Julian Assange: rapist or not?

[PhantomWolf]

From the article it seems that the women weren't out to have him charged, it was the police and prosecutor that decided that there had been a voliation of the law, the women just wanted to force him to be tested.

Still hasn't changed my opinion of the guy though, he's a prick. You don't screw around on people and if you do have unprotected sex and your partner wants testing, then you do it to alay their fears however irrational they might be. The guy needs to learn to keep it in his pants.

 

[Meed]

And yet you can type. I assume that you got better, then?

Oh yeah. I forgot to add that.

 

[McHrozni]

Assuming the above citations are factual.

There is a sentence in the quote that puts a big question mark over this:

Though heavily redacted, with details of the sex allegations blacked out,

From what was released, no, that doesn't seem to be rape. But with the details blacked out one can't really say.

Judging from the report, he's an *******.

McHrozni

 

[BobHaulk]

If it gets him caught and halted, I really don't care. I admit it would bother me otherwise, but not with what he has done.

What has he done exactly? Exposing the hypocrisy of some representatives of the american government maybe, making them look like the liars they are. Maybe you think it's good that they say one thing in public and another in private but i don't. It's time for these people to stand up and be counted, explain themselves instead of blaming the messenger. Especially when british soldiers are being killed and some desk jockey is slagging off the troops. We british should get out of there and leave it to the super duper american soldiers. It's seems they don't even have respect for the men and women who are laying there lives down for some spurious war started by the americans and thanks to wikileaks we now know.

 

[Barney Gumble]

Not sure about Sweden's laws but most countries would be able to prosecute if Assange had a communicable disease and knowingly then had unprotected sex. Still wouldn't be a rape charge though if the actual sex act was consenting by both parties, the only exception to this would be if one of the girls was under the legal age of consent, this would be classed as rape even if she consented, referred to as carnal knowledge.

 

[egslim]

From what was released, no, that doesn't seem to be rape. But with the details blacked out one can't really say.

The document shows neither of the women considered it rape, until they found out about eachother. That fact disqualifies it as rape.

Not sure about Sweden's laws but most countries would be able to prosecute if Assange had a communicable disease and knowingly then had unprotected sex. Still wouldn't be a rape charge though if the actual sex act was consenting by both parties, the only exception to this would be if one of the girls was under the legal age of consent, this would be classed as rape even if she consented, referred to as carnal knowledge.

The women were both in their 20s, so legal age is not an issue.

For the communicable disease no evidence has been brought out

 

[geni]

If it gets him caught and halted, I really don't care. I admit it would bother me otherwise, but not with what he has done.

Your support for scientology is noted (what you thought the US goverment were the only goup he's pissed off?).

 

[geni]

Information wants to be free!

Information wants to be expensive.

 

[Wildy]

what you think, is irrelevent. all that matters is what the facts say to the jury.

Considering the thread is called "Julian Assange: rapist or not?" I would say that INRM's opinion is perfectly valid.

 

[egslim]

From the article it seems that the women weren't out to have him charged, it was the police and prosecutor that decided that there had been a voliation of the law, the women just wanted to force him to be tested.

Still hasn't changed my opinion of the guy though, he's a prick. You don't screw around on people and if you do have unprotected sex and your partner wants testing, then you do it to alay their fears however irrational they might be. The guy needs to learn to keep it in his pants.

The guy may be a lot of things, but based on this information there's no reason to consider him a rapist. That part is pure smear.

 

[JJM 777]

most countries would be able to prosecute if Assange had a communicable disease and knowingly then had unprotected sex. Still wouldn't be a rape charge though

It would be a violent assault charge.

 

[PhantomWolf]

The guy may be a lot of things, but based on this information there's no reason to consider him a rapist. That part is pure smear.

I know that "rapist" and "Prick" share several letters in common, but they aren't the same word.

 

[egslim]

Possibly my use of the word halted was misleading. I am unconcerned as to what brings him to easily accessible, merely that it occurs. I suspect the rest can be easily handled - and the systems will be far better as things move along.

To be honest, it would help me if you were more explicit instead of euphemistic. But let's see if I understand.

- You want mr Assange in the hands of the authorities ('easily accessible').

Then what?
This accusation of rape won't survive a court-case.

Assuming you don't want him set free again, I see two possibilities.
1) Either you expect that having him under arrest for a phoney charge makes it easier to file a charge against him that he can be succesfully prosecuted for.
If that's your line of thought, you have to explain why the phoney charge would make it easier.
2) Or you expect that once he's in the hands of the authorities, he can be locked up indefinately without prosecution or maybe 'accidentally' get killed.
If that's what you're thinking of I'd like you to state it explicitely.

Maybe I missed a possibility, if so please enlighten me.

 

[ddt]

I find Woman B's accusation of rape ludicrous. Woman gets raped, goes out to buy rapist breakfast, buys him a trainticket and sees him off, asks if he will call her. That's not rape, that's consensual sex she afterwards regretted.

Woman A's accusation is almost as crazy. It seems impossible to tell if the condom split deliberately or accidentally, and a person is innocent until proven guilty. Either way, both women did not go to the police until after they had talked with each other and found out they had both had sex with mr Assange.

That seems indeed the crucial point here - they felt cheated upon when they heard each other's stories. Which is naive to say the least - especially for Ardin ("Woman A"), who is a university lecturer on gender equality. While Wélin ("Woman B") literally threw herself at him. From this story, the rape charges are trumped up for political reasons - I know, it's the Daily Fail, but then I'd rather think they'd sex up the story, not sex it down.

The wisest thing for Assange would be to do a test for STDs to allay their fears. That may very well be very impractical for him right now ("which address do we send the results to, mr. Assange?"), and he may also fear that when he walks out of the doctor's office an arrest team is there to greet him.

Halted? No way. Wikileaks will continue to release the 251,287 documents with or without mr Assange. Not to mention insurance.aes256, which has been widely spread through p2p, and will be opened if the password is released.

My torrent client says: seeding to 8 of 12 connected peers.

 

[egslim]

I know that "rapist" and "Prick" share several letters in common, but they aren't the same word.

Apologies, I didn't mean to imply that. I just wanted to emphasize the point, since it pisses me off to see so many headlines and comments accuse someone of rape when a simple look at the facts would convince the vast majority that he's no rapist.

 

[egslim]

I know, it's the Daily Fail, but then I'd rather think they'd sex up the story, not sex it down.

Reading the article, they conclude:

Whatever the outcome, one thing is certain – Assange’s attempts to portray himself as an online saint, exposing the secrets of the superpowers, has been dealt a damaging blow.

So they considered the article damaging to his reputation, instead of as support against the allegation of rape.

My client says 19/1361 peers, and 2976 seeds.

 

[ddt]

1) Either you expect that having him under arrest for a phoney charge makes it easier to file a charge against him that he can be succesfully prosecuted for.
If that's your line of thought, you have to explain why the phoney charge would make it easier.

Extradition might be easier? Rape is a crime that is ubiquitously recognized. Publishing leaked documents not.

2) Or you expect that once he's in the hands of the authorities, he can be locked up indefinately without prosecution or maybe 'accidentally' get killed.
If that's what you're thinking of I'd like you to state it explicitely.

Once you have him you can charge him with, say, terrorism. In Holland too, you can be detained indefinitely when charged with that; and no evidence needed.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

You know, I think it cute how releasing confidental information is cheered when it's not yours

Sent from my Droid

 

[egslim]

Extradition might be easier? Rape is a crime that is ubiquitously recognized. Publishing leaked documents not.

But you can't extradite someone to the US for an alleged crime in Sweden.

Once you have him you can charge him with, say, terrorism. In Holland too, you can be detained indefinitely when charged with that; and no evidence needed.

Publication of information is not terrorism.

If fuelair wants mr Assange locked up indefinately without legal justification, I want him to state that explicitely.

Unlike most suspects of terrorism, mr Assange is a high-profile target. I think a lot of people who don't support his publications will still be appalled if he gets locked up for it indefinately without legal justification.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Based on the story, no, he's not a rapist. A jerk, maybe, but not a rapist.