Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Swedish Investigators Attempt Assange Interview; Wikileaks Makes Major Release

Posted by samzenpus on from the to-talk-or-not-to-talk dept.

cold fjord writes: It seems Julian Assange rates his own section (The Assange Matter) on a Swedish government website related to the investigation. It contains some FAQs on points that seem to keep coming up in Slashdot discussions. The website isn't completely up to date at the moment since it doesn't discuss the recent attempt by Swedish investigators to interview Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. Unfortunately that attempt failed since the government of Ecuador didn't give permission to the Swedish delegation to enter their embassy. That is quite odd given the years of demands for this. Concurrent with this, Wikileaks has started releasing what is reported to be more than 500,000 leaked Saudi Arabian diplomatic documents that are sure to stir up some controversies. Most are in Arabic so it may take some time for their contents to filter out.

14 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Run out the Clock by mbone · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unfortunately that attempt failed since the government of Ecuador didn't give permission to the Swedish delegation to enter their embassy. That is quite odd given the years of demands for this.

    Not odd at all.

    The Statue of Limitations on some of the charges against Assange run out this August.

    1. Re:Run out the Clock by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      TFA mentions that they were unable to compete the necessary paperwork, but that they fully intend to and have simply pushed the interview date back a little. The Swedish don't seem particularly alarmed about this. The request was not refused, they just didn't submit the necessary paperwork.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re: Run out the Clock by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anyways, what Assange did qualifies as rape in every country I know of.

      I think you mean what Assange is accused of having done by people who have changed their story at least once.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    3. Re:Run out the Clock by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The statute of limitations, so far as I understand it, is a limitation on how long prosecutors can wait to press charges. Maybe that's different in Sweden, but in general, I don't think it has anything to do with sentencing. Once you've been sentenced, even in absentia, there is no limit on the amount of time that the jurisdiction that convicted can take in trying to get you to carry out your sentence (ie. there are only two ways Roman Polanski can no longer be at least theoretically held to account; either he serves his sentence, or he dies).

      It's absurd to say there's a statute of limitations on how long it takes to bring somebody into court. If that were the case, then someone charged with a crime who flees would be able to return to the jurisdiction that originally charged him when the limitation was up.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re: Run out the Clock by s.petry · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't know about Sweden, but in most places, limitation clocks only tick while you reside within their jurisdiction.

      Probably something to brush up on before commenting. I'm not Swedish and don't know their laws but refuse to comment on this type of detail without knowledge. What's that old saying about "ass"uming?

      Anyways, what Assange did qualifies as rape in every country I know of.

      I seriously doubt you know what Assange did with this claim. Thing are not always cut and dry. What we have in fact is that his then girlfriend accused him of rape after being in a sexually active relationship. Then we get into inconsistent stories and a long delay between the time that charges were filed and the alleged "rape" happened. I have plenty of personal anecdotes where people claimed "rape" and were not raped but frightened/guilty, etc... If the Duke Lacrosse team or UNVA fakery taught us anything, it should be that these claims are not always truthful, but sure harm the alleged perpetrators. Cui Bono and all that...

      To be more clear than that, US law requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for good reason. Fabricated claims are not some new novel concept any more than crimes are new and novel. Both have been around for thousands of years.

      Also, I can't help but wonder if wikileaks currently has any dirt on Ecuador but doesn't release it for fear of what might happen to Assange. If so, it says quite a bit about their intentions.

      This is a pretty wild speculation without any substance. You started below ground and kept driving until you hit the bottom of fantasy land...

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    5. Re: Run out the Clock by mbone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anyways, what Assange did qualifies as rape in every country I know of.

      Really? Let me introduce you to the United Kingdom. It is a fairly small country, but it does have its charms.

      I think it would be fairer to say that what Assange is alleged to have done would not qualify as rape in any first world country except Sweden

    6. Re:Run out the Clock by zedaroca · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's absurd to say there's a statute of limitations on how long it takes to bring somebody into court. If that were the case, then someone charged with a crime who flees would be able to return to the jurisdiction that originally charged him when the limitation was up.

      I work in the judiciary in Brazil and can't tell how things work in Sweden, but many of these things are similar in most countries, maybe people can discuss the differences here.

      Here in Brazil there are three limitations, one to accept the charges, one to give a sentence and one to execute the sentence.
      The first limitation is on how long before the charges are accepted on court. The prosecutors have to press the charges and they have to be accepted. That is slightly different from the time to press the charges because the accused have to be officially informed of the charges, as he has the right to a preliminary defense before the charges are accepted. Pressing the charges by official news extends this limitation.
      After the charges are received (that's the term in Portuguese), the limitation for sentencing is equal to the one to receive the charges. That is: 1. to have a judgment were all the proofs are presented and the informed defendant has the opportunity to be interrogated and defend himself or be defended by a public attorney if he flees, 2. for the judge to give a sentence and 3. for all the possible appeals until reaching a final sentence ("trânsito em julgado" - Google translates it to "res judicata").
      The third limitation is on how long after the final sentence the government has to execute the sentence.

      So the first limitation is about informing the person about the accusation and the third limitation is about making the person fulfill the sentence. (basically like "bringing somebody to court").
      If the criminal flees (or is not found) for enough time, he can return/stay in the jurisdiction.

      To give a clear and very common example I get here: the limitation for drug possession for personal use is 2 years, 1 year if he/she is under 21. When the guy was found with drugs he was living in a district with one cop doing everything. The police report takes 4-6 months to arrive at the judiciary. We have to check if he can make deals with the prosecutor by checking his criminal records, he has something on another city, we have to ask them exactly what it is (maybe he was found innocent) -> another 3-8 months depending on how many records and where they are. Then he has the right to make a deal (different deals for charged or not charged people), we set a deal hearing ->1 - 4 months (depending on the judge and world soccer schedule), and can't find him (moved away). Try to find him -> 3 to 8 months (the cop at that district only replied to our third reiteration). If he moved to São Paulo, we have to ask them to do the deal hearing, six months latter they reply that the address we gave was wrong or that he moved back. Over and it doesn't matter if he was/wasn't fleeing.

      On the other hand, crimes against children have to limitations.

  2. So they walk up to the fence and talk by drnb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ecuador didn't give permission to the Swedish delegation to enter their embassy.

    Fine. Assange stands on embassy grounds while the investigators stand outside embassy grounds and they talk.

    Hasn't Assange done so with journalists?

    1. Re:So they walk up to the fence and talk by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Funny

      Assange has no interest in talking to Swedish investigators. Just with people who will treat him as if he's the greatest thing since sliced bread....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:So they walk up to the fence and talk by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      The summary makes it sound like they refused to give permission, but actually TFA says that the Swedish simply didn't submit the right paperwork yet due to some delay and have merely pushed the interview date back a little. No refusal has been given, they simply have not applied yet.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:So they walk up to the fence and talk by ag0ny · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You (the submitter) are a fucking idiot who has been foaming about Assange for years. I can't understand why your submissions are accepted.

      Let it go already.

      --
      My site
  3. Site. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Could we not link to the sort of site which also carries "The miracle that cured my son’s autism was in our kitchen" and "Elin Nordegren has Sex on the Beach in the Hamptons" on the front page?

  4. Re:Google Translate by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you trust Google translate for diplomacy, you'd better be ready for war.

    Oh come on. Who goes to war over "yarn lightly extra nowhere fnord"?

    Google is fine with the so-called Romance languages, but it fails hard when trying to translate Asian languages to Romance languages and vice versa.

    Sometimes I think there was a concerted effort by Asian users to poison Google translate's database back when it was accepting user corrections. Especially of Japanese. It never seemed to get any better, and is still awful.

  5. Same tired propaganda by Uberbah · · Score: 4, Informative

    Assange offered to return to Sweden years ago if the government promised not to hand him over to the United States for "intelligence crimes", which even propagandist Rei admits they aren't supposed to do.

    Sweden has never made such a promise, which is why Assange was granted asylum, and why you're an authoritarian bootlicker.