6 ms·

> He still faces the more serious accusation of rape. This should have been in the headline.

by brodo 11y ago

notahacker 11y ago
I presume he is also "disappointed" his entourage has yet to accept the request the Swedish prosecution team claim they have submitted to interview him in the embassy... This seems significant too.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- lazyjones 11y ago
  There are many details regarding this claim and Sweden's (terrible) handling of the negotiations in the Guardian's article: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/11/julian-assange-case-progress-sweden-ecuador-negotiations-wikileaks http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/11/julian-assange-... Wikileaks published a cable from 2012 detailing Ecuador's invitation to question Assange in the embassy. What took Sweden so long?
  - rmc 11y ago
    Ecuador was requiring that Sweden agree to something that they legally cannot agree to. Update: > “As a condition to let Assange be heard they [Ecuador] have demanded a special agreement in which Sweden recognizes asylum status for Assange. But the government cannot make such a commitment because it is the Migration Board which decides whether or not a person has the right to asylum.” From: http://jackofkent.com/2015/08/assange-the-law-of-limitation-and-the-next-eight-days/ http://jackofkent.com/2015/08/assange-the-law-of-limitation-... and http://www.thelocal.se/20150807/sweden-hits-out-at-illegal-ecuador-demands http://www.thelocal.se/20150807/sweden-hits-out-at-illegal-e...
    - smcl 11y ago
      You've said that in another comment, but haven't stated what that exactly it was
      - rmc 11y ago
        I've updated the comment.
        smcl 11y ago
        Thanks, it does seem a slightly strange request
    - spiralpolitik 11y ago
      Not quite. Ecuador made the offer to Sweden to interview Assange in the embassy as early as 2012. The Swedish prosecutor did nothing until March this year when she was prompted to do something by higher ups due to the statute of limitations. Sweden then made the formal request in June which led to what you describe. If Sweden was serious about getting this sorted out then they could have done so years ago. Instead they've been unusually inflexible about the whole affair which makes the whole thing smell even more than it did at the beginning.
      - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        Swedes, inflexible? Incredible.
      - pionar 11y ago
        Or, one could argue that Ecuador changed the deal when Sweden finally took them up on the offer. (I don't have a dog in this fight, I just find the whole situation interesting.)
        spiralpolitik 11y ago
        I suspect that the terms and conditions didn't start getting thrashed out until Sweden made the formal request. At this level of play there is usually a lot of red tape to work through as two legal systems collide. Which is why you don't leave it to the last minute. (While I admire the work WikiLeaks has done, I find Assange to be an egotistical idiot but given the number of unusual events that have occurred during this whole affair one can't help being interested.)
Sone7 11y ago
The two women say they were not raped, and were railroaded by Swedish police. So why exactly should that have been the headline?
- obstacle1 11y ago
  >So why exactly should that have been the headline? Because the actual headline doesn't support or agree with the SJW agenda.
- hahainternet 11y ago
  [citation-needed]
  - Sone7 11y ago
    "On a point of law, the Swedish Supreme Court has decided Ny can continue to obstruct on the vital issue of the SMS messages. This will now go to the European Court of Human Rights. What Ny fears is that the SMS messages will destroy her case against Assange. One of the messages makes clear that one of the women did not want any charges brought against Assange, "but the police were keen on getting a hold on him". She was "shocked" when they arrested him because she only "wanted him to take [an HIV] test". She "did not want to accuse JA of anything" and "it was the police who made up the charges". (In a witness statement, she is quoted as saying that she had been "railroaded by police and others around her".) Neither woman claimed she had been raped. Indeed, both have denied they were raped and one of them has since tweeted, "I have not been raped." -from http://johnpilger.com/articles/assange-the-untold-story-of-an-epic-struggle-for-justice http://johnpilger.com/articles/assange-the-untold-story-of-a...
    - hahainternet 11y ago
      I can't find any primary sources for the witness statement quote. Do you have anything with direct citations? Obviously googling for this is almost impossible.
      - 11y ago
gadders 11y ago
Presumably he would also face some sanction by British authorities for breaching his bail conditions.

> He still faces the more serious accusation of rape. This should have been in the headline.

by brodo 11y ago

> He still faces the more serious accusation of rape. This should have been in the headline.

I presume he is also "disappointed" his entourage has yet to accept the request the Swedish prosecution team claim they have submitted to interview him in the embassy... This seems significant too.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
lazyjones 11y ago
There are many details regarding this claim and Sweden's (terrible) handling of the negotiations in the Guardian's article: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/11/julian-assange-case-progress-sweden-ecuador-negotiations-wikileaks http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/aug/11/julian-assange-... Wikileaks published a cable from 2012 detailing Ecuador's invitation to question Assange in the embassy. What took Sweden so long?
- rmc 11y ago
  Ecuador was requiring that Sweden agree to something that they legally cannot agree to. Update: > “As a condition to let Assange be heard they [Ecuador] have demanded a special agreement in which Sweden recognizes asylum status for Assange. But the government cannot make such a commitment because it is the Migration Board which decides whether or not a person has the right to asylum.” From: http://jackofkent.com/2015/08/assange-the-law-of-limitation-and-the-next-eight-days/ http://jackofkent.com/2015/08/assange-the-law-of-limitation-... and http://www.thelocal.se/20150807/sweden-hits-out-at-illegal-ecuador-demands http://www.thelocal.se/20150807/sweden-hits-out-at-illegal-e...
  - smcl 11y ago
    You've said that in another comment, but haven't stated what that exactly it was
    - rmc 11y ago
      I've updated the comment.
      - smcl 11y ago
        Thanks, it does seem a slightly strange request
  - spiralpolitik 11y ago
    Not quite. Ecuador made the offer to Sweden to interview Assange in the embassy as early as 2012. The Swedish prosecutor did nothing until March this year when she was prompted to do something by higher ups due to the statute of limitations. Sweden then made the formal request in June which led to what you describe. If Sweden was serious about getting this sorted out then they could have done so years ago. Instead they've been unusually inflexible about the whole affair which makes the whole thing smell even more than it did at the beginning.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      Swedes, inflexible? Incredible.
    - pionar 11y ago
      Or, one could argue that Ecuador changed the deal when Sweden finally took them up on the offer. (I don't have a dog in this fight, I just find the whole situation interesting.)
      - spiralpolitik 11y ago
        I suspect that the terms and conditions didn't start getting thrashed out until Sweden made the formal request. At this level of play there is usually a lot of red tape to work through as two legal systems collide. Which is why you don't leave it to the last minute. (While I admire the work WikiLeaks has done, I find Assange to be an egotistical idiot but given the number of unusual events that have occurred during this whole affair one can't help being interested.)

Sone7 11y ago

The two women say they were not raped, and were railroaded by Swedish police. So why exactly should that have been the headline?

obstacle1 11y ago
>So why exactly should that have been the headline? Because the actual headline doesn't support or agree with the SJW agenda.
hahainternet 11y ago
[citation-needed]
- Sone7 11y ago
  "On a point of law, the Swedish Supreme Court has decided Ny can continue to obstruct on the vital issue of the SMS messages. This will now go to the European Court of Human Rights. What Ny fears is that the SMS messages will destroy her case against Assange. One of the messages makes clear that one of the women did not want any charges brought against Assange, "but the police were keen on getting a hold on him". She was "shocked" when they arrested him because she only "wanted him to take [an HIV] test". She "did not want to accuse JA of anything" and "it was the police who made up the charges". (In a witness statement, she is quoted as saying that she had been "railroaded by police and others around her".) Neither woman claimed she had been raped. Indeed, both have denied they were raped and one of them has since tweeted, "I have not been raped." -from http://johnpilger.com/articles/assange-the-untold-story-of-an-epic-struggle-for-justice http://johnpilger.com/articles/assange-the-untold-story-of-a...
  - hahainternet 11y ago
    I can't find any primary sources for the witness statement quote. Do you have anything with direct citations? Obviously googling for this is almost impossible.
    - 11y ago

gadders 11y ago

Presumably he would also face some sanction by British authorities for breaching his bail conditions.