5 ms·

Not that I'm condoning his behaviour, but unless I'm missing a piece of the puzzle that I'm not understanding: Last I checked, anywhere outside of Sweden, havin

Not that I'm condoning his behaviour, but unless I'm missing a piece of the puzzle that I'm not understanding: Last I checked, anywhere outside of Sweden, having sex with a partner who appeared to be willing (until after the fact) is not rape. If that's the case, how do people not get charged with rape all the time? Girl gets drunk, wakes up the morning after, looks over and would rather chew her own arm off than wake him up before escaping... This kind of scenario has played out in countless movies and every university dorm since the beginning of time. Usually it's the guy who gets drunk and tries to escape, but the plot is the same. So he woke her up with sex... something many millions of partners the world over have done countless times... and enjoyed. She appeared willing, consensual, into it - at least that's how it allegedly looked at the time, and then she cries foul after the fact... Sounds an awful lot like she had sex with this guy, then she was jealous about him having sex with another girl, they both found out he was double dipping (as it were), were pissed that they weren't the center of his attention and thus decided to have him slapped with a rape charge. Of course, that's just what one can glean from the various hyperbolic media reports. I'm quite sure it's more nuanced than that. But even with the hyperbole, that doesn't sound like rape, that sounds like a revenge tactic for jealousy. The fact that this could also play favour for a U.S. rendition really just compounds how suspicious this whole situation sounds. If you were in the shoes of Assange, with 2 girls throwing themselves at you for sex (which is how it comes across in the media) and then in the midst of you leaking the largest trove of politically embarrassing documents that have ever been leaked, having them come forward with allegations of rape, in a country that until you start digging you had no idea they have a history of conspiracy to perform illegal rendition to the U.S... It seems to me that the worst thing that happened here was poor judgment. If you have sex with two people at the same time and get busted, it's not unusual for them both to be pissed that they're not the only one... and I hate to say it, but people in that situation tend to do irrational things such as you might hear about in songs written by Carrie Underwood https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaSy8yy-mr8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WaSy8yy-mr8 or worse... abuse the legal system for revenge.

icebraining 12y ago
No mention of the condom? Seems like an important bit to me.
- balabaster 12y ago
  Am I mistaken in recalling that this information was added to the story after the fact? Like it was an afterthought thrown in to try and give weight to an accusation that wasn't going to stick in the first instance? I will admit that without going back and digging through the all original news stories again that my memory could be misleading me here... but I recall at the time that everything about this charge seemed sketchy to the point of suspicious.
chimeracoder 12y ago
Putting aside the details of Assange's case for a moment: > Not that I'm condoning his behaviour, but unless I'm missing a piece of the puzzle that I'm not understanding: Last I checked, anywhere outside of Sweden, having sex with a partner who appeared to be willing (until after the fact) is not rape. If that's the case, how do people not get charged with rape all the time? That's actually not true at all - there are a number of situations in which a person can be legally incapable of consent. In various jurisdictions this can include someone who is too intoxicated, someone who is under the age of consent, someone who is a ward of the state (e.g. prisoners are legally unable to consent to sex), someone who is emotionally pressured or coerced, etc. Rape convictions are very hard to secure for a number of reasons (the biggest one being that most victims don't pursue charges[0]), but that shouldn't confuse what is and isn't rape under the law. > This kind of scenario has played out in countless movies and every university dorm since the beginning of time. Usually it's the guy who gets drunk and tries to escape, but the plot is the same. Yes, and this is what is often referred to with the statement "rape culture" (which is often misunderstood and dismissed). There are a lot of things that are commonplace in movies that would be considered sexual assault in real life. [0] Even if you were 100% sure that you could get a conviction, it's an incredibly exhausting, taxing and humiliating process for the victim, so most ultimately choose not to risk their mental health in the process.
- balabaster 12y ago
  What I'm saying is that this is applying a "rape culture" label to something that I'm not really sure should be considered rape culture. I can point you in the direction of countless men and women that have had drunk sex and enjoyed it and gone back for more... many of whom proclaim the joys of morning sex and being woken up that way. How do you differentiate that from someone who is only having sex with you because they're drunk and waking up the next morning and regretting it? They're surely equally as likely to wake up the next morning, think they've scored and go back for second helpings... There is a morally fine line for sure... but I think "legally incapacitated" is reaching. She wasn't drugged to the point that she wasn't able to make decisions. Arguably she was drugged (by her own alcohol consumption) enough to make shitty decisions (perhaps). Lord knows we've all done that to ourselves at some point or another. But being drunk and making shitty decisions comes in the realm of don't drink and drive. It's not illegal for someone to get in the car with you while you're drunk at the wheel. Stupid, for sure, but if they get behind the wheel drunk and you get in the passenger seat equally drunk and they get in an accident and kill someone, are you an accessory to that crime? If they kill themselves because you let them get behind the wheel is that your fault? They made the shitty decision, you let them. Sure you'll probably feel terrible for letting that happen, their family might blame you for not keeping them out of trouble, but legally...? At what point does being drunk excuse you? How much alcohol do you have to consume? Did she initiate? Did he? Was he that drunk too? Does that matter? Can any of it be proven either way? In a court of law, being drunk doesn't legally excuse you from the ability to make decisions... which is why when you drink and drive, they're still legally able to charge you with "Causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink." (in the UK) and "Driving While Intoxicated" or "Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol" in North America. If you are legally culpable for decisions contributing to a crime when under the influence of alcohol, then you cannot claim that someone is legally incapacitated from making decisions regarding sex when they consent to do so. You can have it one way or the other, but not both. If they're legally incapacitated from making decisions about their sex life, then surely they're legally incapacitated from making the decision to drink and drive, and thus are not legally responsible. Where does legal culpability draw the line?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
rmc 12y ago
You can only be extradited from one country to another if it's a crime in both countries. The UK High & Supreme Court looked at the charge(s), and concluded that if he did what was alledged in the UK, it would be a crime in the UK. One of the 4 things he's wanted for is sex with someone who's asleep. That's rape in the UK. In fact "It's only a crime in the Sweden" would have been a perfect way to legally defeat the extradition request. His lawyers tried it. It didn't work.

icebraining 12y ago

No mention of the condom? Seems like an important bit to me.

balabaster 12y ago
Am I mistaken in recalling that this information was added to the story after the fact? Like it was an afterthought thrown in to try and give weight to an accusation that wasn't going to stick in the first instance? I will admit that without going back and digging through the all original news stories again that my memory could be misleading me here... but I recall at the time that everything about this charge seemed sketchy to the point of suspicious.

chimeracoder 12y ago

Putting aside the details of Assange's case for a moment: > Not that I'm condoning his behaviour, but unless I'm missing a piece of the puzzle that I'm not understanding: Last I checked, anywhere outside of Sweden, having sex with a partner who appeared to be willing (until after the fact) is not rape. If that's the case, how do people not get charged with rape all the time? That's actually not true at all - there are a number of situations in which a person can be legally incapable of consent. In various jurisdictions this can include someone who is too intoxicated, someone who is under the age of consent, someone who is a ward of the state (e.g. prisoners are legally unable to consent to sex), someone who is emotionally pressured or coerced, etc. Rape convictions are very hard to secure for a number of reasons (the biggest one being that most victims don't pursue charges[0]), but that shouldn't confuse what is and isn't rape under the law. > This kind of scenario has played out in countless movies and every university dorm since the beginning of time. Usually it's the guy who gets drunk and tries to escape, but the plot is the same. Yes, and this is what is often referred to with the statement "rape culture" (which is often misunderstood and dismissed). There are a lot of things that are commonplace in movies that would be considered sexual assault in real life. [0] Even if you were 100% sure that you could get a conviction, it's an incredibly exhausting, taxing and humiliating process for the victim, so most ultimately choose not to risk their mental health in the process.

balabaster 12y ago
What I'm saying is that this is applying a "rape culture" label to something that I'm not really sure should be considered rape culture. I can point you in the direction of countless men and women that have had drunk sex and enjoyed it and gone back for more... many of whom proclaim the joys of morning sex and being woken up that way. How do you differentiate that from someone who is only having sex with you because they're drunk and waking up the next morning and regretting it? They're surely equally as likely to wake up the next morning, think they've scored and go back for second helpings... There is a morally fine line for sure... but I think "legally incapacitated" is reaching. She wasn't drugged to the point that she wasn't able to make decisions. Arguably she was drugged (by her own alcohol consumption) enough to make shitty decisions (perhaps). Lord knows we've all done that to ourselves at some point or another. But being drunk and making shitty decisions comes in the realm of don't drink and drive. It's not illegal for someone to get in the car with you while you're drunk at the wheel. Stupid, for sure, but if they get behind the wheel drunk and you get in the passenger seat equally drunk and they get in an accident and kill someone, are you an accessory to that crime? If they kill themselves because you let them get behind the wheel is that your fault? They made the shitty decision, you let them. Sure you'll probably feel terrible for letting that happen, their family might blame you for not keeping them out of trouble, but legally...? At what point does being drunk excuse you? How much alcohol do you have to consume? Did she initiate? Did he? Was he that drunk too? Does that matter? Can any of it be proven either way? In a court of law, being drunk doesn't legally excuse you from the ability to make decisions... which is why when you drink and drive, they're still legally able to charge you with "Causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink." (in the UK) and "Driving While Intoxicated" or "Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol" in North America. If you are legally culpable for decisions contributing to a crime when under the influence of alcohol, then you cannot claim that someone is legally incapacitated from making decisions regarding sex when they consent to do so. You can have it one way or the other, but not both. If they're legally incapacitated from making decisions about their sex life, then surely they're legally incapacitated from making the decision to drink and drive, and thus are not legally responsible. Where does legal culpability draw the line?

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

rmc 12y ago

You can only be extradited from one country to another if it's a crime in both countries. The UK High & Supreme Court looked at the charge(s), and concluded that if he did what was alledged in the UK, it would be a crime in the UK. One of the 4 things he's wanted for is sex with someone who's asleep. That's rape in the UK. In fact "It's only a crime in the Sweden" would have been a perfect way to legally defeat the extradition request. His lawyers tried it. It didn't work.