4 ms·

This is simply basic differences between how different justice systems operate. He was as formally charged as you get in Sweden until the investigation was drop

This is simply basic differences between how different justice systems operate. He was as formally charged as you get in Sweden until the investigation was dropped, only using different words. Assange was arrested in his absence and wanted for questioning in relation to accusations against him of rape and sexual molestation. This was the first step in the criminal prosecution procedure in Sweden, and only after the questioning would the prosecution authority be able to formally indict him.[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority#Accusations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_...

monocasa 6y ago
He was then questioned on Nov 14, 2016, and still not charged.
- foldr 6y ago
  He couldn't be formally charged under the Swedish system because he wasn't in Sweden. (And yes, I know that in principle the Swedish authorities could probably have figured out some way to try him in absentia, but they chose not to because it would have been pointless, and they are perfectly free to make that decision.) Everyone repeating this nonsense should just take the time to read the British High Court judgment, which sets it all out very clearly.
  - justsee 6y ago
    It's important to remember the Swedish authorities were never interested in testimony from Assange. It's worth reading this interview [1] with Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, which reveals in shocking detail the level of manipulation around this entire case. As Melzer says "You just have to look at how the case was run: For Sweden, it was never about the interests of the two women." [1] https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
    - foldr 6y ago
      The Swedish prosecutors wanted to try Assange on rape charges. Their actions were geared towards getting that to happen. Merely having Assange "testify", outside of a courtroom setting, would not necessarily have furthered that goal. I do not see how that conflicts with the interests of the two women.
      - justsee 6y ago
        Actually it's clear from Melzer's thorough investigation, where he reviewed the entire case material, including original Swedish documents, that this was an operation to frame Assange and extradite him to the US – and nothing to do with the two women, who were very clearly pawns in the process. It's really worth reading the interview closely to understand how thoroughly justice has been perverted in numerous countries to get at someone who revealed horrendous crimes.
        foldr 6y ago
        I'm aware of the existence of such conspiracy theories. To me, the simpler and more plausible explanation is that Assange did what the women accused him of doing.
        justsee 6y ago
        Melzer goes into detail about how the women didn't accuse him of rape. It's worth engaging in the facts on this issue, rather than gripping onto a received narrative in dismissive fashion, and the interview really goes into significant detail, including behind-the-scenes behaviour of Sweden that Melzer was privy to as UN Special Rapporteur on torture. It's one of those articles where people go in with the perspective you show here, and come out the end of it stunned by the truth of Assange's unjust treatment. In fact Melzer starts out by stating he began with the same attitude, initially refusing the case as "My impression, largely influenced by the media, was also colored by the prejudice that Julian Assange was somehow guilty and that he wanted to manipulate me." It is probably one of the best summaries of his case I've read, from a highly credible, independent investigator: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...

monocasa 6y ago

He was then questioned on Nov 14, 2016, and still not charged.

foldr 6y ago
He couldn't be formally charged under the Swedish system because he wasn't in Sweden. (And yes, I know that in principle the Swedish authorities could probably have figured out some way to try him in absentia, but they chose not to because it would have been pointless, and they are perfectly free to make that decision.) Everyone repeating this nonsense should just take the time to read the British High Court judgment, which sets it all out very clearly.
- justsee 6y ago
  It's important to remember the Swedish authorities were never interested in testimony from Assange. It's worth reading this interview [1] with Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, which reveals in shocking detail the level of manipulation around this entire case. As Melzer says "You just have to look at how the case was run: For Sweden, it was never about the interests of the two women." [1] https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
  - foldr 6y ago
    The Swedish prosecutors wanted to try Assange on rape charges. Their actions were geared towards getting that to happen. Merely having Assange "testify", outside of a courtroom setting, would not necessarily have furthered that goal. I do not see how that conflicts with the interests of the two women.
    - justsee 6y ago
      Actually it's clear from Melzer's thorough investigation, where he reviewed the entire case material, including original Swedish documents, that this was an operation to frame Assange and extradite him to the US – and nothing to do with the two women, who were very clearly pawns in the process. It's really worth reading the interview closely to understand how thoroughly justice has been perverted in numerous countries to get at someone who revealed horrendous crimes.
      - foldr 6y ago
        I'm aware of the existence of such conspiracy theories. To me, the simpler and more plausible explanation is that Assange did what the women accused him of doing.
        justsee 6y ago
        Melzer goes into detail about how the women didn't accuse him of rape. It's worth engaging in the facts on this issue, rather than gripping onto a received narrative in dismissive fashion, and the interview really goes into significant detail, including behind-the-scenes behaviour of Sweden that Melzer was privy to as UN Special Rapporteur on torture. It's one of those articles where people go in with the perspective you show here, and come out the end of it stunned by the truth of Assange's unjust treatment. In fact Melzer starts out by stating he began with the same attitude, initially refusing the case as "My impression, largely influenced by the media, was also colored by the prejudice that Julian Assange was somehow guilty and that he wanted to manipulate me." It is probably one of the best summaries of his case I've read, from a highly credible, independent investigator: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...