Julian Assange arrested for 'sexual assault'. Are Swedish laws to blame?

[melthebell]

Was he famous before the wikileaks affair? I'd never heard of him until then.

me niether tbh, now hes a superstar Oo

[HeadingNorth]

me niether tbh, now hes a superstar Oo

 

A rise to fame does sometimes spur people from your past to bring charges against you in the hope that some money will come their way, from a payoff to make them go away, or from selling their story to the media. Sometimes, those charges are legitimate; often they aren't. Which it is in this case, I have no idea.

[Phanerothyme]

If this was any other rape case you would be behaving differently. You are not in possession of the facts, but in the possession of hearsay.

 

All you are doing is stoking a different witch hunt to the one in pursuit of Assange.

 

I'll acknowledge that reposting these counter accusations and character assassinations on SF won't be damaging the likelihood of a fair trial, should one ever materialise, but you can see that linking to it, quoting it, and propagating the meme will contribute to that effect elsewhere, don't you?

 

Like the Anonymous DDoS strikes, it's not constructive, useful or even effective.

[melthebell]

A rise to fame does sometimes spur people from your past to bring charges against you in the hope that some money will come their way, from a payoff to make them go away, or from selling their story to the media. Sometimes, those charges are legitimate; often they aren't. Which it is in this case, I have no idea.

yes, i agree with it all

 

BUT!!!

 

when the charges appear right after you publish 1000s of damaging communications against the strongest nation in the world, then it smacks of something completely different

[Fartown]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121002571.html

 

Let's get this out of the way: Sweden does not have a "broken condom" law. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was not arrested because his contraception failed mid-coitus. Nor is he charged with "sex by surprise."

... One of his accusers was quoted by the Guardian newspaper in August as saying, "What started out as voluntary sex subsequently developed into an assault." Whether consent was withdrawn because of the lack of a condom is unclear, but also beside the point. In Sweden, it's a crime to continue to have sex after your partner withdraws consent.

 

In the UK it's a crime to continue to have sex after your partner withdraws consent.

 

In the UK, that crime (if you are male) is called 'Rape'.

 

So he's not accused of rape?

 

If this was any other rape case you would be behaving differently. You are not in possession of the facts, but in the possession of hearsay...

 

Nobody is in possession of all the facts. Nobody will be in possession of all the facts until the case comes to trial (and even then, not all the facts may be exposed.)

 

I really do hope (in the interests of justice) that Assange's trial for the alleged sex crimes is treated separately - entirely separately - from crimes arising from the Wikileaks story.

 

When he was remanded, the judge gave, as one of the reasons for the remand, 'personal safety'.

 

I don't like Mr Assange. I think his behaviour (re Wikileaks) is reprehensible, but my respect for human rights is sufficiently strong to allow me to separate my feelings from my belief that he is entitled to the protection of law (as well as the results.)

 

Would he be safe if he was free in England?

Could he be 'picked up' off the streets and exported?

Has this ever happened before?

(Tell me about Mordecai Vanunu.)

 

He was arrested in accordance with the terms of an EU arrest warrant. It is likely (under EU law) that he will have to appear before a Swedish court to answer those charges.

 

If he was released in the UK (and remember, he's not a British citizen, nor is he resident here, nor has he sought asylum here) and somebody 'picked him up off the streets and exported him' The ship would hit the span.

 

Send him to Sweden to answer the charges. Let them be responsible for him.

 

Why should the British taxpayer get (further) involved?

[Phanerothyme]

...

Nobody is in possession of all the facts. Nobody will be in possession of all the facts until the case comes to trial (and even then, not all the facts may be exposed.)...

 

Send him to Sweden to answer the charges. Let them be responsible for him.

 

Why should the British taxpayer get (further) involved?

 

I'd endorse all of that post, and more.

 

The UK has a curiously unbalanced extradition treaty with the US, signed by our own David Blunkett some years ago.

 

Sweden does not. Also, in Sweden there is a popular, if diffuse, suspicion of the US administration that has persisted since Vietnam.

 

Although this national feeling has dissipated since the intensities of the Reagan era, it has been aroused again by the US diplomatic cables leaked by none other than Wikileaks, which have revealed members of the Swedish government rolling over and having their tummies tickled by the US administration.

 

It will be far more interesting if Assange faces trial in Sweden for rape - which on the face of it will be a trial almost certain to collapse in an explosive politico-legal row visible to the world through Sweden's almost unparalleled transparency in government and law.

 

If the case collapses before trial and the US can write a law fast enough, then Assange may well find himself on a flight to New York sooner than he'd like.

[Vague_Boy]

Anyone think it an *slight* overreaction to set Interpol on someone for not wearing a condom?

 

Interpol FFS!

[Fartown]

Anyone think it an *slight* overreaction to set Interpol on someone for not wearing a condom?

 

Interpol FFS!

 

Errr... the charge was rape. As in:

 

"She said no,[withdrew her consent.] He didn't think 'no' meant 'no'."

 

Under UK law, 'No' means 'No'. If she says ' No' and you continue, that's rape.

 

Under Swedish law, ' No' means ' No'. If she says 'No' and you continue, that's rape.

 

What do condoms have to do with that?

 

Or should certain people be above the law if they do things you approve of?

 

Had Assange done what he is alleged to have done in England, then that would have constituted rape. Why should he not be required to answer before a Swedish court?

[HeadingNorth]

yes, i agree with it all

 

BUT!!!

 

when the charges appear right after you publish 1000s of damaging communications against the strongest nation in the world, then it smacks of something completely different

 

It might do so, I grant. But the fact that he has become famous because of those leaks, means it might be the simpler and more common explanation that I offer.

 

It might even be simpler still; it might be that the Swedish authorities never knew where to find him until Wikileaks made him famous.

[melthebell]

;7008802']http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2010/12/sex-charges-and-arrest-warrant-against.html

 

Anyone think that this is enough of a reason to hold the guy on remand in Wandsworth prison without bail considering the two women he's been intimate with gave their full consent??

just shown a swedish lass i know online this theory and heres her replies

 

1: I said "people are trying to say its some obscure swedish law about not wearing a condom being illegal lol"

She says "Hmmmm...never heard that that would be illegal in this country."

 

2: I showed her the blog in the op about it, she replied " Saw the name of the lawyer, sometimes he is an OK dude in the media. But this is just weird."

 

and

"Something is just kind of fishy."