6 ms·

From what I understand he is accused of having sex without a condom. Girl objected to not using condom but not to having sex. Still, she went with it without be

by lmilcin 11y ago

From what I understand he is accused of having sex without a condom. Girl objected to not using condom but not to having sex. Still, she went with it without being forced physically. The argument is that it is a pretense to have him detained by US-controlled country to get him sent to US without proper judicial procedure. Basically, both UK and Sweden said it can't rule out that he is sent over to US if he's detained for this unrelated "crime".

alkonaut 11y ago
It was a bit more complicated than that. The allegations were of what would definitely be considered statutory rape under swedish law (and probably the laws of most similar countries including the US).
- gillianseed 11y ago
  I made a swedish to english translation of the actual allegation (as in the actual case file), the original can be found here, naturally it's in swedish: http://www.magasinetparagraf.se/bilden/forundersokningen-avs.. http://www.magasinetparagraf.se/bilden/forundersokningen-avs.... Here's my translation of the accusation (to the best of my ability): Sexual Assault They were sitting in bed talking and he took off her clothes. They had sex again and she realised that he had only put the condom over the tip of his penis, but she let it pass. They went to sleep and she awoke with the sensation of him entering her. She immediately asked 'Are you wearing anything?' and he replied 'You'. She told him 'You better not have HIV' and he replied 'Of course not'. She felt it was too late, he was already in her so she let him continue, she was too tired to tell him once more, she had been nagging him about using a condom all night. She never had unprotected sex before. He said he wanted to come inside her, he did not say when he would but he did. A lot leaked out of her afterwards. She told him 'What if I get pregnant?'. He answered that Sweden is a good place to have kids. She jokingly told him that if she became pregnant he would have to pay her student loans. On the train to Enköping he had told her that he had slept in Anna Ardins bed after a party. She asked if he had sex with Anna but he said Anna liked girls, that she was a lesbian. Now she knows that he did the same thing with Anna. She asked him about how many he has had sex with, he responded that he didn't keep count. He said that he had HIV tested himself 3 months earlier and that he had sex with a woman after that and that she was tested and not positive. She said sarcastic things to him in a joking tone, she believes that she was trying to de-dramatize what had happened, he in turn did not seem to care. When he was told the size of her student loans he said that if he was to pay her loans then she would have to give birth to a baby. They joked that the child would be named Afghanistan. He also said that he ought to keep abortion-pills with him that would in reality be sugar-pills. His phone rang and he had a meeting with Aftonbladet (swedish newspaper) on tuesday at 12. She explained that he would not make it to that meeting, so he pushed his whole schedule ahead by one hour. After that he rode a bicycle with her on the back down to the train station. She paid his ticket to Stockholm. Before they separated he told her to keep her phone on. She asked if he was going to call and he said he would. She took the bike home, showered and changed sheets. Since she didn't make it in time for work she called in sick and stayed home. She wanted to clean up and wash everything. There was semen on the sheets and she thought it was disgusting. She also went by the drugstore and bought 'dagenefterpiller' (abortion pills). After she had discussed with her friends she realized that she had been the victim of a crime. She went to Danderyd hospital and from there to Södersjukhuset (another hospital). There she was examined and also tested using a so called 'rape-kit'. edit: the old link s no longer working, here is a working one (again it's in swedish): http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/docs/memoria.pdf http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/docs/memoria.pdf
  - belorn 11y ago
    Abortion pills is not the correct translation of "dagenefterpiller". A literally translation from Swedish to English would be the day-after-pill, but the correct English term would be the morning-after pill, which has the technical name emergency postcoital contraception. Abortion pills is used to trigger an abortion, or to use the other common term, induced miscarriage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_abortion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_abortion
    - gillianseed 11y ago
      Thanks for the correction, I'm not really well-versed in that area (should have asked the missus!) Tack!
      - psykovsky 11y ago
        Why should you ask the missus, just because she's a female?
  - rmc 11y ago
    The UK High court judgement lays out the charges as well: 1. Unlawful coercion On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm. Assange, by using violence. forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting. 2. Sexual molestation On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge. 3. Sexual molestation On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body. 4. Rape On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state. It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange. who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity." http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
- lmilcin 11y ago
  The problem is that he cannot clear himself from rape allegations without risking being extradited to US. Neither Sweden nor UK can't guarantee that he isn't extradited. There is in fact good probability that he will be. Can you expect somebody to hand himself voluntarily to US "judicial" system when it is known that he has bleak chances of having proper case in US court, that US routinely ignores human rights in such cases?
  - rmc 11y ago
    > Neither Sweden nor UK can't guarantee that he isn't extradited. Can the US President give a guarantee that the Supreme Court will decide a case in a certain manner? Can the UK Prime Minister guarantee that a court case in the UK will end a certain way? Because that's what that means. Sweden is a country with laws, and an independent judiciary. Sweden has extradition treaty with the US (as do many countries). If the USA follows a procedure, then the Swedish courts must hand someone over (and vice versa). That's what the (Swedish) law says. You're asking the Swedish government to guarantee that the Swedish courts won't decide a particular case in a particular manner.
    - jellicle 11y ago
      This is entirely false, as extradition is a political process, not a judicial one. In the U.S., the Department of State decides whether someone will be extradited. In Sweden, it's the Government (effectively, the prime minister for a case like Assange's).
- rmc 11y ago
  Extradition treaties require that the act be a crime in both countries. Assanges lawyers argued in the UK courts that what he was wanted for wouldn't be a crime in the UK. They lost. The courts found that those acts would be illegal in the UK.
k-mcgrady 11y ago
You don't have to be forced physically for it to count as rape/sexual assault as far as I am aware. Not objecting is the same as saying no effectively. You need active positive consent to be safe. If I'm wrong please correct me but from what I've read this seems to be the way it works.
- cperciva 11y ago
  It depends on the country. The broad concept that consent is required is something that most countries agree upon, but the fine details of what exactly constitutes consent vary. In Canada, for example, it is illegal to kiss your sleeping wife, because (a) a kiss is a sexual act, (b) there is no de minimis exception to sexual assault, and (c) even if your wife explicitly consented in advance to being kissed while asleep, that consent ended when she fell asleep (in spite of that being the precise circumstance to which she wished to consent). (R v JA) As another example, a man who lies about using birth control is committing a sexual assault, while a woman who lies about using birth control is not; the supreme court took the view that the possibility of becoming a mother is harmful, while the possibility of becoming a father is not. (R. v. Hutchinson) As far as I'm aware, no other legal jurisdiction has followed Canada's example in either of these contexts.
  - mafribe 11y ago
    it is illegal to kiss your sleeping wife a man who lies about using birth control Aren't you a Canadian citizen? What are you doing to fight such insane laws?
    - cperciva 11y ago
      Yes, I am a Canadian. I'm not doing anything to actively fight these laws, but I do try to educate people when the opportunity arises; the first step to fixing bad law is to make people aware of the problems.
      - mafribe 11y ago
        Thank you. It might be interesting to reflect on the social conditions that must have prevailed for judges to believe that this is a defensible judgement. Legal decisions usually reflect the prevailing mores in the social milieu of judges (= upper middle class).
ascorbic 11y ago
You can scare quote "crime" all you want, but there is a procedure to establish the accusation would be a crime in the UK, which is required for the EAW. Assange took it all the way to the Supreme Court. He lost every time. I think they know better than you.
rmc 11y ago
He's accused of 4 acts. One is holding someone down and penetrating her. Another is having sex with someone who was asleep.
gadders 11y ago
No, he's accused of rape: >>One: “The allegation of rape would not be rape under English law” >>This is flatly untrue. The Assange legal team argued this twice before English courts, and twice the English courts ruled clearly that the allegation would also constitute rape under English law. http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-...

by lmilcin 11y ago

alkonaut 11y ago

It was a bit more complicated than that. The allegations were of what would definitely be considered statutory rape under swedish law (and probably the laws of most similar countries including the US).

gillianseed 11y ago
I made a swedish to english translation of the actual allegation (as in the actual case file), the original can be found here, naturally it's in swedish: http://www.magasinetparagraf.se/bilden/forundersokningen-avs.. http://www.magasinetparagraf.se/bilden/forundersokningen-avs.... Here's my translation of the accusation (to the best of my ability): Sexual Assault They were sitting in bed talking and he took off her clothes. They had sex again and she realised that he had only put the condom over the tip of his penis, but she let it pass. They went to sleep and she awoke with the sensation of him entering her. She immediately asked 'Are you wearing anything?' and he replied 'You'. She told him 'You better not have HIV' and he replied 'Of course not'. She felt it was too late, he was already in her so she let him continue, she was too tired to tell him once more, she had been nagging him about using a condom all night. She never had unprotected sex before. He said he wanted to come inside her, he did not say when he would but he did. A lot leaked out of her afterwards. She told him 'What if I get pregnant?'. He answered that Sweden is a good place to have kids. She jokingly told him that if she became pregnant he would have to pay her student loans. On the train to Enköping he had told her that he had slept in Anna Ardins bed after a party. She asked if he had sex with Anna but he said Anna liked girls, that she was a lesbian. Now she knows that he did the same thing with Anna. She asked him about how many he has had sex with, he responded that he didn't keep count. He said that he had HIV tested himself 3 months earlier and that he had sex with a woman after that and that she was tested and not positive. She said sarcastic things to him in a joking tone, she believes that she was trying to de-dramatize what had happened, he in turn did not seem to care. When he was told the size of her student loans he said that if he was to pay her loans then she would have to give birth to a baby. They joked that the child would be named Afghanistan. He also said that he ought to keep abortion-pills with him that would in reality be sugar-pills. His phone rang and he had a meeting with Aftonbladet (swedish newspaper) on tuesday at 12. She explained that he would not make it to that meeting, so he pushed his whole schedule ahead by one hour. After that he rode a bicycle with her on the back down to the train station. She paid his ticket to Stockholm. Before they separated he told her to keep her phone on. She asked if he was going to call and he said he would. She took the bike home, showered and changed sheets. Since she didn't make it in time for work she called in sick and stayed home. She wanted to clean up and wash everything. There was semen on the sheets and she thought it was disgusting. She also went by the drugstore and bought 'dagenefterpiller' (abortion pills). After she had discussed with her friends she realized that she had been the victim of a crime. She went to Danderyd hospital and from there to Södersjukhuset (another hospital). There she was examined and also tested using a so called 'rape-kit'. edit: the old link s no longer working, here is a working one (again it's in swedish): http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/docs/memoria.pdf http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/docs/memoria.pdf
- belorn 11y ago
  Abortion pills is not the correct translation of "dagenefterpiller". A literally translation from Swedish to English would be the day-after-pill, but the correct English term would be the morning-after pill, which has the technical name emergency postcoital contraception. Abortion pills is used to trigger an abortion, or to use the other common term, induced miscarriage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_contraception https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_abortion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_abortion
  - gillianseed 11y ago
    Thanks for the correction, I'm not really well-versed in that area (should have asked the missus!) Tack!
    - psykovsky 11y ago
      Why should you ask the missus, just because she's a female?
- rmc 11y ago
  The UK High court judgement lays out the charges as well: 1. Unlawful coercion On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm. Assange, by using violence. forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting. 2. Sexual molestation On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge. 3. Sexual molestation On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body. 4. Rape On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state. It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange. who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity." http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
lmilcin 11y ago
The problem is that he cannot clear himself from rape allegations without risking being extradited to US. Neither Sweden nor UK can't guarantee that he isn't extradited. There is in fact good probability that he will be. Can you expect somebody to hand himself voluntarily to US "judicial" system when it is known that he has bleak chances of having proper case in US court, that US routinely ignores human rights in such cases?
- rmc 11y ago
  > Neither Sweden nor UK can't guarantee that he isn't extradited. Can the US President give a guarantee that the Supreme Court will decide a case in a certain manner? Can the UK Prime Minister guarantee that a court case in the UK will end a certain way? Because that's what that means. Sweden is a country with laws, and an independent judiciary. Sweden has extradition treaty with the US (as do many countries). If the USA follows a procedure, then the Swedish courts must hand someone over (and vice versa). That's what the (Swedish) law says. You're asking the Swedish government to guarantee that the Swedish courts won't decide a particular case in a particular manner.
  - jellicle 11y ago
    This is entirely false, as extradition is a political process, not a judicial one. In the U.S., the Department of State decides whether someone will be extradited. In Sweden, it's the Government (effectively, the prime minister for a case like Assange's).
rmc 11y ago
Extradition treaties require that the act be a crime in both countries. Assanges lawyers argued in the UK courts that what he was wanted for wouldn't be a crime in the UK. They lost. The courts found that those acts would be illegal in the UK.

k-mcgrady 11y ago

You don't have to be forced physically for it to count as rape/sexual assault as far as I am aware. Not objecting is the same as saying no effectively. You need active positive consent to be safe. If I'm wrong please correct me but from what I've read this seems to be the way it works.

cperciva 11y ago
It depends on the country. The broad concept that consent is required is something that most countries agree upon, but the fine details of what exactly constitutes consent vary. In Canada, for example, it is illegal to kiss your sleeping wife, because (a) a kiss is a sexual act, (b) there is no de minimis exception to sexual assault, and (c) even if your wife explicitly consented in advance to being kissed while asleep, that consent ended when she fell asleep (in spite of that being the precise circumstance to which she wished to consent). (R v JA) As another example, a man who lies about using birth control is committing a sexual assault, while a woman who lies about using birth control is not; the supreme court took the view that the possibility of becoming a mother is harmful, while the possibility of becoming a father is not. (R. v. Hutchinson) As far as I'm aware, no other legal jurisdiction has followed Canada's example in either of these contexts.
- mafribe 11y ago
  it is illegal to kiss your sleeping wife a man who lies about using birth control Aren't you a Canadian citizen? What are you doing to fight such insane laws?
  - cperciva 11y ago
    Yes, I am a Canadian. I'm not doing anything to actively fight these laws, but I do try to educate people when the opportunity arises; the first step to fixing bad law is to make people aware of the problems.
    - mafribe 11y ago
      Thank you. It might be interesting to reflect on the social conditions that must have prevailed for judges to believe that this is a defensible judgement. Legal decisions usually reflect the prevailing mores in the social milieu of judges (= upper middle class).

ascorbic 11y ago

You can scare quote "crime" all you want, but there is a procedure to establish the accusation would be a crime in the UK, which is required for the EAW. Assange took it all the way to the Supreme Court. He lost every time. I think they know better than you.

rmc 11y ago

He's accused of 4 acts. One is holding someone down and penetrating her. Another is having sex with someone who was asleep.

gadders 11y ago

No, he's accused of rape: >>One: “The allegation of rape would not be rape under English law” >>This is flatly untrue. The Assange legal team argued this twice before English courts, and twice the English courts ruled clearly that the allegation would also constitute rape under English law. http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-...