Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation (cnn.com)

rmdingler writes: "Sweden is dropping its investigation into WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on rape allegations, according to a prosecution statement released Friday," reports CNN. "Assange, who has always denied wrongdoing, has been holed up at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London since 2012, in an effort to avoid a Swedish arrest warrant." Despite Friday's announcement, he's unlikely to walk out of the embassy imminently. There is no apparent change in the risk of being detained in the west, particularly in the U.S., but it's definitely a win for Assange. Joshua.Niland adds: The pressure on Julian Assange may have lifted ever so slightly with Swedish prosecutors dropping their investigation into the allegations of rape. A brief statement ahead of a press conference by the prosecutor later on Friday said: "Director of Public Prosecution, Ms Marianne Ny, has today decided to discontinue the investigation regarding suspected rape (lesser degree) by Julian Assange." This will not likely deter the United States from pursuing their own charges against him for publishing tens of thousands of military documents leaked by Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning. After describing the development as "an important victory," Assange said, "[...] it by no means erases seven years of detention without charge under house arrest and almost five years here in this embassy without sunlight. Seven years without charge while my children grow up without me. That is not something I can forgive. It is not something I can forget."

Comments

Obama

[Anonymous Coward]

Could still technically pardon Snowden and Assange.

Re: Obama

[arth1]

You... realize he's no longer president, right?

He is still president. That's a perpetual title. He just doesn't hold office anymore, except as an emissary in potentia, and his powers are rather limited.

Victory redefined?

[shanen]

Trying to imagine how Assange can see "victory" in any part of his situation. While he started with nice ideals, at this point he has been transformed into a "useful idiot", though it would still make a lot of powerful people quite happy to see him punished well beyond indefinite imprisonment in an embassy.

Still seems to me to be an economic problem at heart. Largely based on a couple of books about WikiLeaks, I think it was the lack of a viable economic model that led them (though mostly just Assange) to where they are now. Competing economic models of journalism are equally bad or worse. Consider the eyeballs-for-advertisers model that produces disaster porn like CNN and clickbait websites. Worse than that is the paid propaganda model of FAUX "news", rightwing listen-to-a-nut-talking radio, and Alt-Right websites. The vestiges of mainstream journalism are now engaged in a last-newspaperman-standing strategy, and I think journalism still loses, regardless of whether the last paper standing is the "venerable" NY Times or the Washington Post. (I think the LA Times is already on the ropes and the Boston Globe was never a real contender, though the last paper might be some dark horse like the tainted WSJ.)

Assange is no longer part of any solution, so he must be part of the precipitate.

If this is still the first post, it says something about the state of the Slashdot, eh?

Re:See slashdot he's not so bad...

[arth1]

I know slashdotters love to hate assange but now we know it was fake charges all along

We know no such thing. The European arrest warrant was dropped because there was no way to execute it, but prosecution can be continued if he becomes available before 2020.
His claim that he has been imprisoned for seven years without a trial is of his own doing - he would have received either a trial or the charges dropped if he had presented himself. He chose to avoid to cooperate with the investigation, and jumped bail.

Not only is he wanted for fleeing while on bail, but there are civil suits pending from several of the sureties; individuals who lost money when he turned out to have lied to them and skipped bail despite promises not to do so.

Re:If you don't use a condom

[Rei]

No, if you start fuck a sleeping girl to work around her previous refusal to consent to your preferred form of sex, that's rape.

Which was charge #4 on the EAW, the one marked rape. The other three charges were 2x molestation and 1x unlawful sexual coersion.

Assange should hold his promise

[Vadim Makarov]

and surrender to the US. https://www.usnews.com/news/na...
Manning is free. That was the condition. Please Mr Assange, honor your own words.

Sweden finally did the right thing

[DeplorableCodeMonkey]

Let's put this in a less charged context than rape. Suppose a woman did some lines of cocaine with a man and the claims "he forced me to do that last line of cocaine!" In a system that isn't based on presumed guilt, you know what the court and/or jury are going to see?

1. She was there of her own free will.
2. She did cocaine with him freely, by her own admission, for most of that time.
3. She lacks signs of coercion.
4. Police have found not traces of evidence to plausibly back up her sudden change of mind.
5. Another line of cocaine made it into her system.

Now, if you are a judge or jury who is not a psychopath, you are probably going to weigh that evidence and conclude that you have a non-trivial chance of being the implement of someone's revenge. You are a decent person who doesn't want to throw someone in prison on a "maybe" or a "it looks bad, but I don't know." You're going to side with Assange here.

Re:Blame it on Trump?

[Zemran]

Assange leads an average life, not too many sexual encounters but he does OK. One of his encounters evens brags about her conquest on Twitter. Then a year later, her and another ex press charges at the same time. Unlikely to be a coincidence. I am sure that if asked, you will lie and say you are always a saint when with a woman but this is not rape. This would never go forward as a case as it can never get past being an accusation. There is no case to answer as all he has to say is that it is not true and there is no evidence. It is just an attempt to get him into custody so he can be extradited to the US. Why not extradite him from the UK? The UK have a special agreement and never refuse to extradite. The only difference being that if extradited from Sweden the US does not have to agree not to execute him. It is not rape as sex was agreed upon. You are discussing the terms which makes it a civil case not a criminal case. If I buy a car from you and you make the sale conditional it does not become theft if I break those conditions but you may be able to make a civil case and sue me. Sex was agreed and the girls are saying that the terms and conditions were broken, that does not make it rape.