5 ms·

> This is a textbook example of a large, public extrajudicial process. Rather, it is instead a textbook example of how public figures that are supported by a g

by mpyne 12y ago

> This is a textbook example of a large, public extrajudicial process. Rather, it is instead a textbook example of how public figures that are supported by a group suddenly become incapable of fault. Instead of letting the legal system of Sweden play out (you know, like Snowden had been trying to fight for with his leaks against the FISA Court), Assange's supporters simply declare that this is some vast world conspiracy against Assange, or that it wasn't really "rape" anyways, and even much more misogynistic things. In addition all the contradictory evidence against that hypothesis simply gets glossed over. E.g. the extradition thing makes no sense, and never made any sense. Assange was being processed through courts in the U.K. while avoiding Swedish justice, and the U.K. is hardly knowing for making it difficult to extradite suspects to the U.S.! If Assange was worried about extradition to the U.S. he should have fled from the U.K. ASAP. Given that wasn't what he did, he must have been more worried about something different (perhaps the veracity of the charges of which he was accused?). And either way, as mentioned in a sibling comment, the U.S. would actually have to charge him with something for extradition to apply, and those charges would have to come within the statute of limitations (and perhaps even within a shorter timeframe for whatever country Assange flees to).

easytiger 12y ago
Given the crime he is accused of is, unless i am mistaken, having consensual sex but during the act the condom broke, there's not a lot of rationality in this entire thing.
- rmc 12y ago
  You are mistaken. He's wanted for 4 cases. One is having sex with someone who was asleep. If you come across a sleeping woman, and start to have sex with her, well...
- mpyne 12y ago
  IIRC, one of the accusations was having sex with no condom at all even though consent had been conditional on using a condom, but had nothing to do with a broken condom.
  - swombat 12y ago
    How is that rape? I agree it's a lousy thing to do, but it's not like sexual consent is a conditional thing. "I agree to have sex with you so long as you send that email tomorrow." Next day: "You didn't send the email! That means you raped me yesterday!" Er, no. Either you consent to have sexual relations with someone, or you don't. If you don't, that should always be respected entirely. If you withdraw your consent halfway through sex, that should also be respected entirely. However, you can't withdraw consent later when you find out that the other person wasn't using protection. Or rather, you can accuse them of being an asshole, but you can't accuse them of raping you.
    - mootothemax 12y ago
      I agree it's a lousy thing to do, but it's not like sexual consent is a conditional thing. A few questions for you: If someone has an STD, both parties are aware of this, and only agree to sex with a condom, what should happen if the condom is purposefully removed by the STD carrier? Can someone agree to a blow job, but not penetrative sex? And is taking off a condom without prior agreement also fine? Either you consent to have sexual relations with someone, or you don't I hope my questions above illustrate that it's more complicated than the black-and-white views you're putting across here. Edit: removed crappy BDSM question. Edit II: I guess I'm just really confused that you agree with the principles of consent unless that consent involves a condom. Personally, I find that strange, least of all over the increased STD and pregnancy risks involved.
      - tomp 12y ago
        So you're basically saying that if a woman lies about being on the pill, she raped you? I don't think courts would uphold such an argument...
        mootothemax 12y ago
        So you're basically saying that if a woman lies about being on the pill, she raped you? I don't think courts would uphold such an argument... Yeah, that seems reasonable enough to me. I'm not a lawyer though, no idea what the courts in any given country would or wouldn't do.
- xorcist 12y ago
  You are mistaken. Two girls reported that the condoms broke as if they were cut up, the night after each other. IIRC one of the girls also stated that the sex started out as consensual but she later wanted to stop. It is perhaps not as irrational as some people make it sound. The police report was leaked and can be found online.
  - easytiger 12y ago
    > Two girls reported that the condoms broke as if they were cut up, the night after each other. Who cuts a condom pre coitus? What possible goal would that achieve? The girls stories only changed to concur after collusion from what i recall.
    - pyre 12y ago
      Assuming that this is the truth, it would be extremely odd behavior on Assange's part to cut up condoms prior to intercourse. The only reasoning that I could come up with for it is that Assange has HIV/AIDS and is one of those "I'm angry at the world so I'll give the disease to others" characters, which doesn't seem likely.
      - xorcist 12y ago
        The story from the girls side was that they found this so strange that they went to the local police station to ask if there was a possibility to get him HIV tested. The prosecutor on duty then wanted him for questioning. The legal system was disorganized and slow and two weeks later he left the country. If Assange wanted to flee he would have done so straight away instead of hanging around two weeks more. But a set up makes even less sense, why leave him around for two weeks then? There is more than enough here to weave a conspiracy theory from, but please don't. It just doesn't make sense.
        pyre 12y ago
        Who said that I was weaving a conspiracy? It seems like it could just be a misunderstanding, or even just a 'localized' plot (the girls didn't like him and wanted to get back at him for some real or imagined grievance). Personally, I don't hero-worship Assange, nor have I researched the public knowledge on this case. I'm just mentioning that the action of 'cutting up condoms prior to intercourse' is really weird behavior, even if it's true.
themartorana 12y ago
Processing him through UK courts is hardly evidence of US non-involvement. If the NSA and GCHQ have taught us nothing, it's that each will do the other's bidding in an effort to get around pesky restrictive laws. I'm not commenting on the strength of the rape allegations, just that the US can easily get to someone via the UK without ever needing to formally start extradition proceedings.
- bobbyx 12y ago
  Yes - you agree with parent comment that if Assange is scared of the US then staying in the UK is bizarre behaviour.
  - kaoD 12y ago
    As far as I know he's not staying in the UK. He's staying in Ecuador. He just can't leave Ecuador (actually its embassy) because he's surrounded by the UK, both at land and air.
    - rmc 12y ago
      But people suggest (as an alternative) that Assange could stand trial / answer questions in the UK, implying that it's Sweden he doesn't want to go to. Which doesn't make sense. Why would he stay in the UK while the appeals to the UK Supreme Court were going ahead?
    - xorcist 12y ago
      As people have pointed out below, this is a myth. An embassy is not sovereign. It is on British soil and under British law. The reason embassies are not raided is diplomatic politeness. If it is was someone the US/UK really cared about they would be whisked away in the blink of an eye.
      - kaoD 12y ago
        According to Wikipedia: "[...] the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) [...] and (as an adherent to the Vienna Convention) the host country may not enter the premises of the mission without permission of the represented country" I'm not a lawyer so that's as far as I know :) Seems applicable to this situation.
twelvechairs 12y ago
AFAIK the more immediate concern is that on arrival in Sweden he may be held in solitary confinement (including no internet) for some significant time (months at least like the Pirate Bay guy was) without charge.
- adestefan 12y ago
  No Internet! gasp What a fucking travesty.
  - patcon 12y ago
    I'll bite. Yes, the inability to speak is a travesty. Particularly when the bulk of contribution you've made to the world is through your speaking.
    - adestefan 12y ago
      He'll have plenty of time to speak when he's standing in front of a judge to defend himself. These are serious criminal acts that he's accused of. I'm appalled at the number of people who think this is some grand world conspiracy.
notahacker 12y ago
Of course, if you happen to be a highly controversial public figure then becoming the subject of a couple of rape allegations that you genuinely can't understand the basis of could legitimately make you fearful of a conspiracy against you; sufficiently fearful to run for the sanctuary of the Ecuadorean embassy even. It would be a lot easier to believe that was actually the case if Assange and his campaign team hadn't subsequently spent the next few years fighting on "not really an extraditable crime" technicalities in the UK courts whilst simultaneously asserting he's quite happy to answer prosecutors so long as Sweden rewrite their legal procedures to his design. And, in the case of some of the more lurid blogs from some of his supporters, claiming the women involved are CIA agents. Not to mention the Ockham's razor angle: if US interests wanted to nab Assange on trumped up charges one would assume they have the ingenuity to come up with something a bit less flimsy.
- backprojection 12y ago
  >Not to mention the Ockham's razor angle: if US interests wanted to nab Assange on trumped up charges one would assume they have the ingenuity to come up with something a bit less flimsy. Why? It's rape. All rationality goes out the window if someone's accused of rape. It makes a lot of sense.
  - notahacker 12y ago
    I'm talking more about the details of the alleged rapes; the clumsy sequence of events which Assange supporters have picked apart all over the internet. You'd assume conspirators would at least want a story straight enough to make conviction straightforward.
- informatimago 12y ago
  Rape worked well with Strauss-Kahn. When you have a hammer...
pyre 12y ago
> that it wasn't really "rape" anyways, and even much more misogynistic things If I claim that I don't think that Assange raped anyone, I am now a misogynist? That seems like an extreme view, unless I'm missing something... That said, I think that Assange's publicity seems like it plays a part into why this is being pursued. There doesn't even need to be nefarious pressure from the USA for that to be true.
- notahacker 12y ago
  I assume that he's referring to attack articles like this one: http://rixstep.com/2/1/20111016,01.shtml http://rixstep.com/2/1/20111016,01.shtml which is pretty indefensible even if you subscribe to the view that the allegations are (i) completely false or (ii) have some basis in truth but are in fact the result of a disagreement between adults that doesn't make him legally or morally guilty of rape. I think Sweden has a general policy of pursuing alleged rapists even when they aren't public figures. The UK have undoubtedly spent far more time and effort pursuing him than they would for a non-public figure, but that's because non-public figures are unlikely to have the ability to claim asylum in the Ecuadorean embassy.
  - pyre 12y ago
    > I think Sweden has a general policy of pursuing alleged rapists even when they aren't public figures. It doesn't even have to be at the government level. Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media. This would still be his publicity playing into it. Also, his publicity make it easy for Swedish authorities to know where he is to pursue him.
    - mpyne 12y ago
      > Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media. If the idea of an HN user saying that the charges are B.S. because a rape victim didn't file them until she found out he was a public figure doesn't fully demonstrate my point about misogyny, I can't imagine what would. P.S. He was a public figure even before 2010, btw.

by mpyne 12y ago

easytiger 12y ago

Given the crime he is accused of is, unless i am mistaken, having consensual sex but during the act the condom broke, there's not a lot of rationality in this entire thing.

rmc 12y ago
You are mistaken. He's wanted for 4 cases. One is having sex with someone who was asleep. If you come across a sleeping woman, and start to have sex with her, well...
mpyne 12y ago
IIRC, one of the accusations was having sex with no condom at all even though consent had been conditional on using a condom, but had nothing to do with a broken condom.
- swombat 12y ago
  How is that rape? I agree it's a lousy thing to do, but it's not like sexual consent is a conditional thing. "I agree to have sex with you so long as you send that email tomorrow." Next day: "You didn't send the email! That means you raped me yesterday!" Er, no. Either you consent to have sexual relations with someone, or you don't. If you don't, that should always be respected entirely. If you withdraw your consent halfway through sex, that should also be respected entirely. However, you can't withdraw consent later when you find out that the other person wasn't using protection. Or rather, you can accuse them of being an asshole, but you can't accuse them of raping you.
  - mootothemax 12y ago
    I agree it's a lousy thing to do, but it's not like sexual consent is a conditional thing. A few questions for you: If someone has an STD, both parties are aware of this, and only agree to sex with a condom, what should happen if the condom is purposefully removed by the STD carrier? Can someone agree to a blow job, but not penetrative sex? And is taking off a condom without prior agreement also fine? Either you consent to have sexual relations with someone, or you don't I hope my questions above illustrate that it's more complicated than the black-and-white views you're putting across here. Edit: removed crappy BDSM question. Edit II: I guess I'm just really confused that you agree with the principles of consent unless that consent involves a condom. Personally, I find that strange, least of all over the increased STD and pregnancy risks involved.
    - tomp 12y ago
      So you're basically saying that if a woman lies about being on the pill, she raped you? I don't think courts would uphold such an argument...
      - mootothemax 12y ago
        So you're basically saying that if a woman lies about being on the pill, she raped you? I don't think courts would uphold such an argument... Yeah, that seems reasonable enough to me. I'm not a lawyer though, no idea what the courts in any given country would or wouldn't do.
xorcist 12y ago
You are mistaken. Two girls reported that the condoms broke as if they were cut up, the night after each other. IIRC one of the girls also stated that the sex started out as consensual but she later wanted to stop. It is perhaps not as irrational as some people make it sound. The police report was leaked and can be found online.
- easytiger 12y ago
  > Two girls reported that the condoms broke as if they were cut up, the night after each other. Who cuts a condom pre coitus? What possible goal would that achieve? The girls stories only changed to concur after collusion from what i recall.
  - pyre 12y ago
    Assuming that this is the truth, it would be extremely odd behavior on Assange's part to cut up condoms prior to intercourse. The only reasoning that I could come up with for it is that Assange has HIV/AIDS and is one of those "I'm angry at the world so I'll give the disease to others" characters, which doesn't seem likely.
    - xorcist 12y ago
      The story from the girls side was that they found this so strange that they went to the local police station to ask if there was a possibility to get him HIV tested. The prosecutor on duty then wanted him for questioning. The legal system was disorganized and slow and two weeks later he left the country. If Assange wanted to flee he would have done so straight away instead of hanging around two weeks more. But a set up makes even less sense, why leave him around for two weeks then? There is more than enough here to weave a conspiracy theory from, but please don't. It just doesn't make sense.
      - pyre 12y ago
        Who said that I was weaving a conspiracy? It seems like it could just be a misunderstanding, or even just a 'localized' plot (the girls didn't like him and wanted to get back at him for some real or imagined grievance). Personally, I don't hero-worship Assange, nor have I researched the public knowledge on this case. I'm just mentioning that the action of 'cutting up condoms prior to intercourse' is really weird behavior, even if it's true.

themartorana 12y ago

Processing him through UK courts is hardly evidence of US non-involvement. If the NSA and GCHQ have taught us nothing, it's that each will do the other's bidding in an effort to get around pesky restrictive laws. I'm not commenting on the strength of the rape allegations, just that the US can easily get to someone via the UK without ever needing to formally start extradition proceedings.

bobbyx 12y ago
Yes - you agree with parent comment that if Assange is scared of the US then staying in the UK is bizarre behaviour.
- kaoD 12y ago
  As far as I know he's not staying in the UK. He's staying in Ecuador. He just can't leave Ecuador (actually its embassy) because he's surrounded by the UK, both at land and air.
  - rmc 12y ago
    But people suggest (as an alternative) that Assange could stand trial / answer questions in the UK, implying that it's Sweden he doesn't want to go to. Which doesn't make sense. Why would he stay in the UK while the appeals to the UK Supreme Court were going ahead?
  - xorcist 12y ago
    As people have pointed out below, this is a myth. An embassy is not sovereign. It is on British soil and under British law. The reason embassies are not raided is diplomatic politeness. If it is was someone the US/UK really cared about they would be whisked away in the blink of an eye.
    - kaoD 12y ago
      According to Wikipedia: "[...] the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) [...] and (as an adherent to the Vienna Convention) the host country may not enter the premises of the mission without permission of the represented country" I'm not a lawyer so that's as far as I know :) Seems applicable to this situation.

twelvechairs 12y ago

AFAIK the more immediate concern is that on arrival in Sweden he may be held in solitary confinement (including no internet) for some significant time (months at least like the Pirate Bay guy was) without charge.

adestefan 12y ago
No Internet! gasp What a fucking travesty.
- patcon 12y ago
  I'll bite. Yes, the inability to speak is a travesty. Particularly when the bulk of contribution you've made to the world is through your speaking.
  - adestefan 12y ago
    He'll have plenty of time to speak when he's standing in front of a judge to defend himself. These are serious criminal acts that he's accused of. I'm appalled at the number of people who think this is some grand world conspiracy.

notahacker 12y ago

Of course, if you happen to be a highly controversial public figure then becoming the subject of a couple of rape allegations that you genuinely can't understand the basis of could legitimately make you fearful of a conspiracy against you; sufficiently fearful to run for the sanctuary of the Ecuadorean embassy even. It would be a lot easier to believe that was actually the case if Assange and his campaign team hadn't subsequently spent the next few years fighting on "not really an extraditable crime" technicalities in the UK courts whilst simultaneously asserting he's quite happy to answer prosecutors so long as Sweden rewrite their legal procedures to his design. And, in the case of some of the more lurid blogs from some of his supporters, claiming the women involved are CIA agents. Not to mention the Ockham's razor angle: if US interests wanted to nab Assange on trumped up charges one would assume they have the ingenuity to come up with something a bit less flimsy.

backprojection 12y ago
>Not to mention the Ockham's razor angle: if US interests wanted to nab Assange on trumped up charges one would assume they have the ingenuity to come up with something a bit less flimsy. Why? It's rape. All rationality goes out the window if someone's accused of rape. It makes a lot of sense.
- notahacker 12y ago
  I'm talking more about the details of the alleged rapes; the clumsy sequence of events which Assange supporters have picked apart all over the internet. You'd assume conspirators would at least want a story straight enough to make conviction straightforward.
informatimago 12y ago
Rape worked well with Strauss-Kahn. When you have a hammer...

pyre 12y ago

> that it wasn't really "rape" anyways, and even much more misogynistic things If I claim that I don't think that Assange raped anyone, I am now a misogynist? That seems like an extreme view, unless I'm missing something... That said, I think that Assange's publicity seems like it plays a part into why this is being pursued. There doesn't even need to be nefarious pressure from the USA for that to be true.

notahacker 12y ago
I assume that he's referring to attack articles like this one: http://rixstep.com/2/1/20111016,01.shtml http://rixstep.com/2/1/20111016,01.shtml which is pretty indefensible even if you subscribe to the view that the allegations are (i) completely false or (ii) have some basis in truth but are in fact the result of a disagreement between adults that doesn't make him legally or morally guilty of rape. I think Sweden has a general policy of pursuing alleged rapists even when they aren't public figures. The UK have undoubtedly spent far more time and effort pursuing him than they would for a non-public figure, but that's because non-public figures are unlikely to have the ability to claim asylum in the Ecuadorean embassy.
- pyre 12y ago
  > I think Sweden has a general policy of pursuing alleged rapists even when they aren't public figures. It doesn't even have to be at the government level. Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media. This would still be his publicity playing into it. Also, his publicity make it easy for Swedish authorities to know where he is to pursue him.
  - mpyne 12y ago
    > Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media. If the idea of an HN user saying that the charges are B.S. because a rape victim didn't file them until she found out he was a public figure doesn't fully demonstrate my point about misogyny, I can't imagine what would. P.S. He was a public figure even before 2010, btw.