Julian Assange: rapist or not?

[Silhouette]

Bingo! Ding ding ding ding.

Or should I say, nice smoking gun, Sil.?

 

[PhantomWolf]

Bingo! Ding ding ding ding.

Or should I say, nice smoking gun, Sil.?

You do realise that this was covered right back when the whole things started, and it's not an issue of them going to England and doing it, it's an issue of how English law states it has to be done. They can't do it in the Sweedish embassy, and if done outside they have to jump through a heap of hoops that iirc result in Scotland Yard having to do the investigations. What happened in Serbia has no reflection on what happens in England.

Oh, and another chestnut brought up as if those of us who were there at the start have forgotten, they couldn't do it by phone because the Sweedish courts had just blasted the prosecutions office for doing exactly that in a previous case.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That's a bit of a stretch, PW, claiming some UK technicality prevents the Swedes from sending someone to interview JA in the UK.

Or am I reading your post wrong?

 

[Here_to_learn]

Are you claiming there were no valid sources cited in the discussion until you posted one?

Since you posted the claim I include below, you haven't posted a single sourced fact that back your statement:

She had no reason to get involved in this case. She's a high level administrator.

You have done some handwaving to claim that it has been covered earlier. Well, I look forward to you showing the links. I'm not going back through the full thread to look for something that you claim support your position, that's your job.

Fact: Ny is a department director.
Fact: 39 offices have 900 prosecutors between them.

That suggests departments are large and a department director would have too many responsibilities to take very many (if any) cases personally, let alone a "minor rape" case.

And here are some additional facts that show why your post about 39 offices and 900 procecutors is totally irrelevant:

The operative prosecution activities are conducted at the country’s 39 local public prosecution offices. Of these, 32 are public prosecution offices, with a geographical sphere of operation that is approximately equivalent to a county. In the largest cities there are several local public prosecution offices.
[...]The Prosecution Authority’s three prosecution development centres are [...] all appeals made against prosecution decisions are handled by the development centres

I asked you, how many prosecutors work in the department Ny is director of? I thought you knew and I was trying to save Google time.

If it was 'routine' for Ny to be assigned this case, that supports your claim. If it was unusual for Ny to have taken this case and it would have normally been 'assigned' to someone under her in the department that Ny is the director of, then that supports my interpretation.

Since you started out by claiming that it was unusual, I look forward to your sources.

Also: If CB asked Ny to take the case, that is political. If the papers were filed and CB had no personal contact with Ny, that suggests routine procedure.

Why would having a personal contact not be routine? Sweden is not a large country? It's hardly strange that a lawyer that specializes in a certain type of crime talks to a a prosecutor with the same specialty. But I agree, if no formal appeal was lodged this points to things not been handled correctly, however the agree facts document states that an appeal was made. If you want to claim something else, please show sources.

Also, it matters how Claes Borgstrom became the attorney for this case. It doesn't sound like the two women contacted him.

Source?

It sounds like he contacted them. How this happened is key to the question of malicious political prosecution.

On the other side of the coin, he seems like a man on a gender issue mission and he could easily just be attracted to this case because it is high profile and meets his political agenda needs, irrespective of the Wikileaks troubles with the US government.

From Wiki on the guy:That's quite a history of chasing high profile cases.

Exactly, and that a high-profile lawyer actively looks for a high-profile case is hardly unheard of or unique for the JA case...

 

[Here_to_learn]

If it was 'routine' for Ny to be assigned this case, that supports your claim.

And here is a source for that:

At the prosecution development centre, the case will be reviewed by the Director of Public Prosecution, who will then make a decision on, for instance, the resumption of a discontinued investigation or that certain investigation measures should be taken.

 

[nathan]

It's unusual for a famous person to be accused of a crime. When that happens is it surprising that an experienced prosecutor is assigned to the case?

 

[BenBurch]

You do realise that this was covered right back when the whole things started, and it's not an issue of them going to England and doing it, it's an issue of how English law states it has to be done. They can't do it in the Sweedish embassy, and if done outside they have to jump through a heap of hoops that iirc result in Scotland Yard having to do the investigations. What happened in Serbia has no reflection on what happens in England.

Oh, and another chestnut brought up as if those of us who were there at the start have forgotten, they couldn't do it by phone because the Sweedish courts had just blasted the prosecutions office for doing exactly that in a previous case.

Doesn't matter. Assange has people wrapped around his little finger and is probably happier than at any time in his life. And they can't see how they are being played.

 

[BenBurch]

It's unusual for a famous person to be accused of a crime. When that happens is it surprising that an experienced prosecutor is assigned to the case?

Yep. Sandusky wasn't prosecuted by Joe Nebbish.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Since you posted the claim I include below, you haven't posted a single sourced fact that back your statement:

In case you didn't notice, the thread is 30 pages long. When did you come in? Did you bother to bring yourself up to speed in the discussion?

You have done some handwaving to claim that it has been covered earlier. Well, I look forward to you showing the links. I'm not going back through the full thread to look for something that you claim support your position, that's your job.

My job to re-post what I already posted because you came to the thread late?

I hate going over old news so I've found some new links for you below.

And here are some additional facts that show why your post about 39 offices and 900 procecutors is totally irrelevant:

I think you are still confused about what I said.

How big is the department, how many people work under Ny and how common is it for her to take a minor case? I didn't argue with your information on the appeal process.

Why would having a personal contact not be routine?

Again, that was not the issue. The issue was, did Ny get involved because of this personal contact or was she simply assigned to the case, as would have happened with any case. You keep insisting it was just procedure and ignoring the irregularities in the procedure.

Source?
Exactly, and that a high-profile lawyer actively looks for a high-profile case is hardly unheard of or unique for the JA case...

Let's cut to the chase here. You say routine, following procedure, nothing unusual.

I say a political prosecution.

If anyone doubts politics are involved here:

And in a strange move, superfeminist Claes Borgström was called in to represent the plaintiffs - and this even before the preliminary investigation was complete?

Who is this Claes Borgström anyway? And who is paying his bills? These are questions often heard in the blogosphere.

It's fairly certain Anna Ardin and Sofia Wilén are not paying Claes Borgström's bills. He's much too expensive for them.

But who is he?

Claes Borgström shares a law firm with former minister of justice Thomas Bodström - the one who finagled with the White House to bust The Pirate Bay, the one who just the other day wrote an op-ed for the social democrat Aftonbladet where he called for even more expansive definitions of rape.

The rest of the blog has even more discussion of CB's fanatical political history.

This one's interesting: The Duckpond and Julian Assange. There is so much already-summarized material here, I don't know what to quote. In essence, it's a list of all the political influences in the JA case. The list is long and involves everyone from the accusers to the press. It gives some interesting insight into the overlap of gender issues in the case, well beyond the Wikileaks and potential rendition issues. It explains how CB got involved. I had forgotten AA's feminist role was so involved.

Complainant AA
Aspiring politician for the Social Democrats party in Sweden. She ran on the same party ticket in the September 2010 elections as the police woman who interrogated complainant SW.
Is active in the feminist movement in Sweden.
Was press secretary of the Brotherhood movement, a Christian faction of the Social Democrat party, like Thomas Bodström, who represents her together with politician-lawyer Claes Borgström.
Is a friend of Irmeli Krans, the police officer who interrogated complainant SW. They have been Facebook friends since 2009, and Krans’ Facebook page links to AA’s website. Krans is also active in the Social democrat political party.
Was a friend of politician-lawyer Claes Borgström, the lawyer for both complainants, Social Democrat politician, feminist, and law firm partner of Thomas Bodström.

One might get the impression that feminism has gone wild in Sweden. And that's coming from one who considers herself more liberated than average.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

And here is a source for that:

That does not say the director takes the case, it says something else:

The case is then referred back to the original public prosecution office, but to a different prosecutor.
Decisions made by a prosecution development centre can also be reviewed, and the matter will in this case be handled by the Office of the Prosecutor-General.

Neither of those courses of action say director personally takes on the case.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's unusual for a famous person to be accused of a crime. When that happens is it surprising that an experienced prosecutor is assigned to the case?

The issue here is with the meaning of "assigned". If Ny assigned herself, that doesn't seem to fit routine procedure here.

Sure, I can see a director saying, this needs to be handled right, I'll do it myself. Or, I'll do it so there are no questions later we gave JA special treatment.

But when you scratch the surface all kinds of additional political bile spills out.

 

[Mycroft]

What is the evidence you think supports the conclusion some ugly traumatic thing happened here, (other than picturing JA screwing anyone )? Was it the fact they had consensual sex then found out the guy was screwing two women at the same time?

Is it possible the women had consensual sex with JA then upon being dissatisfied with the affair, became angry after the fact?

The part where Assange ignores the wishes of the women and has condom-less sex with them. The one where he enters the woman in her sleep is pretty darn close to rape rape, and not just rapish.

Consensual sex without a condom is not sexual abuse.

It certainly is when using a condom is a condition of consent.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The part where Assange ignores the wishes of the women and has condom-less sex with them. The one where he enters the woman in her sleep is pretty darn close to rape rape, and not just rapish.

It certainly is when using a condom is a condition of consent.

If you believe the women's versions here. We keep coming back to this. It is equally possible they are distorting the facts.

I find the whole of the evidence leans toward the sex being consensual and the 'rape' part being an exaggeration and rationalization after the fact to justify going to the police because the women were disappointed with JA.

I have no issue with people thinking the whole of the evidence leans toward JA having been over-the-line pushy in bed.

I have yet to see any evidence that an adult woman not otherwise intoxicated would not wake up in time to say, "no". Ben claimed he'd seen some but he's yet to find a cite.

To add to my assessment here, the girls' stories would be a tad more believable if they had been more clear they tried to stop the condomless sex. Their versions are less credible when they admit the sex was consensual and then try to make part of the sex not consensual and in addition they weren't exactly clear just how they made it clear to JA they wanted to stop and JA didn't. The stories sound like the non-consent is being manufactured and exaggerated in each retelling.

 

[BenBurch]

...

I have yet to see any evidence that an adult woman not otherwise intoxicated would not wake up in time to say, "no". Ben claimed he'd seen some but he's yet to find a cite.

...

Sorry for the oversight.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4164846,00.html

http://www.wpxi.com/news/news/police-woman-raped-while-sleeping/nGZj4/

http://capitola.kionrightnow.com/news/crime/deputies-aptos-woman-raped-while-sleeping/456819

Many more at google.com

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Sorry for the oversight.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4164846,00.html

http://www.wpxi.com/news/news/police-woman-raped-while-sleeping/nGZj4/

http://capitola.kionrightnow.com/news/crime/deputies-aptos-woman-raped-while-sleeping/456819

Many more at google.com

I hate to be a stickler here but that's not very good evidence. It's not clear there was penetration in 2 of the cases, not clear when the women woke up, if they were intoxicated, and we don't have evidence the woman in JA's case was a particularly sound sleeper or intoxicated (that I recall). And with all news accounts, they are often wrong.

You said you had seen scientific evidence, and you mentioned Kinsey.

 

[BenBurch]

I hate to be a stickler here but that's not very good evidence. It's not clear there was penetration in 2 of the cases, not clear when the women woke up, if they were intoxicated, and we don't have evidence the woman in JA's case was a particularly sound sleeper or intoxicated (that I recall). And with all news accounts, they are often wrong.

You said you had seen scientific evidence, and you mentioned Kinsey.

Yes. What I would need to cite is something I physically reviewed while researching at the Kinsey Institute when I was doing sexworker's right's activism, and it's not online that I can find, so it might be quite some time before I can get to Bloomington and search it out again.

I can find you about 100 more arrest stories, however. Many with penetration.

I know you simply don't want to believe this, because it goes against your narrative about how this was an impossible crime, but it really does happen to real people all the time, and I hope you never sit on a jury for the sake of the victims.

 

[BenBurch]

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/17/us/2-temple-u-students-are-reported-raped.html

http://news.stv.tv/highlands-islands/234199-blood-obsessed-rapist-may-never-be-freed-warns-judge/

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1996/jan1996/gr_112034_1996.html

How many do you want? Takes some time to weed out the ones who were drinking...

 

[WildCat]

Apparently, Swedish police will go to other countries to interview even murder suspects...
http://translate.google.de/translat...d-i-serbien-1701566.aspx#.T-tO934j_Nw.twitter

Bingo! Ding ding ding ding.

Or should I say, nice smoking gun, Sil.?

They're questioning him while he is in custody and he is not fighting extradition.

Not even similar.

 

[Korren]

If you believe the women's versions here. We keep coming back to this. It is equally possible they are distorting the facts.

No, you don't have to believe the women's version here: all you have to believe is that that is the women's version: that's the sufficient condition for the police investigation to take place and the extradition request to be made.

 

[WildCat]

No, you don't have to believe the women's version here: all you have to believe is that that is the women's version: that's the sufficient condition for the police investigation to take place and the extradition request to be made.

Apparently SG is under the impression that the investigators must prove their case prior to investigating it.