3 ms·

Maybe you're not clear about the actual background. There are no charges against him in Sweden. He was ordered to be questioned related to his vile cheating tri

Maybe you're not clear about the actual background. There are no charges against him in Sweden. He was ordered to be questioned related to his vile cheating trick that isn't even recognized as rape outside of Sweden. I think the guy could be called one of the biggest assholes. But let's not add to be pile of rubbish and defamation that deliberatley has been amassed regarding this case.

gsnedders 9y ago
> He was ordered to be questioned related to his vile cheating trick that isn't even recognized as rape outside of Sweden. Um, the Supreme Court's view was that under English law what he was accused of would be rape.
rbobby 9y ago
> isn't even recognized as rape outside of Sweden. Having sex with an unconscious person, even someone asleep, is against the law in some jurisdictions. Really depends on how they define consent (in England's case sleep is "black-letter" lack of consent). Specific to England: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-3-consent https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offenc...
- bonesss 9y ago
  > Having sex with an unconscious person, even someone asleep, is against the law The allegation is not that he had intercourse with someone unconscious. The allegation is that he re-initiated sexual relations with a coitus partner who was initially asleep and who then woke up, asked about a condom, then later regretted not stopping because of the lack of a condom. There is a distinct legal difference between non-consensual intercourse with someone drugged or passed out and engaging in petting of a naked person who did the naked-nasty with you a few hours ago to see if they're keen on round 2...
  - rbobby 9y ago
    > who was initially asleep And that right there makes it non-consensual. The law (in England and other jursidictions) specifically mention asleep (amongst other conditions) that render a person unable to consent to sex. Once Assange stuck his penis into a sleeping woman's vagina means he's guilty.

gsnedders 9y ago

> He was ordered to be questioned related to his vile cheating trick that isn't even recognized as rape outside of Sweden. Um, the Supreme Court's view was that under English law what he was accused of would be rape.

rbobby 9y ago

> isn't even recognized as rape outside of Sweden. Having sex with an unconscious person, even someone asleep, is against the law in some jurisdictions. Really depends on how they define consent (in England's case sleep is "black-letter" lack of consent). Specific to England: https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offences-chapter-3-consent https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/rape-and-sexual-offenc...

bonesss 9y ago
> Having sex with an unconscious person, even someone asleep, is against the law The allegation is not that he had intercourse with someone unconscious. The allegation is that he re-initiated sexual relations with a coitus partner who was initially asleep and who then woke up, asked about a condom, then later regretted not stopping because of the lack of a condom. There is a distinct legal difference between non-consensual intercourse with someone drugged or passed out and engaging in petting of a naked person who did the naked-nasty with you a few hours ago to see if they're keen on round 2...
- rbobby 9y ago
  > who was initially asleep And that right there makes it non-consensual. The law (in England and other jursidictions) specifically mention asleep (amongst other conditions) that render a person unable to consent to sex. Once Assange stuck his penis into a sleeping woman's vagina means he's guilty.