47 ms·

Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

538 points by choult 9y ago

geekpowa 9y ago
Stars align in strange ways. Chelsea Manning walked free from prison a couple of days ago. so will Assange honour promise made an Jan or will he weasel out of it.
dalbasal 9y ago
I suppose the ball is now in the US' court . Assange is a strange case, hes (Wikileaks is) really a journalist, and should be protected by laws and conventions protecting journalists. But he doesn't seem to identify too strongly with the press and presents more like a political dissident. I used to live in Melbourne (where wikileaks is sort of based). I stopped to sign a petition in his support. The petition mentioned Assange at the top of a long list of dissident left issues: release off-shore asylum seekers, withdraw from afgahnistan, free palestine, jail Blaire & Bush, stop Tasmanian timber harvests, overturn some ruling on Aboriginal land title... They were also inviting people to a dissident-socialist gathering later on that day. Now, I don't want to misrepresent the situatoin. This wasn't Wikileaks petitioning. It was a local activist group promoting their agendas, headlined by the Assange cause. That said, I do think it's kind of indicative of how present themselves & why the Assange debate is associated with the Manning or Snowden cases. They were US operatives "gone rogue." He wasn't. He was just a journalist receiving and diseminating leaked information. I in now way suggesting the protections of a free press system are mooted because he doesn't act or present recognizably as a journalist. But I do think that statements like the CIA Director's (Wikileaks is a hostile non-state actor) would be a lot harder to say if he presented as " Senior Editor of The Wikileaks Times."
- kevingadd 9y ago
  It's really regrettable that he's swung hard into manipulative conspiracy theories and attacks on people he disagrees with or politicians he dislikes. It's much harder to defend his current conduct as journalism, and WL's conduct with more recent leaks and hacked documents (like Macron's campaign) leaves a lot to be desired. In the past, I think you could make a strong argument that he should've been protected as a pseudo-journalist. I think if he had kept a level head and a more serious approach to these things it would at least be easier to defend him...
  - dalbasal 9y ago
    I don't think he swung. He and Wikileaks were politically fringe people all along, and they were rude and confrontational all along. All of that may make you dislike him/them, but it doesn't make him a criminal or an enemy (as the CIA director labels him).
    - pvg 9y ago
      I don't think anyone anywhere has seriously claimed he's a criminal because he was rude.
      - abritinthebay 9y ago
        Plus, most don't even say that: just that he's a dangerous propagandist. Which is pretty undeniable at this point. It's a shame, because the idea of WikiLeaks is decent... but it requires someone with no agenda to skew it. Assange isn't that guy.
  - snomad 9y ago
    Given that he was trapped in the same narrow space for 5+ years, he legitimately saw the US exercise unusual power (re-open investigation, pressure on Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal, etc) it is understandable that Wikileaks evolved as it did.
- mcv 9y ago
  When he still was just a journalist receiving and disseminating leaked information, I supported him. But after the Manning leaks, his power seems to have gone to his head, and he thought he could get away with anything. Journalists need to be protected from persecution for their work as journalism, but they don't get a free license to violate laws in completely unrelated cases. Rape is still rape. And his recent grandstanding trying to manipulate elections through mostly bluff, is really disgusting. I'm done with him. He doesn't stand for anything I support anymore.
  - dalbasal 9y ago
    I don't feel as strongly as you do about the man himself, but he isn't my political cup of tea either. But, I think his persecution relates entirely to his work as a journalist IMO, regardless of how he sees it himself. For that reason I support his freedom, even if I don't really care too much about his cause. The free press is important to me.
  - empath75 9y ago
    Actually, I think it wasn't the manning papers, it was being locked up in the Ecuadorian embassy, where the Russians were free to compromise him.
    - mcv 9y ago
      That happened later. He was already becoming somewhat unhinged well before that. Though living for years locked in an embassy probably hasn't done him much good either.
- seppin 9y ago
  > hes (Wikileaks is) really a journalist He (they) were at some point. Ask anyone that once worked with or volunteered for them back around 2010. They have long since become a wing of Russian intelligence and Assange's personal ego play. Sad really.
walkingolof 9y ago
Article in English, by a Swedish newspaper, about the why http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/swedish-prosecutor-drops-case-against-julian-assange/ http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/swedish-prosecutor-drops-ca...
timwaagh 9y ago
i dont like it when a rapist goes free. what i like less is his apologists. it is like with trump. if you have enough followers it is apparantly ok to mistreat women. i suppose 5 years of sitting in an ecuadoran embassy is no fun but he still escaped justice.
- Accacin 9y ago
  Alleged.
- rorykoehler 9y ago
  If i believed for one second that he committed rape there is no way i would defend him. This was an attempt to frame him due to his political journalism. To infer otherwise is to be malicious or incredibly naive. The people out to get him have a war machine behind them that has millions of deaths on their hands and somehow we're supposed to believe he would be treated fairly. If you believe that I've got a rich deceased uncle in Nigeria who wants to send you a few million.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- intoverflow2 9y ago
  So innocent until proven guilty isn't a thing anymore?
  - maxerickson 9y ago
    The reasonable usage of that has always included "in the eyes of the law". For example, if someone stabs you, there's no need to wait for a conviction to be upset about it. Some people may choose to get upset about things where they have less direct evidence but still believe they have sufficient evidence to come to a conclusion.
- sctb 9y ago
  Let's please not re-ignite this particular flamewar here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
jaboutboul 9y ago
All I can say is... WOW.
tray5 9y ago
Anyone know why they dropped it?
- tontonius 9y ago
  Director of Public Prosecutions, Marianne Ny, will hold a press conference at 12:00 CET. EDIT: Marianne Ny has been a subject of heavy criticism in Sweden for her handling of the Assange case (primarily for refusing to take his statement remotely, and claiming his fears for extradition to nothing more than conspiracy theories).
  - tray5 9y ago
    1 hour and 30 minutes from now for my lazy friends. Correction: 23 minutes from now, thanks svip
    - Svip 9y ago
      I think tontonius meant to say 12:00 CEST. It's summer time. So only 27 minutes from now.
- coldtea 9y ago
  Because it was a shady "character assassination" attempt without real standing in the first place... "*The woman of whom Mr. Assange is accused of the offence of "lesser rape" (a technical term in Swedish law) sent an SMS to a friend saying that she "did not want to accuse JA [of] anything" and "it was the police who made up the charges". The other woman tweeted in 2013 that she had never been raped. Both women’s testimonies say that they consented to the sex. A senior prosecutor already dismissed the ’rape’ accusation, saying that there were no grounds for accusing Mr. Assange on this basis. But a third prosecutor, lobbied by a politician who was running for attorney general, took over the investigation and resurrected the accusations against Mr. Assange.* [1]" That's what happens when you mess with the big powers (and of course it doesn't stop to the "politician who was running for attorney general" being a single bad apple). [1] https://justice4assange.com/ https://justice4assange.com/
tontonius 9y ago
According to his Swedish defence lawyer Per E Samuelson, Assange sent a text immediately after being noticed: "Seriously? Oh my god!" Question kind of still remains: how "free" is he now?
- sschueller 9y ago
  He still can't leave. The US is just going to kidnap him off the streets of London. Wouldn't be the first time.
  - mootothemax 9y ago
    >He still can't leave. The US is just going to kidnap him off the streets of London. Wouldn't be the first time. When was the last time the US kidnapped someone from London's streets?
    - scandox 9y ago
      I think you're being a tad literal there. The last case I remember was Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr who was kidnapped in Italy and brought to Egypt by the CIA in 2005. Italy's streets are not less intrinsically sacred than England's.
      - mootothemax 9y ago
        >I think you're being a tad literal there. The last case I remember was Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr who was kidnapped in Italy and brought to Egypt by the CIA in 2005. Italy's streets are not less intrinsically sacred than England's. I'm being literal on purpose. Look at the other replies to me; everyone talks about the CIA, yourself included, and ignores the fact that Italy was working hand-in-hand with the CIA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case That's very different, and it remains absolutely disgusting nonetheless.
        scandox 9y ago
beilabs 9y ago
I wonder if the UK taxpayer will be asking some questions about the justifications of policing the embassy? A pretty abysmal ROI. So, will the police presence now simply disappear?
- gusfoo 9y ago
  > So, will the police presence now simply disappear? No. He is wanted by the UK courts for failing to appear when on bail and so will be arrested if he leaves the embassy.
- matt4077 9y ago
  I really don't think ROI of individual cases should be a benchmark for the justice system (or, actually, a lot of the processes of democracy). There are endless reasons against, but just to state an obvious one: prosecution should not depend on the subject's ability to raise the costs for the government–both because it would create an incentive for such shenanigans, as well further tilting the justice system in favour of the rich.
- PickledJesus 9y ago
  I believe they stopped actively guarding it a few years ago, but presumably still monitor it.
- ptaipale 9y ago
  It's not about Assange. It's about rule of law. If they'd allow Assange to skip bail without effectively trying to detain him, they would create a precedent for others. In a system with rule of law, you can't make up different decisions, on the go, for people you happen to like or happen to dislike. Likely the police presence will not disappear, it might actually be intensified for a moment. He's now not wanted for extradition to Sweden; he's wanted for skipping bail.
hardlianotion 9y ago
Not sure where this leaves him. He is wanted by UK police for skipping bail. Presumably his US concerns still complicate his living arrangements for now.
- Darthy 9y ago
  Since he skipped bail for something which is now dropped, doesn't that move back up and nullify his wanted status as well? Or is there a process that he could now start, like "remove my wanted status because there is no point now", and that would then get decided by some organization?
  - hardlianotion 9y ago
    No. He gave his bonded word that he would give himself up, which is what the bail was about, then went back on it. That has consequences that are not automatically overlooked.
  - erikb 9y ago
    Well, in most countries there's a legal way to fight a legal action you consider incorrect. Fighting the legal action in another way is a new crime. It's like if someone owes you money, you cannot go and rob him. Even if your payment claim is considered valid robbing is illegal.
Sephr 9y ago
What about the secret US charges? I honestly don't understand how in our democracy there is even such a concept as "secret charges". It just sounds mind-bogglingly corrupt and out of place.
- idlewords 9y ago
  The closest thing to 'secret charges' is a secret indictment. This is a normal grand jury indictment, except its existence is not made public. "Prosecutors may request a secret indictment if they are concerned that someone may flee if he or she becomes aware that trial proceedings are being set in motion. It is also possible to ask for one to protect witnesses and other people involved with the case. " http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-secret-indictment.htm http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-secret-indictment.htm
  - CypressXM 9y ago
    An indictment itself means nothing. A Grand Jury either returns "True Bill" or "No Bill". In this case it would be a sealed "True Bill".
- easilyBored 9y ago
  They are not secret in that sense. Assange will know them when they are filed with the court. I have a feeling that there's enough material to put him on trial in USA and he has gone tit-tat with many three-letter agencies. They have a long memory and don't like challengers. Whether he gets convicted or not that's another thing.
- sschueller 9y ago
  There is a "kill list" [1] which is unbelievable on its own so I don't see this as much of a stretch. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix
  - skrebbel 9y ago
    Oh my god. If Trump would introduce something like that the entire internet would explode.
mootothemax 9y ago
Five years living in a single room, not able to leave or walk outside. Millions of pounds/dollars spent enforcing the same. A gigantic show of idiocy from both sides.
- tomp 9y ago
  Both sides? Makes complete sense from Assange, IMO. Better 5 years of prison than lifetime of torture.
- beagle3 9y ago
  Assange was basically, from his POV, defending his future freedom and poasibly his life, and still is. Very likely, he was right. How is Assange showing "idiocy" here? Also, from the perspective of a government, any government, 10 million is not even a rounding error of a rounding error in the defense budget. The intimidation might have stopped the forming of another Wikileaks or the rise of a 2nd assange. From this perspective, it's not idiocy - it's a good investment. Which is not to say I support this perspective - I don't. But it is important to understand motives rather than dismiss actions as idiotic.
  - rmc 9y ago
    > Assange was basically, from his POV, defending his future freedom and poasibly his life, and still is. And I suspect, his reputation/good name. If he'd gone to trial, and lost, he'd be called a "convicted rapist" for the rest of his life.
    - Avalyst 9y ago
      And so he should, after all at that point he would be a convicted rapist, no?
    - FireBeyond 9y ago
      True. How very noble of him. Did not want to see his reputation challenged, so refused to deal with consequences of his actions...
- 9y ago
cannonpr 9y ago
Sigh, about time, even for the US this was starting to drag, I wonder how much it had become about saving face ? Either for the US actors or the Swedish assets.
grabcocque 9y ago
The UK police will arrest him for obstruction of justice the moment he tries to leave the wardrobe he's hiding in. He'd probably be convicted, which carries a maximum sentence of [EDIT] 1 year in prison.
- wbhart 9y ago
  Can seeking asylum be used as a reason for bringing charges against someone? As far as I understand, exercising legal options cannot ever be interpreted as an illegal act. I think it's much more likely the UK will pick Assange up on behalf of the US, who have threatened to charge him.
  - grabcocque 9y ago
    IANAL, but fleeing from an arrest warrant is very definitely illegal in the UK.
    - Arnt 9y ago
      Illegal, yes, but is it still prosecutable if/after the arrest warrant has been dropped?
      - ascorbic 9y ago
        Yes. Failure to surrender is a separate offence. The Met has already said that he's still wanted in connection with that charge, but they'll be scaling back resources as it's a much less serious offence than rape.
    - robhu 9y ago
      Yes, he would be looking at 12 months in prison for that http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/bail/#a32 http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/bail/#a32 I'm not sure why the parent thinks he would be looking at 10 years?
  - azernik 9y ago
    Assange's bid for asylum does not give him immunity, under British law, from normal criminal charges (which is how they view the Swedish charges). Witness their promises to arrest Assange if he left the Ecuadorian embassy, regardless of his subsequent right to leave for Ecuador after being tried.
chx 9y ago
Is there a good article -- does even anyone know? -- on how did Wikileaks turn from a whistleblower into a mouthpiece of the Kremlin? Edit: some examples: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/10/should_the_press_consider_wikileaks_motives.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/... https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/03/03/was-wikileaks-low-hanging-fruit-for-news-organizations-to-act-as-kremlin-tools/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/03/...
- appleflaxen 9y ago
  i think assange is a victim of an effective smear campaign, probably organized by the CIA. He addresses this specific issue in his reddit AMA: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5n58sm/i_am_julian_assange_founder_of_wikileaks_ask_me/dcamzf6/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5n58sm/i_am_julian_as...
  - nebabyte 9y ago
    It's a fair point - I don't see how ad hominem attacks change the news. I guess that's why painting him as a russian sympathizer is "in" now. Makes it seem like the leaks even if authentic have some agenda. But still, parties and a gov that are threatened by their people looking in on them are just asking to be influenced by outside actors anyways, state or not. There's a reason transparency is key.
    - travmatt 9y ago
      >I guess that's why painting him as a russian sympathizer is "in" now. Makes it seem like the leaks even if authentic have some agenda You do realize that Assange signed a commercial tv deal with Russian state propaganda shortly after they threatened his life? This followed his threats to dump 'kompromat' on them (threats which never translated into action), and was later followed through by Assange censoring emails showing Russian banks involvement in Syria, and then later trying to paint the panama papers as a'CIA plot to discredit Putin.' To act like there isn't more than reasonable grounds on which to question Assanges biases is absurd and contrary to actual history.
usmaster 9y ago
Looks like the US officially going after him changed the circumstances.
r721 9y ago
David Allen Green‏, Law and policy commentator at @FT: >It is now easier for US to obtain Assange's extradition, if they (ever) wanted it. >Now only UK's consent required, not UK and Sweden. https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/865505649806856192 https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/86550564980685619...
- vidarh 9y ago
  That assessment, though, is based on an assumption that Swedish authorities would have complied with Swedish law. Part of Assanges fear of going to Sweden, whether justified or not, is presumably that Sweden had a history of letting Swedish police get away with blatantly violating Swedish law in support of US rendition. One could argue that this risk is not real in his case, but that is/was not relevant to whether or not it affected Assange's concern about which country seemed safer. Part of that fear was presumably based in the unusual persistence of the Swedish prosecutor, which implied something odd was going on. But that "something odd" might simply have been the prosecutors ambitions. In any case, UK courts have a history of taking extradition hearings very seriously, and there are ample opportunities to appeal both to UK courts, the ECHR, and (for the time being) to the ECJ, so it'd by no means be easy to get him from the UK direct.
  - matt4077 9y ago
    It doesn't have to be "the prosecutor's ambition"–it's just an unwillingness to let someone skip a trial just by fleeing, and the precedent it would set.
    - vidarh 9y ago
      That does not explain the highly unusual step of overruling another prosecutors decision that there was no case to answer, the illegal release of information to the press, nor the insistence not to interview him in the UK - something she kept up for four years before finally accepting that there is no legal basis preventing her from doing so (one of the excuses used), and finally interviewing him last year.
  - 9y ago
hosker4u 9y ago
Well - he will certainly be charged in the UK for breach of bail conditions if he steps out of that embassy.
belorn 9y ago
It should be noted that the prosecutor had three options: 1: Drop the charges. 2: Drop the arrest order but continue the investigation. To do so require a plan which would progress the investigation. 3: Charge Assange with rape, arguing that the evidence collected so far is enough for a case. And we got the first option, and thus we can conclude that the prosecutor don't have enough evidence to go to court and have no plans on how to further the investigation.
- rmc 9y ago
  Well if you cannot question the accused, it sort of limits what evidence you can collect...
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    No, that's not how it works. Showing up for a trial (and being represented) reduces your chances of a conviction. Sweden could have held a trial in absentia leading to a conviction if they believed they had a case to begin with. I always wondered why they did not do that.
    - Tomte 9y ago
      As it has been explained many times: no, they couldn't have. Trial in absentia is not a universal feature of justice systems. Germany, for example, doesn't have it. Neither has Sweden.
      - draugadrotten 9y ago
        Sweden most certainly has trial in absentia. It is up to the judge to decide if a case can be tried in the absense of the accused. Use google translate: http://lawline.se/answers/8630 http://lawline.se/answers/8630
        Tomte 9y ago
        Thank you, I had heard otherwise. Upvoted.
gregman1 9y ago
That is very very bad for Sweden because it proves that it was a low class political game so Sweden cannot be viewed as an independent state.
- matt4077 9y ago
  By that logic, every time an investigation is dropped is proof of a world-wide conspiracy.
- Numberwang 9y ago
  No it does not prove any such thing.
  - ageofwant 9y ago
    It was blindingly obvious that it was. Sweden's reputation took a huge hit because of this incident, and rightly so. They should have resolved the matter within 6 months. But it became such a hot potato that they were willing to sacrifice a man's live, and demonstrated to the world that principles and truth is inconsequential when the bully is sitting on your chest. The stench of this shit will cling to Sweden for generations.
    - youngtaff 9y ago
      Whether Swedens's reputation took a hit is a matter of opinion. If he was innocent why didn't he go back to Sweden and face the charges? All the stuff about the risk of US extraditing him in nonsense, they'd find it easier to do from the UK. All he did is use political asylum to avoid facing charges of a sexual assault.
      - jbmorgado 9y ago
        "All he did is use political asylum to avoid facing charges of a sexual assault." All they did was use sexual assault charges in order to force him into political asylum.
tontonius 9y ago
Press conference held by Director of Public Prosecutions, Marianne Ny, listen here: http://sverigesradio.se/sida/default.aspx?programid=4540 http://sverigesradio.se/sida/default.aspx?programid=4540 Held both in Swedish and English
contingencies 9y ago
Congratulations Julian! It's been a long time coming. On a related note, for those unaware, the asylum seekers who helped Snowden escape Hong Kong are currently under threat of being sent back to their own countries (which they left for various reasons including violence, torture and rape). Snowden has called for people to help them. 56% of the €100k goal has been raised so far. https://www.gofundme.com/snowdenguardians https://www.gofundme.com/snowdenguardians
- cjrp 9y ago
  Really? We're congratulating people who successfully skip bail now?
  - k__ 9y ago
    Didn't they setup fake accusations to destroy his reputation and make it easier to let the US imprison him? I thought this all was pretty obvious :/
    - pmelendez 9y ago
      "I thought this all was pretty obvious" I don't know... it doesn't look like fake accusations to me. It was more like things that were there and US used for an entirely political reason, but the claim still seemed legit. Also, it seems they dropped the charges due to a technicality: "Marianne Ny said his arrest warrant was being revoked as it was impossible to serve him notice of his alleged crimes"
    - iddqd 9y ago
      The rape victim is still holding on to these "fake" accusations even after 7 years. Strange eh?
      - k__ 9y ago
        Not really. I mean, when you get in so deep, you can't just back off anymore. Also, the background isn't know. Those victims could be agents or be threatened by some governments.
faragon 9y ago
That's arbitrary. And scary.
gadders 9y ago
I wonder if he will now pay back the people that put up bail for him: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange-supporters-ordered-forfeit-bail https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange...
throw2016 9y ago
The hypocrisy is stunning. Chinese or Russian governments harassing whistle blowers and leakers on this scale would be met by a frenzy of hysterical global condemnation by the media, human rights orgs, governments and citizens with their domestic courts systems summarily dismissed and pay a price in global reputation and even sanctions. Yet here we have Snowden and Assange being harassed brazenly for years with little respite under the cover of 'process'. If Snowden or Assange were Russians and defected to reveal global Russian surveillance they would be legends feted by every single media organization, university, NGO and government every single day. Why the double standards. It appears some are more intoxicated by the moral high ground than committed to it. Kangaroo courts, secret processes and harassment of whistle blowers and journalists are the tools of trade of despots whether used brazenly by unsophisticated tinpots or covered in process by governments and their courts in the UK, Sweden and the US. The end effect is the same. Simply covering inherently despotic and corrupt action with law and 'processes' does not make it lawful. But the big difference is chinese or russian citizens are under no illusions about their rulers while we see a dissonance in our citizens, media and organizations rushing to condemn others while completely failing to hold our governments accountable in any meaningful way. How have Swedish and UK citizens, the media and all human rights orgs from western europe experts at creating global frenzy against despots worldwide held their own governments to account, or helped Snowden or Assange in any meaningful way all these years? So ultimately there is no accountability. Only blatant self serving hypocrisy.
- Kiro 9y ago
  > How have Swedish and UK citizens, [...] helped Snowden or Assange in any meaningful way in all these years? Well, since I believe he's guilty of rape I have no interest in helping him.
  - throw2016 9y ago
    Since even the lady in question has not accused him of rape I wonder where your belief emanates from? You just can't believe someone is guilty, there has to be due process to decide guilt and the court itself has dropped charges. So there is no basis for your beliefs. Dissidents have traditionally faced trumped up charges. It's predictable that Assange would too. When charging dissidents the evidence and process has to be extraordinary and beyond reproach. But there are too many issues with the case and it makes the Swedish justice system look corrupt.
baldajan 9y ago
Reading the comments, many people seem unaware that Assange was indeed interviewed by Swedish prosecutors in London [1]. And before that, for years, Assange gave them that offer, but they refused time and time again (until they reluctantly accepted) [2]. As @belorn noted [3], the prosecutors had 3 options, and given it seems like they didn't have enough to make a case or a plan to continue the investigation, it had to be dropped. Also note, that the UN has sided with Assange. As the confinement in the Embassy is confinement. And he's been unjustly confined for a longer period than the maximum penalty for rape in Sweden [4]. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-sweden-assange-idUSKBN1320UV http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-sweden-assange-idU... [2] "He has offered to be questioned inside the embassy but the Swedish prosecutors only recently agreed." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/11/ecuador-to-let-sweden-interview-julian-assange-at-london-embassy/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/11/ecuador-to-let-sw... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14374161 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14374161 [4] https://www.rt.com/news/368746-un-ruling-free-assange/ https://www.rt.com/news/368746-un-ruling-free-assange/
- efraim 9y ago
  It's nice of him to offer to answer their questions where he chooses, everyone should have that choice. It wasn't Assange that refused to go back to Sweden, it was Sweden to refused to come to Assange.
  - cptskippy 9y ago
    I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. His refusal to cooperate with the investigation on Sweden's terms wasn't about the alleged crime itself. His concern was that because he was involved in a criminal investigation, he could be taken into custody by either British or Swedish authorities at which point he could be extradited to the US.
    - seppin 9y ago
      Actually, his 'conditions' for meeting with the Swedish government were absurd. Basically guaranteeing his freedom no matter what. That's not how criminal investigates are done.
panglott 9y ago
No mention of the alleged victims in the OP? Here's the NYTimes story: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/world/europe/julian-assange-sweden-rape.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/world/europe/julian-assan... 'Elisabeth Massi Fritz, who represents the woman who accused Mr. Assange of rape, issued a scathing response after the prosecutors abandoned the case. “A legal examination is very important for someone who has been raped, as is the possibility for redress,” she said. “In this case, there have been many turns and the wait has been very long. My client is shocked and no decision to shut the case down can get her to change her position that Assange raped her.”'
- jameslk 9y ago
  There is a mention of the plaintiff in the original article: > The plaintiff in the rape case was "shocked" by the decision, her lawyer said, and maintained her accusations against Mr Assange, Agence France-Presse reported.
pdimitar 9y ago
Maybe this is just a bait so he goes out and is easier to apprehend? The way the laws are, they can be bent to serve almost any agenda, given high enough payment to a skilled prosecutor.

538 points by choult 9y ago

Stars align in strange ways. Chelsea Manning walked free from prison a couple of days ago. so will Assange honour promise made an Jan or will he weasel out of it.

dalbasal 9y ago

I suppose the ball is now in the US' court . Assange is a strange case, hes (Wikileaks is) really a journalist, and should be protected by laws and conventions protecting journalists. But he doesn't seem to identify too strongly with the press and presents more like a political dissident. I used to live in Melbourne (where wikileaks is sort of based). I stopped to sign a petition in his support. The petition mentioned Assange at the top of a long list of dissident left issues: release off-shore asylum seekers, withdraw from afgahnistan, free palestine, jail Blaire & Bush, stop Tasmanian timber harvests, overturn some ruling on Aboriginal land title... They were also inviting people to a dissident-socialist gathering later on that day. Now, I don't want to misrepresent the situatoin. This wasn't Wikileaks petitioning. It was a local activist group promoting their agendas, headlined by the Assange cause. That said, I do think it's kind of indicative of how present themselves & why the Assange debate is associated with the Manning or Snowden cases. They were US operatives "gone rogue." He wasn't. He was just a journalist receiving and diseminating leaked information. I in now way suggesting the protections of a free press system are mooted because he doesn't act or present recognizably as a journalist. But I do think that statements like the CIA Director's (Wikileaks is a hostile non-state actor) would be a lot harder to say if he presented as " Senior Editor of The Wikileaks Times."

kevingadd 9y ago
It's really regrettable that he's swung hard into manipulative conspiracy theories and attacks on people he disagrees with or politicians he dislikes. It's much harder to defend his current conduct as journalism, and WL's conduct with more recent leaks and hacked documents (like Macron's campaign) leaves a lot to be desired. In the past, I think you could make a strong argument that he should've been protected as a pseudo-journalist. I think if he had kept a level head and a more serious approach to these things it would at least be easier to defend him...
- dalbasal 9y ago
  I don't think he swung. He and Wikileaks were politically fringe people all along, and they were rude and confrontational all along. All of that may make you dislike him/them, but it doesn't make him a criminal or an enemy (as the CIA director labels him).
  - pvg 9y ago
    I don't think anyone anywhere has seriously claimed he's a criminal because he was rude.
    - abritinthebay 9y ago
      Plus, most don't even say that: just that he's a dangerous propagandist. Which is pretty undeniable at this point. It's a shame, because the idea of WikiLeaks is decent... but it requires someone with no agenda to skew it. Assange isn't that guy.
- snomad 9y ago
  Given that he was trapped in the same narrow space for 5+ years, he legitimately saw the US exercise unusual power (re-open investigation, pressure on Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal, etc) it is understandable that Wikileaks evolved as it did.
mcv 9y ago
When he still was just a journalist receiving and disseminating leaked information, I supported him. But after the Manning leaks, his power seems to have gone to his head, and he thought he could get away with anything. Journalists need to be protected from persecution for their work as journalism, but they don't get a free license to violate laws in completely unrelated cases. Rape is still rape. And his recent grandstanding trying to manipulate elections through mostly bluff, is really disgusting. I'm done with him. He doesn't stand for anything I support anymore.
- dalbasal 9y ago
  I don't feel as strongly as you do about the man himself, but he isn't my political cup of tea either. But, I think his persecution relates entirely to his work as a journalist IMO, regardless of how he sees it himself. For that reason I support his freedom, even if I don't really care too much about his cause. The free press is important to me.
- empath75 9y ago
  Actually, I think it wasn't the manning papers, it was being locked up in the Ecuadorian embassy, where the Russians were free to compromise him.
  - mcv 9y ago
    That happened later. He was already becoming somewhat unhinged well before that. Though living for years locked in an embassy probably hasn't done him much good either.
seppin 9y ago
> hes (Wikileaks is) really a journalist He (they) were at some point. Ask anyone that once worked with or volunteered for them back around 2010. They have long since become a wing of Russian intelligence and Assange's personal ego play. Sad really.

walkingolof 9y ago

Article in English, by a Swedish newspaper, about the why http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/swedish-prosecutor-drops-case-against-julian-assange/ http://www.dn.se/nyheter/sverige/swedish-prosecutor-drops-ca...

timwaagh 9y ago

i dont like it when a rapist goes free. what i like less is his apologists. it is like with trump. if you have enough followers it is apparantly ok to mistreat women. i suppose 5 years of sitting in an ecuadoran embassy is no fun but he still escaped justice.

Accacin 9y ago
Alleged.
rorykoehler 9y ago
If i believed for one second that he committed rape there is no way i would defend him. This was an attempt to frame him due to his political journalism. To infer otherwise is to be malicious or incredibly naive. The people out to get him have a war machine behind them that has millions of deaths on their hands and somehow we're supposed to believe he would be treated fairly. If you believe that I've got a rich deceased uncle in Nigeria who wants to send you a few million.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
intoverflow2 9y ago
So innocent until proven guilty isn't a thing anymore?
- maxerickson 9y ago
  The reasonable usage of that has always included "in the eyes of the law". For example, if someone stabs you, there's no need to wait for a conviction to be upset about it. Some people may choose to get upset about things where they have less direct evidence but still believe they have sufficient evidence to come to a conclusion.
sctb 9y ago
Let's please not re-ignite this particular flamewar here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

jaboutboul 9y ago

All I can say is... WOW.

tray5 9y ago

Anyone know why they dropped it?

tontonius 9y ago
Director of Public Prosecutions, Marianne Ny, will hold a press conference at 12:00 CET. EDIT: Marianne Ny has been a subject of heavy criticism in Sweden for her handling of the Assange case (primarily for refusing to take his statement remotely, and claiming his fears for extradition to nothing more than conspiracy theories).
- tray5 9y ago
  1 hour and 30 minutes from now for my lazy friends. Correction: 23 minutes from now, thanks svip
  - Svip 9y ago
    I think tontonius meant to say 12:00 CEST. It's summer time. So only 27 minutes from now.
coldtea 9y ago
Because it was a shady "character assassination" attempt without real standing in the first place... "*The woman of whom Mr. Assange is accused of the offence of "lesser rape" (a technical term in Swedish law) sent an SMS to a friend saying that she "did not want to accuse JA [of] anything" and "it was the police who made up the charges". The other woman tweeted in 2013 that she had never been raped. Both women’s testimonies say that they consented to the sex. A senior prosecutor already dismissed the ’rape’ accusation, saying that there were no grounds for accusing Mr. Assange on this basis. But a third prosecutor, lobbied by a politician who was running for attorney general, took over the investigation and resurrected the accusations against Mr. Assange.* [1]" That's what happens when you mess with the big powers (and of course it doesn't stop to the "politician who was running for attorney general" being a single bad apple). [1] https://justice4assange.com/ https://justice4assange.com/

tontonius 9y ago

According to his Swedish defence lawyer Per E Samuelson, Assange sent a text immediately after being noticed: "Seriously? Oh my god!" Question kind of still remains: how "free" is he now?

sschueller 9y ago
He still can't leave. The US is just going to kidnap him off the streets of London. Wouldn't be the first time.
- mootothemax 9y ago
  >He still can't leave. The US is just going to kidnap him off the streets of London. Wouldn't be the first time. When was the last time the US kidnapped someone from London's streets?
  - scandox 9y ago
    I think you're being a tad literal there. The last case I remember was Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr who was kidnapped in Italy and brought to Egypt by the CIA in 2005. Italy's streets are not less intrinsically sacred than England's.
    - mootothemax 9y ago
      >I think you're being a tad literal there. The last case I remember was Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr who was kidnapped in Italy and brought to Egypt by the CIA in 2005. Italy's streets are not less intrinsically sacred than England's. I'm being literal on purpose. Look at the other replies to me; everyone talks about the CIA, yourself included, and ignores the fact that Italy was working hand-in-hand with the CIA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case That's very different, and it remains absolutely disgusting nonetheless.
      - scandox 9y ago

beilabs 9y ago

I wonder if the UK taxpayer will be asking some questions about the justifications of policing the embassy? A pretty abysmal ROI. So, will the police presence now simply disappear?

gusfoo 9y ago
> So, will the police presence now simply disappear? No. He is wanted by the UK courts for failing to appear when on bail and so will be arrested if he leaves the embassy.
matt4077 9y ago
I really don't think ROI of individual cases should be a benchmark for the justice system (or, actually, a lot of the processes of democracy). There are endless reasons against, but just to state an obvious one: prosecution should not depend on the subject's ability to raise the costs for the government–both because it would create an incentive for such shenanigans, as well further tilting the justice system in favour of the rich.
PickledJesus 9y ago
I believe they stopped actively guarding it a few years ago, but presumably still monitor it.
ptaipale 9y ago
It's not about Assange. It's about rule of law. If they'd allow Assange to skip bail without effectively trying to detain him, they would create a precedent for others. In a system with rule of law, you can't make up different decisions, on the go, for people you happen to like or happen to dislike. Likely the police presence will not disappear, it might actually be intensified for a moment. He's now not wanted for extradition to Sweden; he's wanted for skipping bail.

hardlianotion 9y ago

Not sure where this leaves him. He is wanted by UK police for skipping bail. Presumably his US concerns still complicate his living arrangements for now.

Darthy 9y ago
Since he skipped bail for something which is now dropped, doesn't that move back up and nullify his wanted status as well? Or is there a process that he could now start, like "remove my wanted status because there is no point now", and that would then get decided by some organization?
- hardlianotion 9y ago
  No. He gave his bonded word that he would give himself up, which is what the bail was about, then went back on it. That has consequences that are not automatically overlooked.
- erikb 9y ago
  Well, in most countries there's a legal way to fight a legal action you consider incorrect. Fighting the legal action in another way is a new crime. It's like if someone owes you money, you cannot go and rob him. Even if your payment claim is considered valid robbing is illegal.

Sephr 9y ago

What about the secret US charges? I honestly don't understand how in our democracy there is even such a concept as "secret charges". It just sounds mind-bogglingly corrupt and out of place.

idlewords 9y ago
The closest thing to 'secret charges' is a secret indictment. This is a normal grand jury indictment, except its existence is not made public. "Prosecutors may request a secret indictment if they are concerned that someone may flee if he or she becomes aware that trial proceedings are being set in motion. It is also possible to ask for one to protect witnesses and other people involved with the case. " http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-secret-indictment.htm http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-secret-indictment.htm
- CypressXM 9y ago
  An indictment itself means nothing. A Grand Jury either returns "True Bill" or "No Bill". In this case it would be a sealed "True Bill".
easilyBored 9y ago
They are not secret in that sense. Assange will know them when they are filed with the court. I have a feeling that there's enough material to put him on trial in USA and he has gone tit-tat with many three-letter agencies. They have a long memory and don't like challengers. Whether he gets convicted or not that's another thing.
sschueller 9y ago
There is a "kill list" [1] which is unbelievable on its own so I don't see this as much of a stretch. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix
- skrebbel 9y ago
  Oh my god. If Trump would introduce something like that the entire internet would explode.

mootothemax 9y ago

Five years living in a single room, not able to leave or walk outside. Millions of pounds/dollars spent enforcing the same. A gigantic show of idiocy from both sides.

tomp 9y ago
Both sides? Makes complete sense from Assange, IMO. Better 5 years of prison than lifetime of torture.
beagle3 9y ago
Assange was basically, from his POV, defending his future freedom and poasibly his life, and still is. Very likely, he was right. How is Assange showing "idiocy" here? Also, from the perspective of a government, any government, 10 million is not even a rounding error of a rounding error in the defense budget. The intimidation might have stopped the forming of another Wikileaks or the rise of a 2nd assange. From this perspective, it's not idiocy - it's a good investment. Which is not to say I support this perspective - I don't. But it is important to understand motives rather than dismiss actions as idiotic.
- rmc 9y ago
  > Assange was basically, from his POV, defending his future freedom and poasibly his life, and still is. And I suspect, his reputation/good name. If he'd gone to trial, and lost, he'd be called a "convicted rapist" for the rest of his life.
  - Avalyst 9y ago
    And so he should, after all at that point he would be a convicted rapist, no?
  - FireBeyond 9y ago
    True. How very noble of him. Did not want to see his reputation challenged, so refused to deal with consequences of his actions...
9y ago

cannonpr 9y ago

Sigh, about time, even for the US this was starting to drag, I wonder how much it had become about saving face ? Either for the US actors or the Swedish assets.

grabcocque 9y ago

The UK police will arrest him for obstruction of justice the moment he tries to leave the wardrobe he's hiding in. He'd probably be convicted, which carries a maximum sentence of [EDIT] 1 year in prison.

wbhart 9y ago
Can seeking asylum be used as a reason for bringing charges against someone? As far as I understand, exercising legal options cannot ever be interpreted as an illegal act. I think it's much more likely the UK will pick Assange up on behalf of the US, who have threatened to charge him.
- grabcocque 9y ago
  IANAL, but fleeing from an arrest warrant is very definitely illegal in the UK.
  - Arnt 9y ago
    Illegal, yes, but is it still prosecutable if/after the arrest warrant has been dropped?
    - ascorbic 9y ago
      Yes. Failure to surrender is a separate offence. The Met has already said that he's still wanted in connection with that charge, but they'll be scaling back resources as it's a much less serious offence than rape.
  - robhu 9y ago
    Yes, he would be looking at 12 months in prison for that http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/bail/#a32 http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/bail/#a32 I'm not sure why the parent thinks he would be looking at 10 years?
- azernik 9y ago
  Assange's bid for asylum does not give him immunity, under British law, from normal criminal charges (which is how they view the Swedish charges). Witness their promises to arrest Assange if he left the Ecuadorian embassy, regardless of his subsequent right to leave for Ecuador after being tried.

chx 9y ago

Is there a good article -- does even anyone know? -- on how did Wikileaks turn from a whistleblower into a mouthpiece of the Kremlin? Edit: some examples: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2016/10/should_the_press_consider_wikileaks_motives.html http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/... https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/03/03/was-wikileaks-low-hanging-fruit-for-news-organizations-to-act-as-kremlin-tools/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/03/...

appleflaxen 9y ago
i think assange is a victim of an effective smear campaign, probably organized by the CIA. He addresses this specific issue in his reddit AMA: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5n58sm/i_am_julian_assange_founder_of_wikileaks_ask_me/dcamzf6/ https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5n58sm/i_am_julian_as...
- nebabyte 9y ago
  It's a fair point - I don't see how ad hominem attacks change the news. I guess that's why painting him as a russian sympathizer is "in" now. Makes it seem like the leaks even if authentic have some agenda. But still, parties and a gov that are threatened by their people looking in on them are just asking to be influenced by outside actors anyways, state or not. There's a reason transparency is key.
  - travmatt 9y ago
    >I guess that's why painting him as a russian sympathizer is "in" now. Makes it seem like the leaks even if authentic have some agenda You do realize that Assange signed a commercial tv deal with Russian state propaganda shortly after they threatened his life? This followed his threats to dump 'kompromat' on them (threats which never translated into action), and was later followed through by Assange censoring emails showing Russian banks involvement in Syria, and then later trying to paint the panama papers as a'CIA plot to discredit Putin.' To act like there isn't more than reasonable grounds on which to question Assanges biases is absurd and contrary to actual history.

usmaster 9y ago

Looks like the US officially going after him changed the circumstances.

r721 9y ago

David Allen Green‏, Law and policy commentator at @FT: >It is now easier for US to obtain Assange's extradition, if they (ever) wanted it. >Now only UK's consent required, not UK and Sweden. https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/865505649806856192 https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/86550564980685619...

vidarh 9y ago
That assessment, though, is based on an assumption that Swedish authorities would have complied with Swedish law. Part of Assanges fear of going to Sweden, whether justified or not, is presumably that Sweden had a history of letting Swedish police get away with blatantly violating Swedish law in support of US rendition. One could argue that this risk is not real in his case, but that is/was not relevant to whether or not it affected Assange's concern about which country seemed safer. Part of that fear was presumably based in the unusual persistence of the Swedish prosecutor, which implied something odd was going on. But that "something odd" might simply have been the prosecutors ambitions. In any case, UK courts have a history of taking extradition hearings very seriously, and there are ample opportunities to appeal both to UK courts, the ECHR, and (for the time being) to the ECJ, so it'd by no means be easy to get him from the UK direct.
- matt4077 9y ago
  It doesn't have to be "the prosecutor's ambition"–it's just an unwillingness to let someone skip a trial just by fleeing, and the precedent it would set.
  - vidarh 9y ago
    That does not explain the highly unusual step of overruling another prosecutors decision that there was no case to answer, the illegal release of information to the press, nor the insistence not to interview him in the UK - something she kept up for four years before finally accepting that there is no legal basis preventing her from doing so (one of the excuses used), and finally interviewing him last year.
- 9y ago

hosker4u 9y ago

Well - he will certainly be charged in the UK for breach of bail conditions if he steps out of that embassy.

belorn 9y ago

It should be noted that the prosecutor had three options: 1: Drop the charges. 2: Drop the arrest order but continue the investigation. To do so require a plan which would progress the investigation. 3: Charge Assange with rape, arguing that the evidence collected so far is enough for a case. And we got the first option, and thus we can conclude that the prosecutor don't have enough evidence to go to court and have no plans on how to further the investigation.

rmc 9y ago
Well if you cannot question the accused, it sort of limits what evidence you can collect...
- jacquesm 9y ago
  No, that's not how it works. Showing up for a trial (and being represented) reduces your chances of a conviction. Sweden could have held a trial in absentia leading to a conviction if they believed they had a case to begin with. I always wondered why they did not do that.
  - Tomte 9y ago
    As it has been explained many times: no, they couldn't have. Trial in absentia is not a universal feature of justice systems. Germany, for example, doesn't have it. Neither has Sweden.
    - draugadrotten 9y ago
      Sweden most certainly has trial in absentia. It is up to the judge to decide if a case can be tried in the absense of the accused. Use google translate: http://lawline.se/answers/8630 http://lawline.se/answers/8630
      - Tomte 9y ago
        Thank you, I had heard otherwise. Upvoted.

gregman1 9y ago

That is very very bad for Sweden because it proves that it was a low class political game so Sweden cannot be viewed as an independent state.

matt4077 9y ago
By that logic, every time an investigation is dropped is proof of a world-wide conspiracy.
Numberwang 9y ago
No it does not prove any such thing.
- ageofwant 9y ago
  It was blindingly obvious that it was. Sweden's reputation took a huge hit because of this incident, and rightly so. They should have resolved the matter within 6 months. But it became such a hot potato that they were willing to sacrifice a man's live, and demonstrated to the world that principles and truth is inconsequential when the bully is sitting on your chest. The stench of this shit will cling to Sweden for generations.
  - youngtaff 9y ago
    Whether Swedens's reputation took a hit is a matter of opinion. If he was innocent why didn't he go back to Sweden and face the charges? All the stuff about the risk of US extraditing him in nonsense, they'd find it easier to do from the UK. All he did is use political asylum to avoid facing charges of a sexual assault.
    - jbmorgado 9y ago
      "All he did is use political asylum to avoid facing charges of a sexual assault." All they did was use sexual assault charges in order to force him into political asylum.

tontonius 9y ago

Press conference held by Director of Public Prosecutions, Marianne Ny, listen here: http://sverigesradio.se/sida/default.aspx?programid=4540 http://sverigesradio.se/sida/default.aspx?programid=4540 Held both in Swedish and English

contingencies 9y ago

Congratulations Julian! It's been a long time coming. On a related note, for those unaware, the asylum seekers who helped Snowden escape Hong Kong are currently under threat of being sent back to their own countries (which they left for various reasons including violence, torture and rape). Snowden has called for people to help them. 56% of the €100k goal has been raised so far. https://www.gofundme.com/snowdenguardians https://www.gofundme.com/snowdenguardians

cjrp 9y ago
Really? We're congratulating people who successfully skip bail now?
- k__ 9y ago
  Didn't they setup fake accusations to destroy his reputation and make it easier to let the US imprison him? I thought this all was pretty obvious :/
  - pmelendez 9y ago
    "I thought this all was pretty obvious" I don't know... it doesn't look like fake accusations to me. It was more like things that were there and US used for an entirely political reason, but the claim still seemed legit. Also, it seems they dropped the charges due to a technicality: "Marianne Ny said his arrest warrant was being revoked as it was impossible to serve him notice of his alleged crimes"
  - iddqd 9y ago
    The rape victim is still holding on to these "fake" accusations even after 7 years. Strange eh?
    - k__ 9y ago
      Not really. I mean, when you get in so deep, you can't just back off anymore. Also, the background isn't know. Those victims could be agents or be threatened by some governments.

faragon 9y ago

That's arbitrary. And scary.

gadders 9y ago

I wonder if he will now pay back the people that put up bail for him: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange-supporters-ordered-forfeit-bail https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange...

throw2016 9y ago

The hypocrisy is stunning. Chinese or Russian governments harassing whistle blowers and leakers on this scale would be met by a frenzy of hysterical global condemnation by the media, human rights orgs, governments and citizens with their domestic courts systems summarily dismissed and pay a price in global reputation and even sanctions. Yet here we have Snowden and Assange being harassed brazenly for years with little respite under the cover of 'process'. If Snowden or Assange were Russians and defected to reveal global Russian surveillance they would be legends feted by every single media organization, university, NGO and government every single day. Why the double standards. It appears some are more intoxicated by the moral high ground than committed to it. Kangaroo courts, secret processes and harassment of whistle blowers and journalists are the tools of trade of despots whether used brazenly by unsophisticated tinpots or covered in process by governments and their courts in the UK, Sweden and the US. The end effect is the same. Simply covering inherently despotic and corrupt action with law and 'processes' does not make it lawful. But the big difference is chinese or russian citizens are under no illusions about their rulers while we see a dissonance in our citizens, media and organizations rushing to condemn others while completely failing to hold our governments accountable in any meaningful way. How have Swedish and UK citizens, the media and all human rights orgs from western europe experts at creating global frenzy against despots worldwide held their own governments to account, or helped Snowden or Assange in any meaningful way all these years? So ultimately there is no accountability. Only blatant self serving hypocrisy.

Kiro 9y ago
> How have Swedish and UK citizens, [...] helped Snowden or Assange in any meaningful way in all these years? Well, since I believe he's guilty of rape I have no interest in helping him.
- throw2016 9y ago
  Since even the lady in question has not accused him of rape I wonder where your belief emanates from? You just can't believe someone is guilty, there has to be due process to decide guilt and the court itself has dropped charges. So there is no basis for your beliefs. Dissidents have traditionally faced trumped up charges. It's predictable that Assange would too. When charging dissidents the evidence and process has to be extraordinary and beyond reproach. But there are too many issues with the case and it makes the Swedish justice system look corrupt.

baldajan 9y ago

Reading the comments, many people seem unaware that Assange was indeed interviewed by Swedish prosecutors in London [1]. And before that, for years, Assange gave them that offer, but they refused time and time again (until they reluctantly accepted) [2]. As @belorn noted [3], the prosecutors had 3 options, and given it seems like they didn't have enough to make a case or a plan to continue the investigation, it had to be dropped. Also note, that the UN has sided with Assange. As the confinement in the Embassy is confinement. And he's been unjustly confined for a longer period than the maximum penalty for rape in Sweden [4]. [1] http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-sweden-assange-idUSKBN1320UV http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-sweden-assange-idU... [2] "He has offered to be questioned inside the embassy but the Swedish prosecutors only recently agreed." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/11/ecuador-to-let-sweden-interview-julian-assange-at-london-embassy/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/11/ecuador-to-let-sw... [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14374161 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14374161 [4] https://www.rt.com/news/368746-un-ruling-free-assange/ https://www.rt.com/news/368746-un-ruling-free-assange/

efraim 9y ago
It's nice of him to offer to answer their questions where he chooses, everyone should have that choice. It wasn't Assange that refused to go back to Sweden, it was Sweden to refused to come to Assange.
- cptskippy 9y ago
  I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. His refusal to cooperate with the investigation on Sweden's terms wasn't about the alleged crime itself. His concern was that because he was involved in a criminal investigation, he could be taken into custody by either British or Swedish authorities at which point he could be extradited to the US.
  - seppin 9y ago
    Actually, his 'conditions' for meeting with the Swedish government were absurd. Basically guaranteeing his freedom no matter what. That's not how criminal investigates are done.

panglott 9y ago

No mention of the alleged victims in the OP? Here's the NYTimes story: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/world/europe/julian-assange-sweden-rape.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/world/europe/julian-assan... 'Elisabeth Massi Fritz, who represents the woman who accused Mr. Assange of rape, issued a scathing response after the prosecutors abandoned the case. “A legal examination is very important for someone who has been raped, as is the possibility for redress,” she said. “In this case, there have been many turns and the wait has been very long. My client is shocked and no decision to shut the case down can get her to change her position that Assange raped her.”'

jameslk 9y ago
There is a mention of the plaintiff in the original article: > The plaintiff in the rape case was "shocked" by the decision, her lawyer said, and maintained her accusations against Mr Assange, Agence France-Presse reported.

pdimitar 9y ago

Maybe this is just a bait so he goes out and is easier to apprehend? The way the laws are, they can be bent to serve almost any agenda, given high enough payment to a skilled prosecutor.