4 ms·

i cannot figure out for the life of me why so many support him given what the women went through.

valarauca1 11y ago
For the same reason people still watch Woody Allen movies, listen to the music of Michael Jackson, and why Cosby Show reruns are still on TV. Talent is more important then morals.
- adekok 11y ago
  The phrase "innocent until proven guilty" seems appropriate here.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - adekok 11y ago
      No. I'm saying that the legal system (flawed as it is) is the best way we have to determine culpability. I am capable of making moral judgements on my friends, but it is much harder to make moral judgements about public figures. I don't know them, and I don't know their accusers. Either one, or both, might be lying. Until such time as I have evidence, I have to conclude that the accusations sound bad, but I have little reason to believe that they are true or false. From the public statements I've seen about the three cases mentioned, there seems to be significant flaws in the accusations. Simply believing one side over another "just cause" leads to lynchings and public panics.
ZenoArrow 11y ago
What did the women go through? I understand he's been charged with sexual assault, but from what I understand the Swedish laws about sexual assault are quite different from those elsewhere, seems to be somewhat more demanding about what is classed as consent, but I could be wrong on that.
- lucozade 11y ago
  When the extradition request went through the UK courts, it was made very clear that these would have been classed as sexual assault under UK law too (may even be rape, I don't recall exactly).
- TimJRobinson 11y ago
  Translated article here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11033244 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11033244
mike_hearn 11y ago
Because if you remember the details of when this case started it's not at all clear the women involved went through anything at all. The initial investigation was dropped by the prosecutor on the grounds that there was no chance of ever getting a conviction (e.g. one of the women tweeted about how she'd slept with Assange afterwards, not something you typically do if you've been raped). Assange hung around in Sweden for about a month, iirc, in case the police wanted to keep talking to him, but they said they were done and he could go. Then later on the stories started changing and the charges were mysteriously resurrected by a different prosecutor as political pressure on Wikileaks intensified. Suddenly they want to question him again, but by this time he's left Sweden (as they said he could). So not surprisingly he is now suspicious as hell.
- timwaagh 11y ago
  I read a pdf with the details once. can't find it now but i think it mentioned quite a bit of violence as well as um... inserting during one's sleep. I'm aware it's not a clear cut case because the victims don't hate him. but i'm sure the judges can determine his culpability better than I. I do however find his behavior disgusting.
  - mike_hearn 11y ago
    What's alleged is irrelevant. The case was dropped because the standard for criminal law is "beyond all reasonable doubt", at least in any rational or sane justice system. There is absolutely no way a case with this many holes in will ever - EVER - reach that standard of evidence unless they have something really unusual, like video evidence of what happened. The chance of getting a conviction in this case given the weaknesses of the claims, the he said/she said nature, and the contradictory behaviour of the alleged victims afterwards (which included attempting to remove evidence that contradicted their story by deleting tweets etc), all point towards a failed prosecution. Hence, why Assange is suspicious.
- rbobby 11y ago
  "charges were mysteriously resurrected by a different prosecutor" is incorrect. The women appealed the prosecutor's original decision, which is their right under Swedish law. A new prosecutor looked at the case and decided to reverse that decision. Nothing "mysterious"... just the normal workings of a justice system. One key part of what Assange is accused of is initiating sex with a person who was asleep. This is a crime in many countries (Sweden, Canada, UK) that have specific legislation around consent (the UK laws actually include "sleep" in their language about consent).

For the same reason people still watch Woody Allen movies, listen to the music of Michael Jackson, and why Cosby Show reruns are still on TV. Talent is more important then morals.

adekok 11y ago
The phrase "innocent until proven guilty" seems appropriate here.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
  - adekok 11y ago
    No. I'm saying that the legal system (flawed as it is) is the best way we have to determine culpability. I am capable of making moral judgements on my friends, but it is much harder to make moral judgements about public figures. I don't know them, and I don't know their accusers. Either one, or both, might be lying. Until such time as I have evidence, I have to conclude that the accusations sound bad, but I have little reason to believe that they are true or false. From the public statements I've seen about the three cases mentioned, there seems to be significant flaws in the accusations. Simply believing one side over another "just cause" leads to lynchings and public panics.

ZenoArrow 11y ago

What did the women go through? I understand he's been charged with sexual assault, but from what I understand the Swedish laws about sexual assault are quite different from those elsewhere, seems to be somewhat more demanding about what is classed as consent, but I could be wrong on that.

lucozade 11y ago
When the extradition request went through the UK courts, it was made very clear that these would have been classed as sexual assault under UK law too (may even be rape, I don't recall exactly).
TimJRobinson 11y ago
Translated article here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11033244 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11033244

mike_hearn 11y ago

Because if you remember the details of when this case started it's not at all clear the women involved went through anything at all. The initial investigation was dropped by the prosecutor on the grounds that there was no chance of ever getting a conviction (e.g. one of the women tweeted about how she'd slept with Assange afterwards, not something you typically do if you've been raped). Assange hung around in Sweden for about a month, iirc, in case the police wanted to keep talking to him, but they said they were done and he could go. Then later on the stories started changing and the charges were mysteriously resurrected by a different prosecutor as political pressure on Wikileaks intensified. Suddenly they want to question him again, but by this time he's left Sweden (as they said he could). So not surprisingly he is now suspicious as hell.

timwaagh 11y ago
I read a pdf with the details once. can't find it now but i think it mentioned quite a bit of violence as well as um... inserting during one's sleep. I'm aware it's not a clear cut case because the victims don't hate him. but i'm sure the judges can determine his culpability better than I. I do however find his behavior disgusting.
- mike_hearn 11y ago
  What's alleged is irrelevant. The case was dropped because the standard for criminal law is "beyond all reasonable doubt", at least in any rational or sane justice system. There is absolutely no way a case with this many holes in will ever - EVER - reach that standard of evidence unless they have something really unusual, like video evidence of what happened. The chance of getting a conviction in this case given the weaknesses of the claims, the he said/she said nature, and the contradictory behaviour of the alleged victims afterwards (which included attempting to remove evidence that contradicted their story by deleting tweets etc), all point towards a failed prosecution. Hence, why Assange is suspicious.
rbobby 11y ago
"charges were mysteriously resurrected by a different prosecutor" is incorrect. The women appealed the prosecutor's original decision, which is their right under Swedish law. A new prosecutor looked at the case and decided to reverse that decision. Nothing "mysterious"... just the normal workings of a justice system. One key part of what Assange is accused of is initiating sex with a person who was asleep. This is a crime in many countries (Sweden, Canada, UK) that have specific legislation around consent (the UK laws actually include "sleep" in their language about consent).