED ISSUE to his transparency work
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
in Sweden if the woman withdraws consent during the act it is still considered rape, with prision terms.
The point of contention is not the swedish law, but whether the consent was actually withdrawn and the credibility of the womens' statement. The women seem to have continued their relationship with Assange, despite the rape and condom-break incident, which makes their claims sound a bit dubious.
And? Their credibility should be judged by a jury, at trial.
Seriously, condoms are tough things. You can stretch them well beyond anything they are designed to contain, blow them up to many times their normal volume. They are intended to prevent pregnancy (as well as infection) and are subject to stringent testing.
How likely is it that a condom would 'break', and even if it did, how would either of the participants know about it if they were in the middle of rumpy pumpy. That is assuming it wasn't left hanging in threads flailing about all over the place.
If Assange did 'break' the condom intentionally as has been suggested, how is it claimed he did it? Did he tear it in half, take the scissors to it? Bite it?
This part of the accusation seems otherworldly.
This report was on its way to the Swedes when it was leaked. It is more like a request from the US rather than a factual report.
Counter intelligence is sometimes counter intuitive.
No, there is no difference, at least not how Assange publishes information on Wikileaks. Wikileaks is a real organization, just like many corporations. Are you saying that leaks relating to illicit activity of, say the head of a major bank should not be published? Even if that is what you are saying, Wikileaks begs to differ. In the recent cable leaks, was a lot of information relating to individuals health conditions, medical records, affairs, etc. Why should the head of Wikileaks be allowed a pass, when the people he reports on aren't?
And before anybody comments, that in Assange's case, they are trumped up charges by the CIA or some government, please don't. The charges against him were filed before his current leaks which are pissing off many a government, particularly the US. Besides, do you really think if the CIA was clairvoyant, they wouldn't use this ability on something more important like Iraq or Afghanistan?
Whether what he did with the two woman is right or wrong, is up for the Swedish court system to decide. Releasing information about the case, while embarrassing for him, is no different than what he does. Heck, for all we know, his organization is the leak, so he can claim he can't get a fair trial now that the info is out.
Personally, I think that if the women's accounts are true, he should be held accountable. I'm pretty sure, as is the case with the second woman, that having sex while one is asleep, means it is not consensual. If the prime minister of some country had done it, Wikileaks would be all over it. There is an old saying about people in glass houses and stones.
Rape is a punishable crime in Islam, regardless of who commits it.
Dude, if you're trying to uphold Islam as a bastion of protection for women, you're in for a long and uphill battle.
Women can't effectively report rape in muslim countries, because they are required to provide four (yes, four) witnesses. Go look at Qur'an (24:4) and Qur'an (24:13) for details.
Muslims have such rule? I have never heard about that in my 40 years of life and I have lived many years in Muslim countries? Unless you want to invent that or you want to put isolated local pathetic rules under the name of the religion.
I have a hard time envisioning an autistic rising to such a high rank in SPECTRE.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Really, because from what I've read, even the Pentagon had admitted that no troops were endangered by the leaks.
Yes, they originally stated that lives were endangered, but later had to change their tune after they really couldn't find anything to that effect.
So unless you count lives being endangered by people being more pissed off at the US in general (a symptom I attribute more to the ignorance of corporate-government policy and meddling than wikileaks), I'd say that the only real danger thus far has been to the careers of various high-up politicos and corporations.
He is spreading FUD. There is no such rule in Islam. It might be a pathetic local tribe rule.
This is actually how rape laws work in Saudi Arabia - men are incapable of rape and women are responsible for being raped.
"Under Islamic law if your brother rapes and beats your wife, you have to kill the wife for tempting him and forgive the brother."
As a Muslim, I can only wonder which Fox news reader you heard this from. Do you even know a Muslim? There are a billion and a half of us, so it wouldn't be hard to find one and cure your ignorance.
A jury? In Sweden?
Haven't I seen this post somewhere before?
Quite easily actually. If you want to test it have your girlfriend clench her thighs just before you thrust... many women know this and use it as a test of their boyfriend's fidelity. (As in, "which is more important to him, my safety or his pleasure?")
this joke will never get old
With a name like that, life in school must have been hell for him.
And what gives one person, Assange, greater credibility than two other people?
"described by media".. She's very officially a member of the Swedish social democrats, not a communist party but yes, a "leftist" one.
c++;
It's actually not that difficult that it breaks if there's very little lubrication, with each thrust it stretches more and more until it breaks. And yes, you can feel it broken because the penis causes less friction than a dry condom -- though you can easily mistake it for the onset of vaginal fluid production.
If you believe Assange, you may, be right. But, that is a question for the court.
If you want to get into whose word is suspect, you have referred to Assange as a creep; his actions and reputation make his word just as suspect as theirs and there are two accusers with similar stories.
This geek, an uber-nerd, who looks like a cross between Johnny Winters and a vampire goes to see a priest. "I want to confess," he says. "But you're not Catholic, you're not even religious. Why would you want to confess?" "Please! I must!" So the priest says okay. And the albino vampire tells him, "The other week I fucked these two girls." "Yes, my son." "They were a couple of Swedish chicks, both great in bed." "Continue, young man." "One of them though I was such a good lay, she threw me a party. And the other one liked it so much she emailed all her friends." "This is a sin, but I don't understand why you're telling me this." "Telling you?", says the vampire, "I'm telling everyone!"
I believe the proper term is Sharia law, not Islamic. You can find all sorts of charming references about Sharia and rape on the Internet and I'm not going to dump them all out here.
One that is very common and enforced in at least Pakistan and Iran is the requirement that a woman have four witnesses to a rape or else she is charged with adultery.
While I haven't seen any reference to specifically "forgiving" a brother after a rape, there are certainly ample references to situations where a woman's family is expected to kill her because of a rape. Rape is assumed in most cases to be the woman's fault which leads to women being kept as virtual prisoners in their homes and being covered head to toe when they are allowed outside.
No, Sharia law isn't the rule in all Islamic countries as you don't see women being stoned to death in Egypt or Turkey. But increasingly in non-Islamic countries Sharia law is being given precedence over local laws for violations between Muslims. This is happening in the US, Australia, Germany and the UK.
If you screw a woman in some countries without their father's approval beforehand it is rape. Under Islamic law if your brother rapes and beats your wife, you have to kill the wife for tempting him and forgive the brother. Why is the fact that different countries have different standards so hard for people to understand? the UK rape laws don't apply in sweden, Islamic law doesn't apply in the USA, chinese law doesn't apply in Russia.
Indeed. An act considered criminal in one country could be legitimate elsewhere. But extradition may require balancing the laws of both lands when considering the act for which extradition is requested.
Suppose a woman fled to the West after being raped by her husband's brother in a country which applied the Islamic law to which you referred. Do you suggest that she should be extradited to be executed for being a victim? Should she volunteer to return to her death out of a respect for that law?
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
You point out all the various different laws in different countries. Country A does not extradite someone to country B for a crime that isn't a crime in country A. Otherwise we're all pretty much criminals.
The broken condom is pretty much a non-starter. Things happen, they break. They *both* knew this was a possibility.
Telling a woman you're going to use one and then not using it - that can be grounds for assault (again depending on jurisdiction) since you could be infecting them with something. Likewise the "while she's asleep" charge is probably an extraditable offense for the same reason.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
While I don't condone his lying to both women, I'm still not convinced that he did anything that would be regarded as illegal even under Swedish law's definition of rape. There's certainly plenty of evidence that both women spent plenty of time with him socially after the fact. There's even some evidence that these women didn't really press charges even after they found out about each other until _after_ someone in the prosecutor's office started pushing them. In the end, though, his final guilt or innocence is for a trial to decide.
However, I'm not sure that he's ever going to get a fair hearing. Based upon the correspondence that has been released by his lawyers in Britain and Sweden, I'm FIRMLY convinced that the way his rights have been trampled by British and Swedish law enforcement go far beyond the point that a fair and impartial judge would declare the Swedish equivalent of a mistrial. In this circus-like, witch hunt atmosphere? Doubtful at best.
It's pretty easy to say "has ties to" and make implications, but none of those links in the article point to specific relationships. It says she wrote articles for an "anti-Castro" magazine. This magazine is accused of by one Swedish professor as having connections with an "anti-Castro" organization. Among this organization's leaders is one man who once had a public argument with a critic where he threw out some personal accusations. A blogger read these accusations, disregarded any possibility of baseless sparring between adversaries, and believed them too specific for a single man to uncover. Then, in true conspiracy theorist fashion, he searched the internet for tenuous connections between this man and US foreign aid programs as evidence
Now, let's forget about this subtle "anti-Castro"/"pro-democracy" turn of phrase, and judge these sites for the time being as unbiased, and work backwards from US foreign aid programs to Ardin. How many leaps across fact-less precipices must one make in order to arrive from one end to the other? I'd say one is too many for a rational man. I invite everyone to read all those links on counterpunch.org and to explain how this is any different from accusations thrown by 911 truthers.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
There is no more or less evidence then there is in most rape cases of this kind. This is more of a Date Rape then the stalker rape, and Date Rape is always a He Said She Said situation. There is no evidence to support your claim that this is a vendetta for him cheating on them. If anything they slept with him because they were drawn to his celebrity status, and if they were aware he was in the habit of sleeping with any woman who threw themselves at him they would of course want a condom used. Mostly out of fear of an STD or they just didn't want his kids. Then we have his dating profile from years back and it sounds a bit too much like the guy who just wants to get a woman pregnant. Also condoms don't break that easily unless you're doing it on purpose or are an idiot. I've seen a condom stretched around a microphone and not break. So he ether got one that was way too large like the guys in India have a problem with the condoms being too big, or he put it on wrong but since it broke before he was finished the pinching an inch wasn't the issue since that only breaks when you're done, it may have been defective which can happen but is very rare, or he diliberatly sabotaged it like when a woman uses vasoline knowing that it will break the condom.
I'm personally more of the it's a conspiracy kind though but not by the government. It's a conspiracy by Assange to create more media attention and give him a way to release his Black Mail insurance file, and claim they were trying to silence him.
I meant to finish that sentence "...between this man and US foreign aid programs as evidence of CIA influence so as to discredit him."
That's the entire chain of links summarized.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Look up Shia law sometime. There is such laws.
I knew a turkey man who killed not only his wife but two out of three daughters because his brother slept with his wife.
It is very real, just because you are ignorant doesn't mean the rest of us are.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
yes, it is wrong to rush to judgment
as equally as wrong as your attitude, which is obviously extremely eager to absolve him of guilt
frankly, it just doesn't fucking matter to his work on transparency, but the way the human mind works, we can't merely discuss the genuinely important topic of transparency, we have to engage in mindless pointless celebrity worship and revilement, and therefore be completely distracted as to any worthwhile discussion
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Assange has stated he slept with those women. To say otherwise is to consider him a liar. So he did sleep with those women.
Now under Swedish law if he slept with them and they withdrew consent it is considered rape. So if they said stop not without the condom while he was screwing them then it is rape under swedish law.
It is a he said she said crime. you are saying he is innocent while ignoring the fact that not just one, but two women have accused him of the same thing.What happens if 5 more show up is he still innocent?
How many boys can a Catholic priest fondle before it is bad? 1? 2? 10? Julian is not fighting this in court but in the media. why is that? This shouldn't be news.
I have never stated that I thought the swedish law was fair or right, but only that the law exists.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Even though the women still hung around with Assange does not carry the weight you might think. I'm guessing that this could be the same in Sweden as in the US because it's not a letter of the law issue, but a natural progression of reporting any crime. Once the women made their statements to the police, a prosecutor (a law professional with a degree) can extrapolate charges from the statements that the women may have never intended to be brought against the individual.
For a REALLY simplistic example. I'm a bar owner and I file a destruction of property complaint against two guys that got in a fight in my bar. After the police investigation. They both are charged with destruction of property because they destroyed a table. In addition, they both pick up assualt charges. One gets an assualt with a deadly weapon charge because he weilded a broken table leg like a club. The other guy gets assualt with great bodily injury (California) because he broke the first guys arm to avoid getting hit with the table leg. It can go on and on.
For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Turkey does not have Shia. I very well (I mean really well) know Shia rules. Major Shia countries are Iran, southern Iraq and southern Lebanon.
And what gives one person, Assange, greater credibility than two other people?
This one thing, you might not be very familiar with, called "presumption of innocence until proven guilty". That said, I have no reason to doubt the sweedish judiciary system and I am waiting for the virdict to form a final opinion.
Shouldn't Assange have already posted it?
If it's a confidential internal police document, how would he have posted it prior to it being leaked?
There isn't any hypocrisy here, is there?
I'm not trolling -- I mean, seriously?
Yeah, not being omniscient makes him a real hypocrite. I mean, seriously. If he's posting documents in his possession, then for God's sake, he ought to also post documents NOT in his possession! To do otherwise would be hypocrisy! It would be a double standard!
"I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
Not really.
There was a case where some woman accused a College basketball(?) team of rape. The school had a fit, suspended the accused players, and even suspended all games for the season. The players received a lot of hate from fellow students, newpaper reporters, and so on. The players had a motive to lie to save themselves, their team, and their scholarship.
By your reasoning the woman wins ("remains credible"). But in reality she was questioned by police, found to have holes in her story, and eventually admitted she had been lying. I think that's the case here - two women lying. And even if they were telling the truth, there's no way to prove it. So "not guilty" by lack of evidence. A US Judge would dismiss this case in about 30 minutes.
The Swedes should too.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Women can't effectively report rape in muslim countries, because they are required to provide four (yes, four) witnesses. Go look at Qur'an (24:4) and Qur'an (24:13) for details.
[24:4]
YUSUFALI: And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations),- flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after: for such men are wicked transgressors;-
PICKTHAL: And those who accuse honourable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never (afterward) accept their testimony - They indeed are evil-doers -
SHAKIR: And those who accuse free women then do not bring four witnesses, flog them, (giving) eighty stripes, and do not admit any evidence from them ever; and these it is that are the transgressors,
[24:12]
YUSUFALI: Why did not the believers - men and women - when ye heard of the affair,- put the best construction on it in their own minds and say, "This (charge) is an obvious lie"?
PICKTHAL: Why did not the believers, men and women, when ye heard it, think good of their own own folk, and say: It is a manifest untruth?
SHAKIR: Why did not the believing men and the believing women, when you heard it, think well of their own people, and say: This is an evident falsehood?
[24:13]
YUSUFALI: Why did they not bring four witnesses to prove it? When they have not brought the witnesses, such men, in the sight of Allah, (stand forth) themselves as liars!
PICKTHAL: Why did they not produce four witnesses? Since they produce not witnesses, they verily are liars in the sight of Allah.
SHAKIR: Why did they not bring four witnesses of it? But as they have not brought witnesses they are liars before Allah.
As much as to the positive things being done by WikiLeaks, Julian is putting himself out there, literally. Where he is being the frontman for WikiLeaks, he has allowed himself to get into this kind of a mess. Don't get me wrong, I'm not doing the holier than thou. He knew the shitstorm that was going to happen with the cable leaks and he put himself into an unfavorable position. I would bet that if the scenario played out a dozen other times with minor changes, this wouldn't have happened, just some bad timing.
Then we have his dating profile from years back and it sounds a bit too much like the guy who just wants to get a woman pregnant.
Wow. That is one crazy conclusion. It didn't even come close to sounding like that.
It's a conspiracy by Assange to create more media attention and give him a way to release his Black Mail insurance file, and claim they were trying to silence him.
Ah, you are one of those who have made up his mind with no evidence.
He didn't say a word about the insurance file until a week or two ago and even then he said it was in case the organization was shut down, not just himself being mistreated. After all, he turned himself in once the british police issued a warrant and the keys to the insurance file were still not published.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
I think the only reasonable conclusion is this: Julian Assange has an ungodly large penis.
"I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
And I know Christians and people in US who did very similar things. And that's also very real.
You cannot generalize crazy acts of crazy people to a society or religion.
You are obviously more ignorant than me.
You point out all the various different laws in different countries. Country A does not extradite someone to country B for a crime that isn't a crime in country A. Otherwise we're all pretty much criminals.
Actually, within the EU, exactly that will happen. As one american idiot found out who mailed Nazi propaganda from the USA to Germany, and then they got him when he travelled to Denmark.
it will be nearly impossible to prove that consent was withdrawn and that the other party understood that and continued anyway.
Which is why this ridiculous fabrication of a charge will be dropped moments before Assange is extradited to the US.
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
Omitted is the fact that they forgot to inform Assange that they were "trying persuade him", before going to court. The facts are easily twisted. These women clearly have an angle at this, something beyond revenge, and what they say is a part of the show.
yes I should have included 'extradition treaties not withstanding' in my explanation. Does the EU include England yet?
I still think my point stands though; barring something extreme, like the NAZI propaganda you mention, countries aren't likely to extradite you for something that they don't consider a crime.
People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people
He's intelligently using his strengths where they will most benefit his purpose. Compare with other celebrities who have huge egos and are media whores, e.g. Paris Hilton. How many of them use those qualities as a way of drawing attention to lies and duplicity at the highest levels of the US government? No, instead they use them to make money.
If you're not a media whore, you're a pretty stupid and useless kind of activist. Assange is doing something interesting and worthwhile with his whoredom.
I piss off bigots.
You are ignorant. Those are not about rape. They are about criticizing a woman of blasphemy. If you criticize a woman of blasphemy you should bring 4 witnesses.
Not blasphemy, I meant adultery.
Now under Swedish law if he slept with them and they withdrew consent it is considered rape. So if they said stop not without the condom while he was screwing them then it is rape under swedish law.
The swedish prosecutors can't seem to decide what it is exactly that he is accused of. At the moment he seems to be accused of having sex with a torn condom and having sex with a sleeping woman. I haven't (recently) seen any claims that either woman withdrew her consent at any point. But the claims against him keep shifting. We'll have to wait for the trial to receive official word of exactly what it is he is accused of doing. If either women did tell him to stop (for whatever reason) and he went ahead anyway or if he really did have sex with a sleeping women (although it is hard for me to imagine her not waking up) then I would agree that he is guilty of what is commonly referred to as rape, and not just in Sweden. Otherwise the charges against him seem absurd. The sex with a sleeping woman claim seems particularly bizarre to me. If she didn't wake up, then how did she know that he even had sex with her? I suppose those sorts of details would be revealed at a trial.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
And? That's why iammani didn't put them in jail, he only posted an opinion on an Internet forum.
Ideally no, a police investigation isn't "government dealings". Maybe in your country the two are the same but I believe some countries strive to separate the two. This would be a better position to be in, to allow fair and independent investigation of politicians by police officers when required.
For FUCK'S sake, cite the fucking original source not what has been passed through all these useless parasites regurgitating while diluting and colouring whatever facts there were at each step? So, it took me 2 whole minutes to find at http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/world/europe/19assange.html
What next: A Tweet referring to a blog copying a Usenet post... How can the editors let these douchebags promote their worthless blogs like this, in the guise of a news story they've plagiarised from someone else?
I was pointing out the fact that "having motive" isn't sufficient.
But as for your illogical comparison: The university overreacted; the police didn't.
In Assange's case, are the police overreacting? They're not backing down based on the things the women are saying. Meanwhile, he ran and hid in another country, and is spending a lot of money (a lot of it other people's money) to stay hidden. And his defense to it all is still that it's a nefarious conspiracy being run by American intelligence agencies.
As for credibility, this is a guy who admitted his organization got 1300 Kenyans killed, then later said his organization's activities never got anyone hurt. His credibility starts out negative, and getting caught treating women like masturbation sleeves doesn't help it.
Other Muslim countries do not have any rule to punish a raped person.
Bangladesh. Indonesia. Saudi Arabia (again). Mauritania. Pakistan. India. Turkey.
I could, of course, go on. This doesn't even touch honor killings that aren't part of State-backed mistreatment of victims of rape. I don't believe the United States should be dumb enough to think it can make people change their minds on women's rights through violence, but I also don't think we should be allies with nations that ignore this type of behavior.
It seems like you are suggesting that the charges should not be investigated and that Assange should not be questioned because of "presumption of innocence."
The presumption of innocence does not mean one is not prosecuted. It means that when one is accused of a crime and prosecuted, the court assumes one is innocent until the prosecution proves guilt.
Two women have come forward and accused Assange of a crime. The police investigate the crime. The prosecutor decides if there is a case to made. The case is heard in a court. That is how it works.
You may start thinking: How many times did that guy have unprotected one-night-stands before? Does he have any STDs? Have I been infected? Let's at least try to find out whether that guy had an HIV screening recently!
Right, because the most obvious way to find out whether you’ve been exposed to an STD is to track down old sexual partners and have them tested for STDs...
Option B: Get yourself tested.
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
Having sex with someone while they are sleeping (and thus unable to consent) is rape.
And? Their credibility should be judged by a jury, at trial.
Which they could have lined up the LAST time he was in Sweden. You know, when he asked the lead prosecutor for permission before leaving the country...
But... they didn't...
They waited till he hopped across the pond before getting interpol involved?
These women obviously aren't real rape victims or they would have done something when they had him under the laws thumb the first time.
I personally think their blatant abuse of the system causes immediate discredibility and it should be tossed out of court. If I brought up charges against you, the police brought you in, I dropped them, they let you go, and then I brought them up again - I certainly wouldn't be taken seriously.
Sweden does not have juries. Trials have a judge acting as chairman, assisted by political appointees representing the political parties, acting as lay assessors or nämndemän, who act like the jury.
Option B: Get yourself tested after waiting long enough for the disease to have a chance to show up on the test.
If you find out a partner has had tests you get the results instantly. Some things have an incubation period.
You must Acquit.
"Leftist" indeed. Not leftist though. The social democrats and the moderates were traditionally the biggest parties for left/right politics, but now they are both moving towards a middle point somewhere to the right of where the old center used to be. (Moderates are changing their rhethoric to be more appealing to workers, while still running a policy that's a lot better for people with high incomes, while the social democrats are copying the moderate ideas and recently said that they must stop trying to be a voice for unemployed or too-sick-to-work people)
What the hell are you talking about?
if he did what the two women assert he did, he did something wrong, and should be chastised for it, whatever the legality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It was 4 months ago, though.
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
And? Their credibility should be judged by a jury, at trial.
Which they could have lined up the LAST time he was in Sweden. You know, when he asked the lead prosecutor for permission before leaving the country...
But... they didn't...
They waited till he hopped across the pond before getting interpol involved?
These women obviously aren't real rape victims or they would have done something when they had him under the laws thumb the first time.
I personally think their blatant abuse of the system causes immediate discredibility and it should be tossed out of court. If I brought up charges against you, the police brought you in, I dropped them, they let you go, and then I brought them up again - I certainly wouldn't be taken seriously.
You keep using the pronoun "they" in your post, to refer to several independent parties. Allow me to fix it:
These women obviously aren't real rape victims or [these women] would have done something when [these women] had him under the laws thumb the first time. I personally think [these women's] blatant abuse of the system causes immediate discredibility and it should be tossed out of court.
Seem right? I justify my replacements with your hypothetical, in which you, the person who accuses me, is the same person dropping charges, bringing charges, etc.:
If I brought up charges against you, the police brought you in, I dropped them, they let you go, and then I brought them up again - I certainly wouldn't be taken seriously.
So, here's the thing... [These women] aren't prosecutors. [These women] aren't bringing charges, dropping them, and bringing them again. [These women] don't have control over the "law's thumb". [These women] don't have the power to command INTERPOL to post red notices.
Now, with that in mind, let's fix your post:
These women obviously aren't real rape victims or [the Swedish justice system] would have done something when [the prosecutor] had him under the laws thumb the first time. I personally think their blatant abuse of the system causes immediate discredibility and it should be tossed out of court. If I brought up charges against you, the police brought you in, [the prosecutor] dropped them, [the police] let you go, and then [a different prosecutor] brought them up again - I certainly wouldn't be taken seriously.
... but now it's incorrect. Whatever some prosecutors do has no bearing on whether you or these women are real victims and should be taken seriously. In fact, after the initial charges, both you and these women are no longer involved in the process, so how can any actions of prosecutors, after your involvement is over, have any bearing on your credibility?
I personally think Mr. Assange did commit rape. I think it's not about being a pig or not being a pig - it's not black and white - men can be rude. Of course this wouldn't apply to slashdotters, as nerds are known to be on the gentler side, but Assange is a different character. Doesn't mean he is a scumbag - I think he met two attractive and liberated women and sort of failed to well, show his better side. Also, consider that Anna Ardin has withdrawn her charges and apparently holds little to no grudge against him, in light of the proportions this has taken. It is irrelevant what character she is - people have had sex and quarreled, something didn't go very much in a gentlemen-like manner. Pity. That said, I think Wikileaks needs to proceed, and Assange SHOULD be imprisoned FOR RAPE (not whatever U.S. would love to put on him while he is in the process of risking jail in Sweden.)
Has anyone of you by chance had sex with Swedish women? They're completely out of control in bed, like furias or something. It's fireworks all the way. Imagine you're a guy exclusively preoccupied with waging war on unrighteous and the liars and idealistic enough to stand up to U.S. government, you come to Sweden, hook up with friends, they take you to a bar, are infatuated with you and you get to get under the bed sheets with hot Swedish young women who can't get enough of you. Oh gee, a condom broke - let's lock this asshole up for 100 years in prison and i dunno, whip his feet with iron rods. Because media can't make up their mind and neither can we - should we hate or love Assange? Well, how about a dose of reality - people make mistakes, sometimes really ugly mistakes, but the world is not black and white. This doesn't mean that the rich and powerful get to keep their secrets though - everyone can benefit from forced change and venting off once in a while, including and ESPECIALLY a government gone too comfortable with the darker side of politics. So I say put yourself in Assange shoes and imagine what would it take for you to end up where he end up.
This isn't the first place I've heard this, but this terminology confuses me. I would think being anti-communist would qualify her as being a rightist as communism is seen as leftist. Or do the terms here mean something other than what I'm used to?
What good would that do if the boyfriend doesn't know this? No, you generally can't tell if the condom breaks unless it's a really wierd model.
Slagborr
He didnt run.
He asked permission ot leave the country, after all charges being dropped, and was given permission to.
He is not hidden. His whereabouts are very well known - its a condition of bail.
Your post lacks a lot of credibility.
Here's something I've never understood about how I've seen this woman being labeled by the media: if she's a "leftist" wouldn't she be more likely to be pro-Castro and pro-Communist instead of the opposite? Or is she some kind of convoluted center-left that's actually anti-extreme-left?
The feeling's entirely different. You know when your condom breaks.
Whatever some prosecutors do has no bearing on whether you or these women are real victims and should be taken seriously.
Prosecutors are acting on these women's behalf - they aren't as willy-nilly as you so describe.
increasingly in non-Islamic countries Sharia law is being given precedence over local laws for violations between Muslims. This is happening in the US, Australia, Germany and the UK.
Some Muslims in the UK are seeking to have cases judged by Sharia law instead of involving the UK authorities. That doesn't negate the precedence of UK law, and doesn't mean that punishments prescribed by Sharia law have any legality.
E.g. if a contract failure is deemed to be covered by Sharia and both parties agree to have it assessed in a Sharia court (or whatever they use) and abide by its terms, then there is no case for UK law and they can get on with it.
If a man bullies his daughter into agreeing to stand before a Sharia court regarding her unmarried sex with her boyfriend, and the court sentences her to stoning, trust me, that's illegal in several different ways and she'll be completely protected by the UK authorities (if she can make it to them).
Anybody in the UK is protected by UK law, irrespective of religion. That some bigoted ignorant fucks decide to ignore it in favour of their own archaic abusive sexist stupid law doesn't make what they're doing legal.
Maybe a reality show hosted by ABBA
Whatever some prosecutors do has no bearing on whether you or these women are real victims and should be taken seriously.
Prosecutors are acting on these women's behalf - they aren't as willy-nilly as you so describe.
Prosecutors are acting on the state's behalf. The women are, at best, complaining witnesses.
Credibility isn't a commodity that one can compare in simple numerical values. By your logic a woman accuses two men of raping her but they both deny it, thus she is a liar and they committed no crime.
In this particular case the credibility of the two women is particularly suspect because neither of them came forward with any allegations of wrongdoing at the time and continued to socialise with him. It was only after the two women(who are reportedly friends prior to this incident) got together and discovered that he had been sleeping with both of them and agreed to go to the police together. While he may have raped them or comitted a sexual crime the fact they didn't feel what had occured merited police attention individually makes it seem like it could be a case of collaboration to revise history because they are angry at him.
Indeed, they continued their relationship until the sun came out, which happens in Sweden a couple of times a year. When they saw that he did not sparkle in the sunshine, they realized that he was not a vampire as they had assumed. Only then did they withdraw consent.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
My girlfriend takes advantage of my morning wood, while I'm sleeping... I wake up to marvelous morning sex, not rape.
Would it have been "rape" if he was going down on her in her sleep instead?
By your logic, I should always ask first before walking up behind my girlfriend in the kitchen, groping her and making out in the breakfast nook. Sexual spontaneity is a trait that many women and men enjoy.
I assume that since we're in a sexual relationship that affection and sex is welcome. If at any point she says "stop" or terminates the relationship my sexual advances will cease.
I just can't accept the notion that when your significant other is asleep, you are no longer a couple...
I posted on this thread, but you sir would have gotten my +1 Insightful otherwise, no questions asked.
Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
It seems like you are suggesting
He is not suggesting that at all. Seriously.... you are reading what you want to read, not what is actually written.
Actually condoms tend to get really dry before they break. If its dry-dry-dry-wet it pretty safe to assume the condom didn't automatically lube itself.
This is actually how rape laws work in Saudi Arabia - men are incapable of rape and women are responsible for being raped.
Please cite the part of Saudi Law that says this.
Beetle B.
While I haven't seen any reference to specifically "forgiving" a brother after a rape, there are certainly ample references to situations where a woman's family is expected to kill her because of a rape.
Ever consider that Pakistanis don't always (or even often) follow Shariah law?
I suppose if you put "Islamic Law" into the constitution, everything that follows is Shariah Law? That's great: Now I understand that democracy is against allowing women and people of the wrong skin color from voting.
Rape is assumed in most cases to be the woman's fault which leads to women being kept as virtual prisoners in their homes and being covered head to toe when they are allowed outside.
Again, how is this Shariah Law?
No, Sharia law isn't the rule in all Islamic countries as you don't see women being stoned to death in Egypt or Turkey.
And nor are women who get raped treated the way you described in all Islamic countries. I guess that must have been a clause in Shariah law that said those rules need only apply in certain geographic regions...
But increasingly in non-Islamic countries Sharia law is being given precedence over local laws for violations between Muslims.
And in not a single one of those countries is Sharia Law being given precedence over local laws for criminal matters.
Thanks for the spin.
Beetle B.
Look, I'm NOT saying he's guilty or innocent. All I know, like you, is what I've read in the papers about the case, including this statement from his attorney from a month ago:
(emphasis added)
The fact that he was held WITHOUT BAIL for a month after all that? Despicable. His rights under Swedish and British law? Nonexistent, apparently, precisely BECAUSE he chose to push for transparency in government. Don't you find that just the least bit horrific? I certainly do.
I'm confused by both accounts, to be honest. I'll make no claims on who is in the right, but the information just seems strange to me.
Case 1 - did not stop sex after condom broke. I personally have never experienced a broken condom. It is something I'm rather paranoid about, and as such, check that condoms are not leaking after having sex. I've always been under the assumption that during continuous activity there would be no way to know about a break. So, how can someone ask me to stop for a reason they are unable to know about?
Case 2 - how in the world does someone consent to sex that was initiated while fully asleep? Unless saying, "I'm going to sleep now, but feel free to have sex with me while I'm out", I don't see how consent could be involved.
Regardless, this is a situation that's certainly raising questions - both in innate cultural misogyny and in the realm of plausible political conspiracy.
I'm curious to see how things turn out, and desperately hope that wikileaks can survive this, that my government isn't engaged in a smear campaign for conspiracy, and that Assange gets punishment in line with how faulty his character really is - freed if innocent, punished if a rapist.
Getting diabetes AND salmonella would be a bad weekend.
I always get them confused. Long story.
Really? I must have missed the agenda item on the City Council docket for "allow Muslim laws to supersede the rest of this stuff".
Sure, some of the more strict Muslims in the local community near me might pull their daughter from public school and disallow her from wearing what she wants, but so do the Hassidic Jews a few blocks down, and the fundamentalist Christians a few blocks in the other direction. I don't see the difference. The only time it becomes a problem is when the law is broken. This is America, you can raise your kids however you want to, as long as you keep them fed, clothed, watered, schooled, and unharmed.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
Like any charged term "leftist" can mean many things. Her reasons for not liking Castro may be for some of the same reasons Trotsky didn't like Stalin, while both were definitely described as leftists AND communists. She might be the sort of leftist who doesn't believe in communism, or maybe she disagrees with what Castro did with communism, or perhaps she believes that being a leftist should preclude you from having political prisoners and being generally anti-democratic.
man, how could he already have posted it, if it was leaked just recently ...
Read radical news here
Secondly, the oldest, over 30 years of age, worked at GT, the Gothenberg Expressen edition, and later worked for Swedish intelligence (MUST) through their embassies in South America and Cuba.
Also, Claues Borgstrom, one of the two partners of the law firm representing these two women, has two sisters who work for the Bonnier family, the media masters of Sweden, who also own that tabloid, Expressen, whence the first leaked stories appeared.
Now, the second partner, Thomas Bodstrom, is a published fiction author, and while the Bonnier family doesn't appear to own the publisher of his books, they do own the online company where they are sold (AdLibris).
Is this simply financially significant, or is there more? The Bonnier family has had long ties with the Swedish intel establishment, but best not to go into detail on that. By the way, Thomas Bodstrom happens to be in the USA (in the New York to Washington, D.C. corridtor) during the highest profile case of his firm?
Most likely, to coordinate the extradition to America, which is primarily what all this subterfuge is about. This entire thing has been handled by leaks: multiple and constant leaks from the Swedish Prosecution Authority regarding the ongoing case and Assange's file, etc.
And then there's Bodstrom's former cabinet co-member and former adviser, Par Nuder, recently appointed a director at Madeleine Albright's international lobbyist group, Albright Stonebridge Group.
So many posts about whether he's innocent or guilty...
There is a legal process to establish the fact of that. It will be decided by a jury or a panel of judges depending on the laws in Sweden.
This tirade of posts declaring his obvious guilt or innocence is just opinionated pandering to the government spin doctors who are trying to detract interest away from the substance of the leaks.
Its not our job to decide Julian Assange's fate. In trying to do so, we are reducing the chance that he will have any kind of fair trial.
Shouldn't we be more interested in our governments' lack of action regarding the crimes evidenced in the cablegate leaks?
It would never have been an issue if he hadn't publicized the proceedings, spreading conspiracy theories and his accusers names far and wide. He was the one who turned it into a circus; it's hypocritical for him to complain about it now.
The existence of the insurance file regardless of the Rick Roll content and him saying I'll release all these secrets if you shut me down is undeniably Black Mail, and he should have his year in prison and the fine for doing it. It is what makes him a despicable deplorable human being, and doesn't help him in other arguments about the type of character he is. It is also why he isn't a journalist of any kind.
Now the rape can go ether way in my opinion but I view it's probably all just a contrived story that he and the girls colluded to get a conspiracy theorists spot light on him.
thanks :)
If you don't have ideals, or try to improve your lot or that of your fellow citizens, I'd say you're in a pretty bad place.
in Sweden if the woman withdraws consent during the act it is still considered rape, with prision terms.
The point of contention is not the swedish law, but whether the consent was actually withdrawn and the credibility of the womens' statement. The women seem to have continued their relationship with Assange, despite the rape and condom-break incident, which makes their claims sound a bit dubious.
And? Their credibility should be judged by a jury, at trial.
A trial? There hasn't been any charges yet!
9 days in solitary, but no charges.
Credibility? I don't see any.
You can't take the sky from me...
There's even some evidence that these women didn't really press charges even after they found out about each other until _after_ someone in the prosecutor's office started pushing them.
What were they doing in the prosecutor's office in the first place?
You can't take the sky from me...
So far I've picked up from this thread:
a) Julian Assange may have two-timed a couple of women
b) He probably isn't gay
Who cares? Did Tiger Woods leave a gossip void that simply needed to be filled?
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
UK law is quite flexible on civil matters, but does not allow intrusion of religion and customs into criminal law.
You can have any civil case in the UK arbitrated and decided by any court you mutually agree on; you are only forced to use a "normal" court if you cannot agree on venue. The Jewish court for this is called the Beth Din, and it has powers to settle divorce and other civil matters in accordance with religious law. If both parties agree on a court upholding Sharia law, then the decisions of such a court will be binding on both parties.
Further, even in normal courts, where the parties involved are Jewish or Muslim, a judge will often go some way into taking advice for a means of giving his decision in a manner compatible with the culture of the parties involved. Its often the same decision, but how a decision is phrased often guarentees that it will be respected and upheld.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
He did run, and he did hide. After getting permission to leave the country, he ran and hid from the people who gave him that permission. They had dropped nothing, they simply weren't at a stage in the investigation where they thought they needed to hold him. When they decided they did need to speak to him, they couldn't find him. His wherabouts were not well known. They had to get the English police to hunt him down. It was not terribly difficult, but it wasn't as though he was checking in with Sweden, which you'd think would be a condition of being allowed to leave during an investigation. And then he fought extradition. You'd think another condition of his leaving Sweden during an investigation would be that he not fight extradition. I think it probably was.
My credibility is fine. Your credulity is in a heap on the floor.
Ah. He didn't pull the trigger, he just told the Kenyan government to do it because they were already holding a gun to the heads of 1300 people. So that makes lying about his involvement in it later, after he admitted wikileaks got those people killed, okay.
So he should return in order to be interrogated? How can he "prove his innocence"? What defense lawyer in their right mind would recommend him to return and incriminate himself? Getting him to talk in Sweden, a totally foreign country for Assange, they can come up with any and all charges at their own leisure.
It is the Swedish prosecutor who must now file formal charges, something they have not done yet. Only "allegations", which mysteriously to all, finds its way on the Interpol (very very suspicious).
"Allegations" are not charges. How can Assange defend himself against unspecified crimes?
This combined with PayPal, VISA, Mastercard, Swiss banks and Bank Of America preventing their customers to transfer money to Wikileaks, smells like something very very rotten.
Exactly what Wikileaks is created to expose!
Btw, did you know promiscuity may be genetically triggered? We should not be so quick to condemn. Look at the bigger picture.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
And what gives one person, Assange, greater credibility than two other people?
A consistent story and willingness to co-operate with authorities ?
Everybody needs to go read The Myth of Male Power . Like, right now. SOOOOOOOOO relevant to this article.
Once a formal charge is filed, you can bet these women's sorry ass a counter-suit for untruthful allegations and collaboration is to follow.
But by the time all this has blown over, Assange's life will already have been ruined by the powerful people behind the invisible strings. These sex-allegations are perfect, dubious and speculative, but enough to mow down Assange and his credibility, together with the denial of all business with every major corporation on the planet. The right to possess money (banking) has already been taken away from him, without any evidence of criminal activity or judgements against him.
Who will step up and assist him now? It will be professional and personal suicide.. You will also get registered and surveilled for the rest of your life.
Unless we expose it all that is.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
yes, assange did something good in the world. he also did something wrong.
Did he though ? If there's one thing markedly lacking from this case so far, it's evidence. Further, Assange's behaviour strongly suggests he has no fear of being found guilty of rape (by any definition).
If they can throw Clinton out of office for having sex with a secretary, when Bush can start wars on false grounds, and most presidents are known for similar "extravagance", then this is just more of the same shit.
It's not that we condone Mr. Assange's or Clinton's behaviour. But it is not criminal, just a leverage for someone behind the scenes to manipulate media and everyone into getting what they want.
What we need to do is reward and support those who expose such abuse of power, even if it is just "political".
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/tj-hemlinger-emails_n_798104.html
I've not had much trust in nor respect for Interpol since I learned that Reinhard Heydrich (a.k.a. "The Butcher of Prague") was president of Interpol from 24 August 1940 to 4 June 1942.
Great men are almost always bad men--Lord Acton's Corollary
Assange had absolutely no reason to think that a woman he met the week before had consented to such a thing
You mean apart from the fact that she willingly climbed naked into his bed? (She must've done so if he started having sex with her as she slept.)
...said that they would consider the US extradiction requests and would probably (not certainly but only *probably* - yeah right) extradite him the second he set foot on Swedish soil.
Apparently, rape charges are not as serious as the request of the US to extradite someone for acts that are legal in the country he lives in at the time, and are legal in Sweden as well.
And in other worldnews, Hungary has passed a law bringing heavy fines into play for any media that is not providing "moral" and "objective" news. Since the judge of that has just been confirmed (for 9 years) by the very conservative government, most people think this *won't* be used against the fascist movement of Jobbik, but probably against people reporting on embarrassing news like Wikileaks cables. Fines can go up to 700000 euro per violation, which is quite a lot compared to the monthly wage in Hungary. Oh, and all media has to register. That includes you, bloggers.
People can call Assange whatever they like, and he may be the biggest scumbag in the world, but if you don't see the writing on the wall writ large for freedom of the press, you need glasses.
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
No, you didn't miss it.
This is just more BS propaganda from the BNP/One Nation parties. "Teh evil immigrants are destroying the $NATIONS national identity and blergh", just an excuse for racism and bigotry to make up for their own fears and failures. GP should not have been modded up. Muslims are a convenient target because there's lots of negative propaganda around them already. When you consider the overwhelming majority of Muslims live in non-sharia countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, Indo is right up there for religious diversity too) and that most Muslims have taken great lengths to integrate themselves into western society (particularly in OZ) it's not as bad as the ultra-nationalists make out.
But this doesn't stop them from being used as a bogeyman to scare people who dont know any better.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Your response is consistent with your attitude.
Wow! Was her name Marina Oswald?
'Cause then i'd be guessing the magic bullet is Assange's condom leak went 'back, and to the left'.
Just a guess there, Jerry.
soylentnews.org Go there to enjoy the people!
I just posted translations of the relevant Quran verses the AC mentioned.
So how does that prove I'm ignorant?
Perhaps you need to improve your reading skills before you accuse people of ignorance.
...and if the nature doesn't supply any, we still have the lawyers :)
Well, the Swedish bikini team doesn't look so hot now, does it?
Well, your lies just lost you all credibility with me. He never ran and hid in another country. His request for Swedish residence failed. That meant he had no reason to stay there. He ASKED the prosecutor if they needed anything more of him and was told "No, you can leave". So he did. Evil fucker huh ?
The EU has included England for a helluva long time!
Alternately, being a victim of a very personal crime they were doubting, questions and unsure about the circumstances. Essentially in a kind of denial. Shock and stress can do that to you.
Imagine something a bit less severe, first imagine you're not super confident or teeming with testosterone, you were in a car accident, it was clearly the other persons fault but they talked their way out of the situation. You carried on with your life and picked up the pieces, sorted the car, and started to believe that maybe it was just an accident, where no one was at fault. Then you meet someone who had the same experience, with the exact same other driver...
Back to real life: When they got together and discovered the same thing had happened to someone else they realized their doubts were unfounded and gained the confidence to go to the authorities.
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
When they met and realized the same guy had done the same thing to someone else they realized that what happened to them was not an "accident", that they didn't somehow misunderstand, that their self doubt was unjustified and that this guy needed reporting.
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
>>>The university overreacted; the police didn't.
Yeah they did. The Swedish police know very well this is a "she said; he said" case that they have no possibility of winning, and therefore they should drop it. In fact, they did already drop it..... but then suddenly revived it at the behest of the US White House.
This is just police harassment over a case that they already know they will lose. Similar to that Connecticut DA who arrested a man because he was wearing a "Close Guantanamo" shirt. The judge threw it out but the stupid DA pressed charges anyway, so it got thrown out again. People in power who pursue cases they know they can't win are abusing their power & the citizens.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Did either of these women actually expect Julian Assange to keep something under wraps?
in Sweden if the woman withdraws consent during the act it is still considered rape, with prision terms.
The point of contention is not the swedish law, but whether the consent was actually withdrawn and the credibility of the womens' statement. The women seem to have continued their relationship with Assange, despite the rape and condom-break incident, which makes their claims sound a bit dubious.
And? Their credibility should be judged by a jury, at trial.
A trial? There hasn't been any charges yet! 9 days in solitary, but no charges.
Credibility? I don't see any.
So, because Assange has been held by British police, therefore two Swedish women have no credibility? I thought Slashdot was supposed to be home to logical thinkers.
In terms of Sharia, not cultural and un-Islamic practices of certain countries, it would be the other way around. Four witness are needed for adultery.
If she’s pregnant, it was obviously either rape or adultery... and how hard do you think it would be for the guy to get 4 male friends to testify that he’d never do such a thing as raping someone and/or give him an alibi against anything the woman claims?
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
in Sweden if the woman withdraws consent during the act it is still considered rape, with prision terms.
The point of contention is not the swedish law, but whether the consent was actually withdrawn and the credibility of the womens' statement. The women seem to have continued their relationship with Assange, despite the rape and condom-break incident, which makes their claims sound a bit dubious.
And? Their credibility should be judged by a jury, at trial.
A trial? There hasn't been any charges yet!
9 days in solitary, but no charges.
Credibility? I don't see any.
So, because Assange has been held by British police, therefore two Swedish women have no credibility?
You can't withdraw your consent more than a week after the sex happened (she kept letting him live with her for a week and said she never was afraid of him), that's why the complaint was dismissed in less than 24h, because it wasn't credible.
It was such a nice pretext though, they couldn't let it go to waste...
It's not about the claims, the claims are just a red herring for police action and legal delays. There is no credibility in the claims because the response is completely disproportional to the claims. No one ever got pursued like this over such claims before. Those governments are not doing this because they believe the claims, they're using the claims as an excuse.
And Swedish authorities don't even believe the claims: They haven't even laid any formal charges. They just want to ask him questions. They didn't want to ask him questions when he was in the country, they told him it was ok to leave the country, and then they wanted him jailed in the U.K. right when the cables started going public?
No credibility.
I thought Slashdot was supposed to be home to logical thinkers.
I've known for a long time that slashdot is full of illogical dullards like you.
You can't take the sky from me...
Centipedes? In my vagina?
Well, dammit!
That's why the condom broke!!
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
The question comes natural... can it be all without foreing intervenction?
That question came naturally?
I'd hate to see a question you have that didn't come naturally.
The question that comes naturally to me is: What the hell are you talking about?
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
You can't withdraw your consent more than a week after the sex happened (she kept letting him live with her for a week and said she never was afraid of him)
In the first case, she withdrew consent during. In the second case, the other woman was asleep and therefore could not consent.
The actions afterwards are irrelevant. If a domestic abuse victim stays with his or her attacker, does their black eye suddenly disappear?
The rest of your post is based on a misunderstanding of the law and how the justice system works, with questioning of the accused almost always occurring prior to the bringing of formal charges, and is thus moot.
No... in both cases, they claimed those things more than a week later with no proof whatsoever to back up the claims.
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
In the first case, she withdrew consent during. In the second case, the other woman was asleep and therefore could not consent.
Claims? Remember? You're talking about this as if It Happened With Certainty.
Isn't that so very interesting. So, very.
The actions afterwards are irrelevant.
They are certainly not!
If a domestic abuse victim stays with his or her attacker, does their black eye suddenly disappear?
Now you're implying this was similar to violent domestic abuse, fanfuckingtastic, you biased fuck.
The rest of your post is based on a misunderstanding of the law and how the justice system works, with questioning of the accused almost always occurring prior to the bringing of formal charges, and is thus moot.
9 days of solitary confinement (torture) always occurring, huh?
Eat shit and die.
You can't take the sky from me...
No... in both cases, they claimed those things more than a week later with no proof whatsoever to back up the claims.
No... in both cases, they reported those things to police four days later with evidence consisting of complaining witness testimony to back up the claims.
Oh, you think that the testimony of the complaining witness doesn't count as evidence? Sounds good to me. Thanks for your wallet and cash. Very nice of you to give it as a gift, particularly at Christmas time.
Claims? Remember? You're talking about this as if It Happened With Certainty.
Isn't that so very interesting. So, very.
Pot, meet Kettle:
You can't withdraw your consent more than a week after the sex happened
Kettle has an appropriate response to you, too:
fanfuckingtastic, you biased fuck. Eat shit and die.
Oh, you think that the testimony of the complaining witness doesn't count as evidence? Sounds good to me. Thanks for your wallet and cash. Very nice of you to give it as a gift, particularly at Christmas time.
False analogy. She already gave him her wallet, she just claims she demanded he give it back.
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
Oh, you think that the testimony of the complaining witness doesn't count as evidence? Sounds good to me. Thanks for your wallet and cash. Very nice of you to give it as a gift, particularly at Christmas time.
False analogy. She already gave him her wallet, she just claims she demanded he give it back.
Well, in a way, that's what it comes down to... It is a false analogy: unlike giving someone a wallet, sex is not a discrete action, but takes place over a period of time (about 5 seconds for Slashdotters).
Some people believe that if a woman says yes once - if the guy sticks it in - she then can't withdraw consent until he's done pumping away. Some people even go as far to say that if a woman has consented once - say, has sex the previous night with a condom on - then she has consented to any and all actsin the future, including being woken up to sex without a condom.
The law, however, says that women can certainly withdraw consent during the act. And that a sleeping woman cannot consent.
But this is all irrelevant to my point above, and your earlier post: you said that there's "no proof whatsoever." I pointed out that witness testimony is proof, or evidence rather, and it's up to a jury to determine whether it's credible or not. Many, many convictions fall down to witness testimony rather than physical evidence, particularly where consent is an issue: legitimate vs. fraudulent contracts, theft vs. gift, consensual sex vs. rape. In all of these, physical evidence doesn't determine anything - the signature on the contract is the right signature, the money or object changed hands, the woman has a stained dress with DNA on it. Determining whether there was consent falls to witness/victim testimony, the testimony of the defendant, and the jury's opinion of their credibility.
Mind you, we only complain about the inadequacies of he-said/she-said evidence in rape cases... Not in fraud. Curious, huh?
witness testimony is proof, or evidence rather
It’s neither of those things. It is testimony. Whether or not it is considered to be credible depends both on its coherency, its circumstances, and the credibility of the person giving it.
Many, many convictions fall down to witness testimony rather than physical evidence, particularly where consent is an issue ... Determining whether there was consent falls to witness/victim testimony, the testimony of the defendant, and the jury's opinion of their credibility.
Assange’s presence wasn’t needed for that determination until some political weight got thrown around and suddenly he’s an international fugitive. Strange...
(And Sweden apparently doesn’t use a jury system.)
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
witness testimony is proof, or evidence rather
It’s neither of those things. It is testimony. Whether or not it is considered to be credible depends both on its coherency, its circumstances, and the credibility of the person giving it.
We may be using different definitions. I'm using the legal definition, where testimony is part of "evidence". I have no disagreement with the rest of your statement here, though.
Many, many convictions fall down to witness testimony rather than physical evidence, particularly where consent is an issue ... Determining whether there was consent falls to witness/victim testimony, the testimony of the defendant, and the jury's opinion of their credibility.
Assange’s presence wasn’t needed for that determination until some political weight got thrown around and suddenly he’s an international fugitive. Strange...
Not so... They were asking him to come in for questioning, and he refused. So, accordingly, they filed a red notice with INTERPOL. Then he showed up at the police station in London. He still has refused to go to Sweden for questioning, however, hence the current extradition fight.
I don't know... Criminal law is not my particular field, but I don't believe that a suspect typically gets to choose whether to be questioned in person or via a telephone link with his lawyer silently holding up cue cards in the background.
(And Sweden apparently doesn’t use a jury system.)
Yeah, silly civil law jurisdictions. Nonetheless, they do have a "finder of fact", specifically lay judges, I believe, which perform the same function.
Not so... They were asking him to come in for questioning, and he refused.
As I understand it, what happened was more like this:
they informed him of the investigation, so he couldn’t leave;
they investigated the charges, found no credibility, and dropped them;
at which point he asked if he could please leave the country now?;
they told him yeah, go ahead... and he did;
Then the international shitstorm occurred over Assange’s involvement with the Wikileaks release of US documents and now suddenly they want him to come back, on his own dime, and answer some questions – and without yet being formally charged.
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
Not so... They were asking him to come in for questioning, and he refused.
As I understand it, what happened was more like this:
they informed him of the investigation, so he couldn’t leave; they investigated the charges, found no credibility, and dropped them; at which point he asked if he could please leave the country now?; they told him yeah, go ahead... and he did;
Then the international shitstorm occurred over Assange’s involvement with the Wikileaks release of US documents
I'm not so sure about that timing. There was a fight between two Swedish prosecutors, one who wanted to bring charges and one who didn't, but I believe that fight was going on almost immediately, rather than after the international shiatstorm.
and now suddenly they want him to come back, on his own dime, and answer some questions – and without yet being formally charged.
Well, since they're asking for extradition, I don't think that's on his dime, technically...
Well, since they're asking for extradition, I don't think that's on his dime, technically...
Maybe not at this point, but I understood that it initially was.
After he turned himself in to the UK officials, then Sweden had the opportunity to press the UK for his extradition (they couldn’t very easily extradite him if they didn’t have him), and he’s pretty much at the mercy of whatever the UK officials decide at this point.
Distributed Denial of APK: It takes 15 seconds to reply to him anonymously, but wastes tons of his time if we all do it.
If you think that someone can after-the-fact decide that, actually, they didn't want to fuck around with that guy after all, and that makes him a rapist, I hope you or someone you love is actually raped someday
For the record, I agree with the logic behind Anon's hate, but I, for one, just want the troll to die; I don't wish rape on the troll's acquaintances.
You can't take the sky from me...