3 ms·

No one truly knows, but one can guess. One of the accusers is Anna Ardin... read up on her. She's a Jihadi-apologising nut job and an left-wing extremist from

by seivan 11y ago

No one truly knows, but one can guess. One of the accusers is Anna Ardin... read up on her. She's a Jihadi-apologising nut job and an left-wing extremist from "Tro och Solidaritet" which does propaganda for Muslim Brotherhood. Her close friends from MMRK (Swedish CAGE) have been downplaying ISIS rape on children as "American propaganda" until founder Fathima Doubakhil deleted her tweets when Mehmet Kaplan "ISIS are freedom-fighters" got elected in the last election. Yeah I am aware of the concept "Victim Blaming" but Wikileaks has been tough on Muslim Brotherhood which gives Ardin an angle. She's a scumbag, regardless of Assanges alleged crime.

fetbaffe 11y ago
I know who she is. Yes, she is the typical Marxist apologist, I have no ideological sympathies for here cause. And her lawyer is just a dunk left wing opportunistic hack. However Assange is not the innocent person that some people want him to be either.
- sancha_ 11y ago
  > However Assange is not the innocent person that some people want him to be either. Source?
  - fetbaffe 11y ago
    The crowd he is moving with. Hes relation to Snowden smells, because of the Russian connection.
- Zigurd 11y ago
  Tightest loop of hypocrisy all day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9523900 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9523900
  - fetbaffe 11y ago
    In what way? Ardin and Borgström are well know people in Swedish public life and their reputation as well. And if Assagne is guilty or not, I can't tell. I hope the court leaves out their personalties and opinions, otherwise both are doomed.
Udik 11y ago
Have no idea about Anna Ardin's political motives. And if you think there isn't a ton of anti-enemy and enemy building shameless propaganda thrown to and via the press during any conflict, you're deluded. However, for what I remember, the rape accusations are ridiculous (though sound for the Swedish law). The alleged rape victim voluntarily hosted Assange in her house and her bed for days after the the alleged rape had happened. The Swedish law appears to be calling rape what in sane countries is just called regret and second thought.
- fetbaffe 11y ago
  First, it is two alleged rape victims. Second, you can have consensual sex one time and then rape the second.
  - Udik 11y ago
    Can't check now, but wasn't the story of the second victim similar to that of the first? Sure, you can have consensual sex before and rape after. It's the definition of rape that makes me doubtful in this case. You can't decide a sexual intercourse was actually rape some days after the fact; a rape should involve physical coercion or heavy psychological abuse. The rapist and the victim generally don't part in good terms as apparently happened in this case.
    - vidarh 11y ago
      > a rape should involve physical coercion or heavy psychological abuse This isn't the test in pretty much any European country at the very least. All that is required is generally the absence of consent for the specific act. If she has said "no" or had diminished capacity to object or consent (e.g. been drunk or asleep), then you generally don't have consent. In this case part of the allegation is in one instance that the woman was "half asleep" (potentially unable to provide consent, though in this case the defence will want to question exactly what is meant by "half asleep" in the statement), and secondly that consent had previously given for intercourse with a condom and that it been made very clear to Assange there was no consent to sex without a condom, but that Assange allegedly intentionally sabotaged a condom (if he did, then that would be a crime in a whole range of countries). If those allegations are true as they have been presented, then it would be some form of sexual offence pretty much everywhere, whether rape or sexual assault. Of course we don't know if they are true, or even if they accurately represents what the women told police. > You can't decide a sexual intercourse was actually rape some days after the fact; No, but you can decide you need to report it days after the fact. While a delay in reporting a rape is often used as an argument by the defence in rape cases, it is fairly common for rape victims to take their times to come forward. More importantly in this case the alleged victims allegedly did not report a rape but went to police to ask if they could compel an STI test, and the police started a rape investigation on the basis that the details as described by the women allegedly meets the standard of sexual offences under Swedish law. > The rapist and the victim generally don't part in good terms as apparently happened in this case. Victims often continue to live with rapists for years. Or date them. Or work with them. To those around them it can often perfectly well look like they're on good terms. This is part of the reason why rapes are so hard to prosecute, because so often it devolves to a "he said, she said" where the way the victim have acted is hard to understand for juries. Assange may very well be not guilty, but I don't think any of this remotely rules out that he might be guilty.

by seivan 11y ago

fetbaffe 11y ago

I know who she is. Yes, she is the typical Marxist apologist, I have no ideological sympathies for here cause. And her lawyer is just a dunk left wing opportunistic hack. However Assange is not the innocent person that some people want him to be either.

sancha_ 11y ago
> However Assange is not the innocent person that some people want him to be either. Source?
- fetbaffe 11y ago
  The crowd he is moving with. Hes relation to Snowden smells, because of the Russian connection.
Zigurd 11y ago
Tightest loop of hypocrisy all day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9523900 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9523900
- fetbaffe 11y ago
  In what way? Ardin and Borgström are well know people in Swedish public life and their reputation as well. And if Assagne is guilty or not, I can't tell. I hope the court leaves out their personalties and opinions, otherwise both are doomed.

Udik 11y ago

Have no idea about Anna Ardin's political motives. And if you think there isn't a ton of anti-enemy and enemy building shameless propaganda thrown to and via the press during any conflict, you're deluded. However, for what I remember, the rape accusations are ridiculous (though sound for the Swedish law). The alleged rape victim voluntarily hosted Assange in her house and her bed for days after the the alleged rape had happened. The Swedish law appears to be calling rape what in sane countries is just called regret and second thought.

fetbaffe 11y ago
First, it is two alleged rape victims. Second, you can have consensual sex one time and then rape the second.
- Udik 11y ago
  Can't check now, but wasn't the story of the second victim similar to that of the first? Sure, you can have consensual sex before and rape after. It's the definition of rape that makes me doubtful in this case. You can't decide a sexual intercourse was actually rape some days after the fact; a rape should involve physical coercion or heavy psychological abuse. The rapist and the victim generally don't part in good terms as apparently happened in this case.
  - vidarh 11y ago
    > a rape should involve physical coercion or heavy psychological abuse This isn't the test in pretty much any European country at the very least. All that is required is generally the absence of consent for the specific act. If she has said "no" or had diminished capacity to object or consent (e.g. been drunk or asleep), then you generally don't have consent. In this case part of the allegation is in one instance that the woman was "half asleep" (potentially unable to provide consent, though in this case the defence will want to question exactly what is meant by "half asleep" in the statement), and secondly that consent had previously given for intercourse with a condom and that it been made very clear to Assange there was no consent to sex without a condom, but that Assange allegedly intentionally sabotaged a condom (if he did, then that would be a crime in a whole range of countries). If those allegations are true as they have been presented, then it would be some form of sexual offence pretty much everywhere, whether rape or sexual assault. Of course we don't know if they are true, or even if they accurately represents what the women told police. > You can't decide a sexual intercourse was actually rape some days after the fact; No, but you can decide you need to report it days after the fact. While a delay in reporting a rape is often used as an argument by the defence in rape cases, it is fairly common for rape victims to take their times to come forward. More importantly in this case the alleged victims allegedly did not report a rape but went to police to ask if they could compel an STI test, and the police started a rape investigation on the basis that the details as described by the women allegedly meets the standard of sexual offences under Swedish law. > The rapist and the victim generally don't part in good terms as apparently happened in this case. Victims often continue to live with rapists for years. Or date them. Or work with them. To those around them it can often perfectly well look like they're on good terms. This is part of the reason why rapes are so hard to prosecute, because so often it devolves to a "he said, she said" where the way the victim have acted is hard to understand for juries. Assange may very well be not guilty, but I don't think any of this remotely rules out that he might be guilty.