3 ms·

Again, he was scared of the US so he fled to the UK. That makes sense to you? He had sex with someone who is asleep. Some who is asleep cannot consent. You und

Again, he was scared of the US so he fled to the UK. That makes sense to you? He had sex with someone who is asleep. Some who is asleep cannot consent. You understand that this is rape, right? The women involved does still want to take him to court and the Swedish Prosecution Authority is currently reviewing the matter. The other allegations have passed the statue of limitation and cannot be prosecuted. To be clear, the alleged offenses happened between 13 August 2010 and 18 August 2010. They were reported to the police on 20 August. Assange was interviewed on the 30th and had left Sweden by 27th September 2010, after an arrest warrant had been issued. They had tried to interview him before he left. On the 26 November 2010, a European Arrest Warrant was issued after hearings in both Stockholm District Court and the Court of Appeal (in which Assange's lawyer was present). The arrest warrant was issued by the Swedish Prosecution Authority. Subsequently this warrant was certified by the UK's Serious and Organised Crime Agency. It was also upheld by a district judge on 24 February 2011 and by the High Court on 2 November 2011. So it's been thoroughly reviewed by two legal systems that both agree there is a case to answer.

Tycho 8y ago
It is not established that he 'fled' to the UK, versus leaving with permission, and obviously if they really wanted to they could have stopped him leaving. It's not clear what exactly the accusation is or what the injured party actually wants. But the odds are that this is a ruse.
- ChrisSD 8y ago
  His own lawyer admits[0] that Assange was informed that Swedish authority were seeking Assange for interrogation, although the lawyer apparently suffers from a certain amount of selective amnesia (as many lawyers do). It's incredibly clear what the accusations are even if you don't speak Swedish as they're spelled out in the European Arrest Warrant[1]: > On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state. > It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange. who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/08/julian-assange-extradition-hearing-texts https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/08/julian-assange... [1] http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
  - Tycho 8y ago
    That's what the Swedish authorities are saying but for all we know the alleged victim is not even standing behind these claims. Since the Swedish authorities just want to 'interview' Assange there is no downside for them to use some trumped up accusations/statements as a pretext to get that interview (and get him into custody). Assange's lawyer is on record saying that text messages contradict the allegations. I doubt he's staking the defense and his professional reputation on a lie.

Tycho 8y ago

It is not established that he 'fled' to the UK, versus leaving with permission, and obviously if they really wanted to they could have stopped him leaving. It's not clear what exactly the accusation is or what the injured party actually wants. But the odds are that this is a ruse.

ChrisSD 8y ago
His own lawyer admits[0] that Assange was informed that Swedish authority were seeking Assange for interrogation, although the lawyer apparently suffers from a certain amount of selective amnesia (as many lawyers do). It's incredibly clear what the accusations are even if you don't speak Swedish as they're spelled out in the European Arrest Warrant[1]: > On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state. > It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange. who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's sexual integrity. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/08/julian-assange-extradition-hearing-texts https://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/feb/08/julian-assange... [1] http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
- Tycho 8y ago
  That's what the Swedish authorities are saying but for all we know the alleged victim is not even standing behind these claims. Since the Swedish authorities just want to 'interview' Assange there is no downside for them to use some trumped up accusations/statements as a pretext to get that interview (and get him into custody). Assange's lawyer is on record saying that text messages contradict the allegations. I doubt he's staking the defense and his professional reputation on a lie.