Julian Assange: rapist or not?

[I Ratant]

It seems that Swedish rape law is a bit different. Perhaps this article will shed some light:

http://m.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/07/julian-assange-denied-bail?cat=media&type=article

The prosecuter has dismissed suggestions that the charges are politically motivated.

.
Doesn't mean the charges aren't.
Prosecutors are political animals.
High profile wins help their political futures.

 

[BenBurch]

Of course, ANY charges now will be CLAIMED to be politically-motivated whether they are or not.

And whatever the motivation of the charges themselves, it is not surprising that other governments are very willing to move along a warrant that would otherwise languish until the person presented himself at a border.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Of course, ANY charges now will be CLAIMED to be politically-motivated whether they are or not.

And whatever the motivation of the charges themselves, it is not surprising that other governments are very willing to move along a warrant that would otherwise languish until the person presented himself at a border.

Except that he presented himself at a police station. They didn't have a lot of options at that point.

 

[Puppycow]

It seems that Swedish rape law is a bit different. Perhaps this article will shed some light:

http://m.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/07/julian-assange-denied-bail?cat=media&type=article

The prosecuter has dismissed suggestions that the charges are politically motivated.

I posted that from my droid and it's a mobile link, but here is the desktop version.

I just want to extract the legal issues from the article, if I may:

Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish prosecutors, said the first involved complainant A, who said she was the victim of "unlawful coercion" on the night of 14 August in Stockholm. The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.

The second charge alleged Assange "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.

The third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity". The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on 17 August without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.
. . .
Unlike the UK, Swedish rape law is not based on consent but on the aforementioned concept of sexual integrity. There are a number of possible offences against this integrity. Those that involve both penetration and either physical force or a threat of some illegal act, such as violence, are classified as rape. So are assaults on people who are helpless at the time, either as a result of intoxication or severe mental disturbance. The degree of physical force involved need only be very small. It can be enough merely to move the victim's legs apart, according to Gunilla Berglund, at the Swedish ministry of justice. Rape carries a sentence of between two and six years; aggravated rape a sentence of four to 10 years.

Furthermore, this:

It gets better, with this article from Crikey
The women are named there, it seems 'Woman A' is Ardin and 'Woman B' is Wilén.

From a barrister who represented Assange, is a blatant example of character assassination against the victims. The purpose is to name them, shame them and discredit them. In the Guardian and other papers, they are only referred to as 'Woman A' and 'Woman B'.

Finally, putting aside the merits or the case, does anyone have any hard evidence that the charges are politically motivated?

 

[PhantomWolf]

having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on 17 August without a condom while she was asleep

If the facts support this allegation, then I suspect this would be considered rape in most western countries.

 

[BenBurch]

If the facts support this allegation, then I suspect this would be considered rape in most western countries.

Oh yes it would.

 

[little grey rabbit]

If the facts support this allegation, then I suspect this would be considered rape in most western countries.

According to the Guardian

The following day, the woman attended and helped facilitate the event, at which Miss W was also present. According to her police interview, Miss W accompanied the Australian and some male guests to lunch at which he flirted with her; afterwards the pair went to the cinema, where she told police she had performed oral sex on him. They slept together that night, using a condom, and again the following morning, when both parties appear to agree that a condom was not used, after which Assange left.

Its going to be an entertaining court case that is for sure.

 

[Travis]

She performed oral sex on him in the theater?

That's so tacky.

What's this about her being asleep then?

 

[Andrew Wiggin]

He wasn't ordered to submit to STD testing. He was asked, and he refused. That doesn't make him a rapist*, true, but it hardly makes him an upstanding member of society, either.

From what I understand, she wasn't able to get in touch with him, as he had his cell phone turned off. She asked around to see if anyone else knew where he could be found or contacted, and in the process found out she wasn't the only one he'd had relations with. By the time she got in touch with him, it was the weekend and no clinics were open. Not something he did deliberately to be an ass. Just bad timing. In the meantime, she and the other woman had gone to the police, though they say it was not with the intent of getting him in trouble... (I find that dubious. Going to the police and making a statement is not a good way to avoid getting people into trouble)

 

[Puppycow]

What's this about her being asleep then?

That's what the charge says. Maybe she's a heavy sleeper, or maybe she was really intoxicated. Or maybe she woke up at some point after he began to initiate sex.

 

[lionking]

No he's not a rapist. But with Pilger and Chomsky supporting him, I may change my mind.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Do you have a link what Holder said about copyright infringement? Because thati s, well, the most ridiculous chare I heard thus far. According to US law, documents produced by the US government are not copyrighted!

No, sorry if I wasn't clear. That's not what I meant. Holder just said he was working on something to charge Assange with. I was using copyright as an example of the only law I could think of that would apply to someone outside the US who was given the material. I made it up. I wasn't saying Holder made the charge.

Receiving stolen property?

How does Assange differ from the NY Times? Proving one is news and one isn't would be darn hard given the blogosphere is considered a news source by many people.

You can't just make up a crime after the fact when someone does something that simply embarrasses the government. And I've not seen the evidence yet that anyone has been put in danger from the leaks.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You're right. We should never believe sluts who claim they were raped.

I take it you haven't read anything about this case.

Neither of these women ever said they were raped by Assange.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

This is why prosecutors have the power to decide who not to prosecute.

No. This is what the Constitution says about freedom of the press.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

....
This circus act is annoying.

Fred Phelps is way more annoying. Yet we tolerate that nonsense because no one in a position of power cares that much.

The point is, people should not be going to jail on trumped up charges because the government is annoyed. Either there is a law the guy broke, or there isn't. He didn't steal the documents as far as we know. And news organizations are not being prosecuted for publishing the same material.

Where is the evidence of people's lives being endangered?

You really don't care that people in the government can put people in jail on trumped up charges because said persons are political liabilities? I find that way more troublesome than any of the leaks I'm aware of so far.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The more I hear the more I am sure that this has been totally set up, by Assange and his supporters. They couldn't have bought this sort of publicity.

Are you joking, or did you miss the part about the prosecutor with political ambitions reopening a case that was dropped because there was no there there? And no bail on a petty charge where the suspect turned himself in? Come on.

 

[Here_to_learn]

.
Doesn't mean the charges aren't.
Prosecutors are political animals.
High profile wins help their political futures.

So how many swedish politicians are basing their political career on beeing former prosecutors? I assume you base your statement on experience of Swedish politics, and not of how it works in any other other countries.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...

The prosecuter has dismissed suggestions that the charges are politically motivated.

That's a joke.


So how is the guy responsible if he uses a condom that breaks? Did I miss that in the link?


And why would a somewhat famous guy, good looking, need to force himself on anyone? Both of these ladies said they only wanted Assange to get an STD test. Chances are they were disappointed to find out he wasn't in love. No charges of, "Hey this guy forced himself on me", were ever made as far as I can see.

The first prosecutor said there was not enough evidence for any charges. It is totally a trial by media second guessing, filling in the blanks (stuff they didn't know) with stuff that sells more news, and being willing partners to the character assassination the US government is waging by not doing their job as investigative journalists.

 

[Here_to_learn]

It is totally a trial by media second guessing, filling in the blanks (stuff they didn't know) with stuff that sells more news, and being willing partners to the character assassination the US government is waging by not doing their job as investigative journalists.

As opposed to trial by Internet, basing opinion on rumors and blogposts based on other rumors.

David Allen Green (Jack of Kent) did tweet this about 13 hours ago:

We have the arrest warrant and the charges as read out in court. Beyond that there is little to no info to base such strong views #Assange
about 13 hours ago via Twitter for BlackBerry®

#Assange Am astonished just how many people have strong and detailed views at to law and facts based on *no* sources whatsoever.
about 13 hours ago via Twitter for BlackBerry®

He has also linked to several blog posts, for example this one from ENEMIES OF REASON

None of that, though, excuses Assange if he's guilty of what he's accused of. But at the moment it is "if". People's private lives are different from the actions of governments; individuals have the right to privacy and an expectation that these things should not be pored over in public. So if there is an investigation, a crime, accusations and so on, perhaps this is one instance where we don't have the right to know everything. We must wait and see what happens, and leave any assumptions aside.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So how many swedish politicians are basing their political career on beeing former prosecutors? I assume you base your statement on experience of Swedish politics, and not of how it works in any other other countries.

It is extremely common here for prosecutors to have political ambitions. The majority of Congresspersons and Senators in this country are lawyers by profession. They weren't all defense lawyers.

The Congressmen in my district, though a police chief and not a prosecutor, cites his claim to fame was catching the Green River Serial Murderer. (And truthfully, he did nothing to earn that claim and actually failed to stop the murderer for may years.)

Gary Ridgway^WP

The most notable members of the task force were Robert Keppel and Dave Reichert, who periodically interviewed incarcerated serial killer Ted Bundy from 1984. Their interviews with Bundy were of little help in the Green River investigations but elicited confessions from Bundy on unsolved cases. Also contributing was John E. Douglas, who has since written much on the subject of the Green River Killer.
Ridgway was arrested in 1982 and 2001 on charges related to prostitution. He became a suspect in 1983 in the Green River killings. In 1984, Ridgway took and passed a polygraph test, and on April 7, 1987, police took hair and saliva samples from Ridgway.

Dave Reichert^WP

Reichert was a leading member of the Green River Task Force, which was formed to track down the so-called "Green River Killer." DNA evidence eventually identified Gary Leon Ridgway as the Green River Killer in 2001.[6] Ridgway was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the Green River murders.[7]

Reichert refers to this qualification in every campaign.

Thomas E. Dewey^WP was another politician who launched his campaign on his fame as a prosecutor.

Dewey rocketed to fame in 1935, when he was appointed special prosecutor in New York County

And even if not having political ambitions, lots of prosecutors desire the fame of prosecuting famous cases.