5 ms·

Don't know where you are from, but since I am from Sweden and live in Sweden I can assure you that what you are writing is simply not true. There isn't a concen

by Steer 15y ago

Don't know where you are from, but since I am from Sweden and live in Sweden I can assure you that what you are writing is simply not true. There isn't a concensus on Assange's possible guilt in this case, opinions are divided (while most people don't care about this at all of course). Can you give an example of any previous cases that has gone to a "secret trial" here in Sweden?

illumen 15y ago
"Clare Montgomery QC, for the Swedish authorities, said evidence from a trial would be heard in private but the arguments would be made in public." That is a secret trial. The Swedish Prime Minister has declared the man guilty, as well major Swedish news sources have declared his guilt. Those are the best evidence I can give - elected members, and the press. I can only give anecdotal evidence of the Swedish people accusing him of being a misogynist and a rapist - without hearing evidence. There is even an element of racism, as he is an Australia, so obviously he must have done it. My experience based on friends, and friends of friends in Sweden is that many of them think he is guilty. There have been many instances of secret trials in Sweden. Not including the old Swedish Nazi trials of course, but more recently. See the quote from the prosecuting QC as evidence that the trial will not be public. The Swedish Parliament make the laws, and the Prime Minister has proclaimed the man guilty. Do you not see the lack of justice there?
- piers 15y ago
  And can you link to reliable sources with that stuff? And there's a different between a rape trial being held in private (see fun2have's post here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3186245 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3186245) and some secret committee. Personally, I think there are too many contradictions (like the fact that the stories have changed) for this to be something other than politically motivated. But we shall see.
- gyardley 15y ago
  The Swedish Parliament make the laws, and the head of the Parliament has proclaimed the man guilty. Do you not see the lack of justice there? Is the head of Parliament also the judge at his trial? Will the Swedish people be voting on the verdict American Idol-style? If not, then no, I don't see 'the lack of justice there'. The legislative and judicial functions are kept separate for a reason.
- Steer 15y ago
  It is always hard to grasp the nuances of the political system in other countries. The prime minister is not the head of the parliament; he is the head of the government. The head of the parliament is called "talman" (the "speaker" if I would hazard a guess at translating it). You are right in that it is the parliament that make the laws. What the Swedish prime minister has done is defending the Swedish judicial system which, at least to me, seem like a reasonable thing for him to do. You can read more about it here for example http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/8437-swedish-pm-slams-julian-assanges-claims- http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/8437-swedish-pm-slams-ju.... I can not find any reputable sources where he is quoted as saying that Assange is guilty. Regarding the media they have written the same gossip/sensationalistic crap the media of all western countries seem to write in these circumstances, varying wildly between "totally innocent" and "guilty" with a lot of erroneous reporting and misunderstandings in between. Oh, now I understand what you mean with "secret trials", a better way of putting it is "trials that are closed to the public" which is often done here in Sweden in trials concerning rape or children. That is put in place to protect the victims and although I don't know for sure I can't image that we are the only country in the world to practice it. All affected parties are of course allowed in to the court room, but you and I ("the public") are not. The verdict is made public as usual.
  - illumen 15y ago
    This trial happened in a UK court. Not a Swedish one. If the the evidence is not made public in the Swedish trial, then it is a mockery of justice. How can anyone take the word of the court that it was a fair trial? It is not transparent. Saying "Asange is an enemy of the people" is not just defending the Swedish legal system. International law covering human rights applies in Sweden, and those rights will be violated by a secret trial. A country either respects international law and human rights, or it does not. Sweden does not respect this facet of the law, or this human right. In some countries media can be taken to task for declaring someone a rapist without proof. How many of the media has been taken to task in Sweden for doing so? It is strange how the Swedish legal system has been suspiciously quiet in this regard. Count the number of Swedish people sticking up for this Human in this thread. I guess flag sales are up in Sweden, because there does not seem to be many Swedish people arguing that the Swedish state could possibly be wrong here.

by Steer 15y ago

illumen 15y ago

"Clare Montgomery QC, for the Swedish authorities, said evidence from a trial would be heard in private but the arguments would be made in public." That is a secret trial. The Swedish Prime Minister has declared the man guilty, as well major Swedish news sources have declared his guilt. Those are the best evidence I can give - elected members, and the press. I can only give anecdotal evidence of the Swedish people accusing him of being a misogynist and a rapist - without hearing evidence. There is even an element of racism, as he is an Australia, so obviously he must have done it. My experience based on friends, and friends of friends in Sweden is that many of them think he is guilty. There have been many instances of secret trials in Sweden. Not including the old Swedish Nazi trials of course, but more recently. See the quote from the prosecuting QC as evidence that the trial will not be public. The Swedish Parliament make the laws, and the Prime Minister has proclaimed the man guilty. Do you not see the lack of justice there?

piers 15y ago
And can you link to reliable sources with that stuff? And there's a different between a rape trial being held in private (see fun2have's post here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3186245 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3186245) and some secret committee. Personally, I think there are too many contradictions (like the fact that the stories have changed) for this to be something other than politically motivated. But we shall see.
gyardley 15y ago
The Swedish Parliament make the laws, and the head of the Parliament has proclaimed the man guilty. Do you not see the lack of justice there? Is the head of Parliament also the judge at his trial? Will the Swedish people be voting on the verdict American Idol-style? If not, then no, I don't see 'the lack of justice there'. The legislative and judicial functions are kept separate for a reason.
Steer 15y ago
It is always hard to grasp the nuances of the political system in other countries. The prime minister is not the head of the parliament; he is the head of the government. The head of the parliament is called "talman" (the "speaker" if I would hazard a guess at translating it). You are right in that it is the parliament that make the laws. What the Swedish prime minister has done is defending the Swedish judicial system which, at least to me, seem like a reasonable thing for him to do. You can read more about it here for example http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/8437-swedish-pm-slams-julian-assanges-claims- http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/8437-swedish-pm-slams-ju.... I can not find any reputable sources where he is quoted as saying that Assange is guilty. Regarding the media they have written the same gossip/sensationalistic crap the media of all western countries seem to write in these circumstances, varying wildly between "totally innocent" and "guilty" with a lot of erroneous reporting and misunderstandings in between. Oh, now I understand what you mean with "secret trials", a better way of putting it is "trials that are closed to the public" which is often done here in Sweden in trials concerning rape or children. That is put in place to protect the victims and although I don't know for sure I can't image that we are the only country in the world to practice it. All affected parties are of course allowed in to the court room, but you and I ("the public") are not. The verdict is made public as usual.
- illumen 15y ago
  This trial happened in a UK court. Not a Swedish one. If the the evidence is not made public in the Swedish trial, then it is a mockery of justice. How can anyone take the word of the court that it was a fair trial? It is not transparent. Saying "Asange is an enemy of the people" is not just defending the Swedish legal system. International law covering human rights applies in Sweden, and those rights will be violated by a secret trial. A country either respects international law and human rights, or it does not. Sweden does not respect this facet of the law, or this human right. In some countries media can be taken to task for declaring someone a rapist without proof. How many of the media has been taken to task in Sweden for doing so? It is strange how the Swedish legal system has been suspiciously quiet in this regard. Count the number of Swedish people sticking up for this Human in this thread. I guess flag sales are up in Sweden, because there does not seem to be many Swedish people arguing that the Swedish state could possibly be wrong here.