Slashdot Mirror
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."
Guess I'll have to do it. Boldfacing the interesting parts, which for some reason Slashdot didn't bother covering in the summary.
You're treating a symptom while the disease rages on. The fish rots from the head. Why not cut off the head?
No. See the explanation for the dropping of the investigation which for some reason Slashdot didn't bother to mention. The short of it: They dropped it because Moreno won the Ecuadorian election, and he's refused to negotiate on handing over Assange, so there's no realistic possibility that he'll be surrendered before the statute of limitations runs out. Swedish law mandates that when all possibilities to resolve an investigation have been exhausted, the prosecutor is obliged to discontinue it.
You're treating a symptom while the disease rages on. The fish rots from the head. Why not cut off the head?
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.
17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
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.
The only thing "fishy" about this case to start with was that Assange decided to run and hide in the embassy rather than face his day in court, spouting this blatant nonsense about a US extradition scheme.
Yet America refused to say that they would not ask Sweden to extradite if Assange agreed to testify.
And then they got Bolivian president's Evo Morales' plane rerouted by spreading rumors that Snowden was aboard and demanding extradition
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
He did present himself to Sweden, and Sweden refused. This was highly unusual on the part of Sweden. This makes the whole thing quite suspicious.
Learn to love Alaska
He did present himself to Sweden, and Sweden refused.
No, he did not. He agreed to do an interview from the embassy to an Ecuadorian intermediary, but not to present himself. The "interview" took place last year, but was worthless in that none of questions asked were answered, and instead deflected to a pre-written statement. It was a farce. As a result, the Swedish prosecutors upheld the charges.
The investigation is now dropped, mainly because after the election in Ecuador, there seems to be no way to negotiate an extradition. With no way to bring the investigation to a conclusion, the investigation has to be dropped. But if he presents himself, the charges can be brought forward, and he will have a chance to defend himself and actually answer the questions given.
Wikileaks had a working "economic model" (it was financed by donations), until their accounts got frozen.
He was actually under house arrest at one point in the UK, while the UK court cases were playing out - although said "house" was a luxurious country mansion. He had to cut his tracking bracelet before fleeing to the embassy.
You're treating a symptom while the disease rages on. The fish rots from the head. Why not cut off the head?
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.
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
because US went off the reservation in pursuit of those guys (him and Snowden). And since that part was very publicly proven [wikipedia.org], it throws some serious shade on the whole accusation thing.
The US going after Assange is pure, unadulterated, extra-legal revenge for the public political embarrassment WL has caused the US government by exposing their wrongdoing. Assange no more broke US laws than Woodward & Bernstein did in printing the Pentagon Papers, and W & B are US citizens and were on US soil when they printed the PPs, totally unlike Assange.
But then, if we've learned anything over the past 10 years, it's that those in power believe themselves above the law and think they can do whatever they want and to whomever they want with little consequences.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
He's always been available-- they could come to talk to him at the embassy, interview him on the phone, or whatever. He just won't go where it's easy for the US to grab him, which is not at all an unrealistic fear at this point.
A modest proposal: if we're the good guys, we shouldn't go around acting like the bad guys in a cold war spy novel.