9 ms·

Sweden Seeks to Detain Assange

74 points by CaptainZapp 16y ago

vibragiel 16y ago
For those not registered at nytimes.com, here's a bookmarklet to bypass the login page: http://nytimes.blogspace.com/genlink http://nytimes.blogspace.com/genlink
- CaptainZapp 16y ago
  Thanks, I always forget that the grand old lady requires registration.
- mrcharles 16y ago
  Another easy trick is to google the title of the article -- it is almost the first google hit, and clicking a NYT link from google bypasses their login system.
eof 16y ago
Nothing against the OP since s/he just copied the title from the article; but that title is really misleading. A prosecutor requesting a court order to detain someone for questioning simply does not mean 'Sweden' proper wants to detain Assange.
- jrwoodruff 16y ago
  It's an official of the Swedish government, acting officially on behalf of the country. Maybe it's an American thing, but this is pretty standard headline writing.
  - eof 16y ago
    I was under the impression that this was not a mere formality; but rather a request from a lawyer that may or may not be granted. Reading roel_v's comment though I may be mistaken.
  - henrikschroder 16y ago
    Over here, such headlines are usually reserved for statements from various ministers of the government. The way I read that headline is as if our minister of justice made a statement about Assange, and it would be a big surprise to me if she had done that. So from this perspective it's misleading.
  - danik 16y ago
    It doesn't work like that in the USA either, does it? If a official of the government, say a judge in a city, does something do you have headlines saying USA did it?
    - michael_dorfman 16y ago
      Sure it does, if regards foreign citizens. "The US demands extradition of so-and-so", for example, would be a typical headline in many places.
      - danik 16y ago
        Here we reserve that for when the president, secretary of state or someone relevant in foreign affairs says or does something, not a prosecutor.
- roel_v 16y ago
  Could you clarify: Are you saying that a country cannot have actions of its own and cannot detain anyone? In that case, yes obviously, but it's common use and nobody will misunderstand. I don't see how it's misleading, what do you feel people are lead to think? Or are you saying that just because the prosecutor has requested it, doesn't mean that it will be granted or that he's wanted at all? In that case, keep in mind that in several countries the request is a mere formality and is (save for exceptional cases) always granted. If that is the case in Sweden, as I suspect, it's not that much of a stretch to write that he's already wanted. (to contract with the US/other common law penal systems and the way people see it happen on Law & Order, those systems are accusatory, meaning that the public prosecutor builds his case against the defendant who get to defend himself, with the whole process being watched by a judge. Most Western European system are inquisitory, meaning that the prosecutor looks for the truth and is not antagonistic against the defendant from the start. This whole process is also supervised by a judge, but that judge is much less strict and will assume more the role of a 'backstop' for egregious violations of procedure. This judge is this type of system is much looser in granting requests for warrants, searches etc. to the point where they are routinely granted, under the assumption that the prosecutor has already thought the request through and wouldn't request it if it weren't necessary.). Then again maybe someone who actually knows something about Swedish criminal procedure could fill me in here rather than me reasoning from generalities ;)
  - eof 16y ago
    I see I might have just been mistaken about the process. I was lead to believe, from reading the title, that there was some court action that ruled that Assange be detained. After reading the article I was more under the impression it was just a request for a subpoena from a lawyer. After reading your comment I am under the impression that they are basically the same thing.
    - roel_v 16y ago
      As I understand, there is a request from the public prosecutor of a Swedish city/district for him to brought before the prosecutor for interrogation. This prosecutor is a government official, prosecuting suspected criminals in name of the state. If by 'a lawyer' you mean someone who works as legal counsel for a private party, then no, they are not the same. What I meant was that a 'subpoena' (to use the in this context more or less equivalent concept in common law system) from a public prosecutor in many Western European countries is usually granted, and as such the headline is not as premature as it may seem. Anyway, if the confusion is over the word detain then yes I agree that that may not be quite what is happening; I hadn't looked at it that way. It's not like they're going to throw him in jail (for a longer time than it takes to arrange the interrogation), it's just that they want him to be picked up by the police to be interrogated in order to determine the merits of the case.
gizmomagico 16y ago
Yeah I bet Assange feels like he's been able to move way too freely until now, so he decided to start raping women! He'll probably tour all Western countries, and rape a couple of women in each to make things a little more exciting. Edit: Wow, what was fast! You really believe this is not bullshit? Edit2: Or are we just not allowed to discuss reality on HN? Rainbows & Unicorns are much nicer.
- crocowhile 16y ago
  I don't see why you are being downvoted. The allegation of rapes, both filed on the same day, sound like the cheapest way to get an international mandate for him indeed.
  - roel_v 16y ago
    The question is, is there any factual proof that the claim is a fabrication, or is it all a big conspiracy theory? If Assange commits a crime, is it always made up because he ticked off the government? Merely claiming it's a trumped up charge for the sole reason that he's the Wikileaks guy is not a strong argument. (it's not a valid argument at all, I'd say).
    - Alex3917 16y ago
      The last two biggest enemies of the U.S. government had wars started against them based on made up evidence. How many more times does this have to happen before the default position is assuming that the charges are trumped up?
    - noarchy 16y ago
      "The question is, is there any factual proof that the claim is a fabrication, or is it all a big conspiracy theory?" That's not how most legal systems work. The prosecution is the one with the burden of proof. That said, for all I know, Assange may indeed be guilty. Perhaps we'll find out.
      - roel_v 16y ago
sneak 16y ago
Julian Massage
henrikschroder 16y ago
Update: The request was granted, and an arrest warrant is issued for him. According to the newspapers this might be expanded to an international arrest warrant. Probably the best news source in English for this: http://www.thelocal.se/30286/20101118/ http://www.thelocal.se/30286/20101118/
dsplittgerber 16y ago
For context: Press release from Assange's lawyer: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt Quote: "Despite his right to silence, my client has repeatedly offered to be interviewed, first in Sweden before he left, and then subsequently in the UK (including at the Swedish Embassy), either in person or by telephone, videoconferencing or email and he has also offered to make a sworn statement on affidavit. All of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate. Pursuing a warrant in this circumstance is entirely unnecessary and disproportionate."
- grandalf 16y ago
  It would seem to have been appropriate for the NY Times / AP to include mention of this release in its coverage.
  - jrockway 16y ago
    Yeah. And I really don't see an agenda on the NY Times' side, as Wikileaks' work has allowed them to write a lot of great articles.
    - borism 16y ago
      it's just a news article pulled off Associated Press wire for god's sake...
      - grandalf 16y ago
        True, however the title was likely chosen by the NY Times editors -- you'd be surprised at how much editorial whim goes into the choice of how to title an article, and how much bias is reflected in the titles. Also, that the title clearly reads like "They found enough evidence to put Assange behind bars" rather than what actually happens suggests that the AP is either biased against Assange or simply engaging in the worst sort of tabloid journalism.
charlesattlan 16y ago
This article stinks. Someone seeking means nothing. Juilan's official response: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt The main point is that it is against EU legislation for arrest warrants to be made public. Every attempt at contacting the wanted person has to be made. This suggests shenanigans at some level: bad journalism from nytimes/the swedish tabloid pushing the agenda of the Pentagon, or some form of corruption/incompetence of government officials in Sweden.
- roel_v 16y ago
  "The main point is that it is against EU legislation for arrest warrants to be made public" That doesn't even make sense. Even if I interpret this as 'most criminal procedure laws across Europe prohibit...', it's still not true. "... bad journalism from nytimes/the swedish tabloid pushing the agenda of the Pentagon, or some form of corruption/incompetence of government officials in Sweden." This is claimed various times in this thread and on other sites, but I have yet to see any proof, even if it's in the form of circumstances that point in this direction, or other small hints in that direction. The only reason people believe this seems to be cognitive dissonance - 'I like the idea of Wikileaks, so the guy that runs it must be a good guy, so everything he's accused of must be false.'. That's not rational at all.
  - grandalf 16y ago
    On the bad journalism claim: The NY Times article is shown as breaking news and has one update, yet it lacks any mention of the statement issued by Assange's lawyer. Further, the headline and first bit of the story implies that there must have been some new development in the case against Assange, when in fact there has not been.
  - charlesattlan 16y ago
    I'll concede bad journalism on my part; my post was rushed and not accurate. The important part is the following taken from the official European Human rights on rights to a fair trial (6.3): "Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of...". Publicly announcing the desired arrest goes against this idea, and that suggests systemic failure inside Sweden, and subsequent bad journalism that started in sweden and is being copied else where, particularly by the nytimes. If you compare EU coverage of the leaks; death tolls, frago 242 (an order not to actively prevent torture) and civilian casualties were the lead. In the US it has been Assange's private life. That smacks of an agenda, and nytimes actually spiked a story on frago 242 and a google search for "site:nytimes.com frago 242" comes back with 4 useless results. Search "site:guardian.co.uk "frago 242" and you get 164 good results. The initial stub was utter trash, barely above a copy-and-paste of a Swedish tabloid with the good bits removed. The nytimes pushed this article as soon as they could without possibly fact checking. The lengthened article is a little bit better, but still uses any excuse to push the rape charges and the idea that he is a wanted man. More accurately is Assange perhaps facing charges of molestation which is a better translation, and what did he do? Assange claims he had sex (there has been a claim else where this could be unprotected sex) with multiple partners who found out and retrospectively took revenge through legal proceedings. And remember the media has pushed the "rape" charges without evidence, initially just hearsay and from leaked police reports. Again that goes against the idea of a fair trial. I believe there is deceit or incompetence somewhere, and that is not produced from cognitive dissonance. The evidence I use is how botched the process has been. If there was evidence of rape, a very serious claim, he could have been arrested in Sweden at the time. He was told he was free to leave, without even the need for an interview. Months have gone by and no attempt had been made. Now he is out of the country (Sweden) it all conspires to portray him as a guilty man on the run. That is the narrative that is being pushed; ignoring the 15,000 deaths the Pentagon lied about, the hint of a molestation is more important.
mrtron 16y ago
This stinks of a smear job. A Toronto newspaper has the front page story "Swedish court orders Wikileaks founder Assange detained in rape case" "A Stockholm prosecutor started a rape investigation that was dropped by the city's chief prosecutor a day later. Ms. Ny reopened it the following week." It seems like they are just opening and closing the same case to repeatedly bring media attention to Assange in connection with it.
joshes 16y ago
A bit off topic, yes, but does any one else cringe when they read the phrase "computer hacker" in a major news publication? Just, ugh.

74 points by CaptainZapp 16y ago

For those not registered at nytimes.com, here's a bookmarklet to bypass the login page: http://nytimes.blogspace.com/genlink http://nytimes.blogspace.com/genlink

CaptainZapp 16y ago
Thanks, I always forget that the grand old lady requires registration.
mrcharles 16y ago
Another easy trick is to google the title of the article -- it is almost the first google hit, and clicking a NYT link from google bypasses their login system.

eof 16y ago

Nothing against the OP since s/he just copied the title from the article; but that title is really misleading. A prosecutor requesting a court order to detain someone for questioning simply does not mean 'Sweden' proper wants to detain Assange.

jrwoodruff 16y ago
It's an official of the Swedish government, acting officially on behalf of the country. Maybe it's an American thing, but this is pretty standard headline writing.
- eof 16y ago
  I was under the impression that this was not a mere formality; but rather a request from a lawyer that may or may not be granted. Reading roel_v's comment though I may be mistaken.
- henrikschroder 16y ago
  Over here, such headlines are usually reserved for statements from various ministers of the government. The way I read that headline is as if our minister of justice made a statement about Assange, and it would be a big surprise to me if she had done that. So from this perspective it's misleading.
- danik 16y ago
  It doesn't work like that in the USA either, does it? If a official of the government, say a judge in a city, does something do you have headlines saying USA did it?
  - michael_dorfman 16y ago
    Sure it does, if regards foreign citizens. "The US demands extradition of so-and-so", for example, would be a typical headline in many places.
    - danik 16y ago
      Here we reserve that for when the president, secretary of state or someone relevant in foreign affairs says or does something, not a prosecutor.
roel_v 16y ago
Could you clarify: Are you saying that a country cannot have actions of its own and cannot detain anyone? In that case, yes obviously, but it's common use and nobody will misunderstand. I don't see how it's misleading, what do you feel people are lead to think? Or are you saying that just because the prosecutor has requested it, doesn't mean that it will be granted or that he's wanted at all? In that case, keep in mind that in several countries the request is a mere formality and is (save for exceptional cases) always granted. If that is the case in Sweden, as I suspect, it's not that much of a stretch to write that he's already wanted. (to contract with the US/other common law penal systems and the way people see it happen on Law & Order, those systems are accusatory, meaning that the public prosecutor builds his case against the defendant who get to defend himself, with the whole process being watched by a judge. Most Western European system are inquisitory, meaning that the prosecutor looks for the truth and is not antagonistic against the defendant from the start. This whole process is also supervised by a judge, but that judge is much less strict and will assume more the role of a 'backstop' for egregious violations of procedure. This judge is this type of system is much looser in granting requests for warrants, searches etc. to the point where they are routinely granted, under the assumption that the prosecutor has already thought the request through and wouldn't request it if it weren't necessary.). Then again maybe someone who actually knows something about Swedish criminal procedure could fill me in here rather than me reasoning from generalities ;)
- eof 16y ago
  I see I might have just been mistaken about the process. I was lead to believe, from reading the title, that there was some court action that ruled that Assange be detained. After reading the article I was more under the impression it was just a request for a subpoena from a lawyer. After reading your comment I am under the impression that they are basically the same thing.
  - roel_v 16y ago
    As I understand, there is a request from the public prosecutor of a Swedish city/district for him to brought before the prosecutor for interrogation. This prosecutor is a government official, prosecuting suspected criminals in name of the state. If by 'a lawyer' you mean someone who works as legal counsel for a private party, then no, they are not the same. What I meant was that a 'subpoena' (to use the in this context more or less equivalent concept in common law system) from a public prosecutor in many Western European countries is usually granted, and as such the headline is not as premature as it may seem. Anyway, if the confusion is over the word detain then yes I agree that that may not be quite what is happening; I hadn't looked at it that way. It's not like they're going to throw him in jail (for a longer time than it takes to arrange the interrogation), it's just that they want him to be picked up by the police to be interrogated in order to determine the merits of the case.

gizmomagico 16y ago

Yeah I bet Assange feels like he's been able to move way too freely until now, so he decided to start raping women! He'll probably tour all Western countries, and rape a couple of women in each to make things a little more exciting. Edit: Wow, what was fast! You really believe this is not bullshit? Edit2: Or are we just not allowed to discuss reality on HN? Rainbows & Unicorns are much nicer.

crocowhile 16y ago
I don't see why you are being downvoted. The allegation of rapes, both filed on the same day, sound like the cheapest way to get an international mandate for him indeed.
- roel_v 16y ago
  The question is, is there any factual proof that the claim is a fabrication, or is it all a big conspiracy theory? If Assange commits a crime, is it always made up because he ticked off the government? Merely claiming it's a trumped up charge for the sole reason that he's the Wikileaks guy is not a strong argument. (it's not a valid argument at all, I'd say).
  - Alex3917 16y ago
    The last two biggest enemies of the U.S. government had wars started against them based on made up evidence. How many more times does this have to happen before the default position is assuming that the charges are trumped up?
  - noarchy 16y ago
    "The question is, is there any factual proof that the claim is a fabrication, or is it all a big conspiracy theory?" That's not how most legal systems work. The prosecution is the one with the burden of proof. That said, for all I know, Assange may indeed be guilty. Perhaps we'll find out.
    - roel_v 16y ago

sneak 16y ago

Julian Massage

henrikschroder 16y ago

Update: The request was granted, and an arrest warrant is issued for him. According to the newspapers this might be expanded to an international arrest warrant. Probably the best news source in English for this: http://www.thelocal.se/30286/20101118/ http://www.thelocal.se/30286/20101118/

dsplittgerber 16y ago

For context: Press release from Assange's lawyer: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt Quote: "Despite his right to silence, my client has repeatedly offered to be interviewed, first in Sweden before he left, and then subsequently in the UK (including at the Swedish Embassy), either in person or by telephone, videoconferencing or email and he has also offered to make a sworn statement on affidavit. All of these offers have been flatly refused by a prosecutor who is abusing her powers by insisting that he return to Sweden at his own expense to be subjected to another media circus that she will orchestrate. Pursuing a warrant in this circumstance is entirely unnecessary and disproportionate."

grandalf 16y ago
It would seem to have been appropriate for the NY Times / AP to include mention of this release in its coverage.
- jrockway 16y ago
  Yeah. And I really don't see an agenda on the NY Times' side, as Wikileaks' work has allowed them to write a lot of great articles.
  - borism 16y ago
    it's just a news article pulled off Associated Press wire for god's sake...
    - grandalf 16y ago
      True, however the title was likely chosen by the NY Times editors -- you'd be surprised at how much editorial whim goes into the choice of how to title an article, and how much bias is reflected in the titles. Also, that the title clearly reads like "They found enough evidence to put Assange behind bars" rather than what actually happens suggests that the AP is either biased against Assange or simply engaging in the worst sort of tabloid journalism.

charlesattlan 16y ago

This article stinks. Someone seeking means nothing. Juilan's official response: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt http://www.twitlonger.com/show/71lsqt The main point is that it is against EU legislation for arrest warrants to be made public. Every attempt at contacting the wanted person has to be made. This suggests shenanigans at some level: bad journalism from nytimes/the swedish tabloid pushing the agenda of the Pentagon, or some form of corruption/incompetence of government officials in Sweden.

roel_v 16y ago
"The main point is that it is against EU legislation for arrest warrants to be made public" That doesn't even make sense. Even if I interpret this as 'most criminal procedure laws across Europe prohibit...', it's still not true. "... bad journalism from nytimes/the swedish tabloid pushing the agenda of the Pentagon, or some form of corruption/incompetence of government officials in Sweden." This is claimed various times in this thread and on other sites, but I have yet to see any proof, even if it's in the form of circumstances that point in this direction, or other small hints in that direction. The only reason people believe this seems to be cognitive dissonance - 'I like the idea of Wikileaks, so the guy that runs it must be a good guy, so everything he's accused of must be false.'. That's not rational at all.
- grandalf 16y ago
  On the bad journalism claim: The NY Times article is shown as breaking news and has one update, yet it lacks any mention of the statement issued by Assange's lawyer. Further, the headline and first bit of the story implies that there must have been some new development in the case against Assange, when in fact there has not been.
- charlesattlan 16y ago
  I'll concede bad journalism on my part; my post was rushed and not accurate. The important part is the following taken from the official European Human rights on rights to a fair trial (6.3): "Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of...". Publicly announcing the desired arrest goes against this idea, and that suggests systemic failure inside Sweden, and subsequent bad journalism that started in sweden and is being copied else where, particularly by the nytimes. If you compare EU coverage of the leaks; death tolls, frago 242 (an order not to actively prevent torture) and civilian casualties were the lead. In the US it has been Assange's private life. That smacks of an agenda, and nytimes actually spiked a story on frago 242 and a google search for "site:nytimes.com frago 242" comes back with 4 useless results. Search "site:guardian.co.uk "frago 242" and you get 164 good results. The initial stub was utter trash, barely above a copy-and-paste of a Swedish tabloid with the good bits removed. The nytimes pushed this article as soon as they could without possibly fact checking. The lengthened article is a little bit better, but still uses any excuse to push the rape charges and the idea that he is a wanted man. More accurately is Assange perhaps facing charges of molestation which is a better translation, and what did he do? Assange claims he had sex (there has been a claim else where this could be unprotected sex) with multiple partners who found out and retrospectively took revenge through legal proceedings. And remember the media has pushed the "rape" charges without evidence, initially just hearsay and from leaked police reports. Again that goes against the idea of a fair trial. I believe there is deceit or incompetence somewhere, and that is not produced from cognitive dissonance. The evidence I use is how botched the process has been. If there was evidence of rape, a very serious claim, he could have been arrested in Sweden at the time. He was told he was free to leave, without even the need for an interview. Months have gone by and no attempt had been made. Now he is out of the country (Sweden) it all conspires to portray him as a guilty man on the run. That is the narrative that is being pushed; ignoring the 15,000 deaths the Pentagon lied about, the hint of a molestation is more important.

mrtron 16y ago

This stinks of a smear job. A Toronto newspaper has the front page story "Swedish court orders Wikileaks founder Assange detained in rape case" "A Stockholm prosecutor started a rape investigation that was dropped by the city's chief prosecutor a day later. Ms. Ny reopened it the following week." It seems like they are just opening and closing the same case to repeatedly bring media attention to Assange in connection with it.

joshes 16y ago

A bit off topic, yes, but does any one else cringe when they read the phrase "computer hacker" in a major news publication? Just, ugh.