• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Julian Assange: rapist or not?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You can do that for any crime. In general, the state doesn't require any kind of statement or cooperation from the victims at all in order to investigate or prosecute a crime. In particular, the victims' understanding of the relevant laws has no bearing on the decision to prosecute at all. The victims have neither the responsibility nor the legal power to interpret laws.

In this case, it looks like the state has severely traumatized the alleged victim by pursuing a politicized prosecution that she was opposed to pursuing and which probably has very little chance of being successful. What has that achieved?


What a silly question.

What a silly answer.
 
Last edited:
She has explained that he had sex with her without her consent. That is rape, and that is why they are pursuing it legally, and they STILL are. They have not withdrawn their statements, that's just Assange acolytes lying.

Stop it. You will regret it in years to come.
 
In this case, it looks like the state has severely traumatized the alleged victim by pursuing a politicized prosecution that she was opposed to pursuing and which probably has very little chance of being successful. What has that achieved?

Strangely, the victims don't see it that way, but keep on lying..

It has every chance of being succesful. You think Assange is going to live on an air matress in the Ecuadorian ambassy for the rest of is life?

He has made his own jail.
 
Going on the palpable hatred for Assange demonstrated here, what are the odds a Grand Jury is going to settle for Manning?

Pretty high, considering it's their JOB to evaluate the law objectively, and if they cannot determine that the evidence is sufficient to charge Assange himself with anything, they won't. It would be far too easy to determine if the charges were trumped up by any competent lawyer looking to make a name for him or herself if such a jury did decide, while lacking sufficient evidence, to charge Assange with anything.

At best, Assange is no more than an accessory to the crime Manning committed; all he did was receive documents and put them on the internet. MANNING is the one who stole classified documents and gave them to someone who was neither authorized to view them nor cleared to view them. Assange, in that regard, is a mere patsy.

Don't get me wrong; I don't like Assange. I don't think he applies his whole "philosophy" of "government transparency" equally, since he seems to have such a hard-on for the US and virtually ignores his own hypocrisy in utilizing a government known for it's oppression of its own people to save his own skin from rape charges in Sweden. But I don't believe, based on my own knowledge of how the US government tends to work, that we have any intention at this time of charging him with anything, and we're content to let him spiral out of control and show himself for the fraud he is (which he seems to be doing at a more and more rapid rate, if recent events are any indication). IANAL of course, but I don't see how we can possibly charge him with anything at this point and actually be seen as applying our own laws legitimately. I'm not ruling out potential charges in the future, should more concrete evidence of wrongdoing arise, but right now we likely don't have anything that can really be used against him that is anything more than circumstantial at best. I'm speculating, of course, but I have as much evidence for my speculations as those Australian diplomats had for theirs.

The long and the short of it is, until I see evidence that the US actually intends to charge Assange with breaking a law and submits an extradition request to whatever country he's in, I will maintain that Assange is nothing more than a paranoid lunatic trying to avoid being convicted of rape charges.
 
I continue to <3 Grrenwald:


Again: the Swedish courts simply decide whether extradition is legally possible, but the final decision as to whether to extradite is vested in the Swedish government.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/24/new-statesman-error-assange-swedish-extradition

- so the Swedes actually could bargain on this

- And, regarding extradition from Sweden:

For several reasons, Assange has long feared that the US would be able to coerce Sweden into handing him over far more easily than if he were in Britain. For one, smaller countries such as Sweden are generally more susceptible to American pressure and bullying.

For another, that country has a disturbing history of lawlessly handing over suspects to the US. A 2006 UN ruling found Sweden in violation of the global ban on torture for helping the CIA render two suspected terrorists to Egypt, where they were brutally tortured (both individuals, asylum-seekers in Sweden, were ultimately found to be innocent of any connection to terrorism and received a monetary settlement from the Swedish government).

Perhaps most disturbingly of all, Swedish law permits extreme levels of secrecy in judicial proceedings and oppressive pre-trial conditions, enabling any Swedish-US transactions concerning Assange to be conducted beyond public scrutiny. Ironically, even the US State Department condemned Sweden's "restrictive conditions for prisoners held in pretrial custody", including severe restrictions on their communications with the outside world.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/20/julian-assange-right-asylum
 
She has explained that he had sex with her without her consent. That is rape, and that is why they are pursuing it legally, and they STILL are. They have not withdrawn their statements, that's just Assange acolytes lying.

Stop it. You will regret it in years to come.

It says she has withdrawn it effectively, if she refuses to sign the statement, and co-operation with the police, that is effectively withdrawing her statement. "Consent" is a grey area, in that it is difficult to define, as it is in this case. The woman clearly does not endorse her concern about an STD as being a case of rape.

The initial assessment by a prosecutor decided that there was no crime, does that mean that person is an 'acolyte'?

Your personal attacks are not appreciated, and constitute abuse. Do you think you should be prosecuted?
 
Last edited:
I don't think he applies his whole "philosophy" of "government transparency" equally, since he seems to have such a hard-on for the US

You have absolutely nothing to back this up but keep making the claim.

and virtually ignores his own hypocrisy in utilizing a government known for it's oppression of its own people

It is ironic / hypocritical that Ecuador has been accused of limiting press freedom recently.



The long and the short of it is, until I see evidence that the US actually intends to charge Assange with breaking a law and submits an extradition request to whatever country he's in, I will maintain that Assange is nothing more than a paranoid lunatic trying to avoid being convicted of rape charges.

If you're walking down a street and you see a mugger grab three people in a row and drag them into the alley are you a paranoid lunatic for crossing the street just in case? (I mean, the mugger isn't on record anywhere as saying he wants to grab you too...)
 
It says she has withdrawn it effectively, if she refuses to sign the statement, and co-operation with the police, that is effectively withdrawing her statement.

No, and that's why the women appealed and won over the prosecutions decision to drop the case.

"Consent" is a grey area, in that it is difficult to define, as it is in this case. The woman clearly does not endorse her concern about an STD as being a case of rape.

Rape-apologetics. Charming.

The initial assessment by a prosecutor decided that there was no crime, does that mean that person is an 'acolyte'?

No, because they have, in contrast to you seen the available evidence, and try to make an objective decicion based on the law. And they didn't decide there was no crime, it's just you projecting. They assesed that the evidence was not sufficient to get a conviction. And the appeal authorities disagreed with that assesment.

Your personal attacks are not appreciated, and constitute abuse. Do you think you should be prosecuted?

Feel free to report me. If there is sufficient evidence of me commiting a crime, I should be prosecuted.

But with your grasp of law, and what constitutes abuse (rape is not abuse, but internet arguing IS apparantly..?) , I'm not very concerned.
 
If you're walking down a street and you see a mugger grab three people in a row and drag them into the alley are you a paranoid lunatic for crossing the street just in case?

You have a point.

And if you're walking down a street and you see a mugger grab three people in a row and drag them into the alley,

why would you rape and sexually assault two women and run from the police?
 
come to skeptic website

diagnose mental illness in person never met based on hearsay and hysterical op-eds

Sigh...

There are some tell tale signs for many with mental health problems, some are easy to identify, others less so. My fellow poster simply mentioned that our subject would not seem out of place with some he has met.

I personally work in an area of mental health dealing with any number of personality disorders each month, and simply agreed with his observation. There has been no diagnosis by anyone here BTW - but if you could be bothered, it would not be difficult to identify some of Assange's traits via DSM IV-TR. It would be evident to even the most casual of observers that Assange displays some behaviors consistent with a Narcissistic personality disorder - he certainly has some of the defense mechanisms around same.

The again he might be just as sane and normal as you. ;)
 
She has explained that he had sex with her without her consent. That is rape, and that is why they are pursuing it legally, and they STILL are. They have not withdrawn their statements, that's just Assange acolytes lying.

As far as I know, Wilén never signed, approved or even read her statement, so how could she withdraw it?

If you have different information about her statement, please share it. Are we talking about different statements, perhaps?

Stop it. You will regret it in years to come.

Have you read Wilén's alleged statement?

Strangely, the victims don't see it that way, but keep on lying..

Repeatedly accusing me of lying when you have absolutely no evidence that I am (I am not) has a strong odor of teenager-style smear to me. Just saying!

(To lie is to deliver a false statement to another person which the speaking person knows is not the whole truth, intentionally.)

I was only talking about one alleged victim, Wilén. Please provide some evidence that she doesn't feel that way.

It has every chance of being succesful. You think Assange is going to live on an air matress in the Ecuadorian ambassy for the rest of is life?

Are you saying that you believe Assange will give himself up rather than spend the rest of his life on an air mattress? If so, I think it's very unlikely he would give up his asylum for this reason.

However, I meant unsuccessful if a trial were to happen so your wee air bed fantasy is completely irrelevant. :)

He has made his own jail.
Hello judge and jury!

Besides the weakness of the evidence, the conduct of the police and prosecution has severely compromised the chances of either a fair trial or a successful prosecution.
 
Sigh...


The again he might be just as sane and normal as you. ;)

Then again maybe I'm crazy for laughing at a pseudo-pyschiatry circle jerk diagnosis party by a couple of internet hotheads who hate the guy. After all, plenty of great mental health professionals probably do all kinds of legitimate evaluations of people they viscerally dislike based on hearsay from others that despise that same person.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom