Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped • Hacker News Board

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#151

Post by drcube » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 7:35 PM UTC

OvidNaso wrote: post #137

afarrell wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you take something that belongs to another person, but you believe you do own it, no crime has been committed. For example, if walk out of a store thinking you paid for a bag of groceries when in fact the card reader had errored and you need to swipe again. That isn't shoplifting, that is a mistake of fact. This concept is called "mens rea" or "guilty mind". A statute for each crime should define what type of mens…

But in a case of property dispute, this contradicts what you said about the mind of the victim not mattering. If I am in your house and believe that the playstation is mine and walk out with it. Weather or not it is a crime is entirely dependent on what you believe about ownership of the playstation. Entirely on "whether or not the victim feels they were wronged".

No, the mind of the perpetrator is relevant, not the victim. And it isn't just "he said, she said", but the court tries to actually understand what was going on in the perpetrator's mind. For example, you can't shove merchandise down your pants at Walmart, sneak out the front door and claim "I thought it was mine".

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#152

Post by rmc » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 7:48 PM UTC

trevelyan wrote: post #141

rmc wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Assange could then have defeated the extradition request by showing his behavior was not a crime under British law. Extradition is only allowed if it's for a crime that's illegal in both countries. Assange's legal team repeatidly challenged the extradition on the grounds that it wasn't a crime in the UK. The UK legal system consistantly said that it was. Remember one of the charges/claims is that he had sex with so…

Assange has never been found guilty of a crime or even charged with one. The British legal ruling was not over guilt or innocence but simply over the bureaucratic definition of a crime. If the Swedish government reprinted the exact same request with your name on it, you would also face extradition without the ability to challenge the request on the grounds that its allegations are not factual. This is the key point t…

> Assange has never been ... charged with one

The UK legal system says he has. In the High Court judgement[1], the judge says:

> 153. ... there can be no doubt that if what Mr Assange had done had been done in England and Wales, he would have been charged and thus criminal proceedings would have been commenced. If the commencement of criminal proceedings were to be viewed as dependent on whether a person had been charged, it would be to look at Swedish procedure through the narrowest of common law eyes. Looking at it through cosmopolitan eyes on this basis, criminal proceedings have commenced against Mr Assange.

> despite what you seem to believe (who told you this?) the woman in question was not asleep

Assange is/was wanted in Sweden for 4 cases, with at least 2 different women. One of which is the charge that[1]:

> 3. ... deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state.

Is he guilty? I don't know, that's up to the Swedish courts to decide.

[1] http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#153

Post by rmc » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 7:50 PM UTC

stenl wrote: post #129

Bohahahaha wrote: post #79

"Those doubting the degree of ruthlessness Assange can expect should remember the forcing down of the Bolivian president's plane in 2013 - wrongly believed to be carrying Edward Snowden." If you think of Sweden as ABBA, think again: "In December 2010, The Independent revealed that the two governments had discussed his onward extradition to the US." "The rendition and subsequent torture of two Egyptian political refug…

From that link: "the Swedish authorities have never explained why they refuse to give Assange a guarantee that they will not extradite him on to the US under a secret arrangement agreed between Stockholm and Washington." Weeeell, maybe because Sweden is a democracy and has no "authorities" that can guarantee the outcome of hypothetical future legal proceedings. Also, note that Assange was obviously in Sweden when the…

It's like asking Obama to ensure the Supreme Court finds in a certain way.

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#154

Post by rmc » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 7:51 PM UTC

deciplex wrote: post #136

stenl wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From that link: "the Swedish authorities have never explained why they refuse to give Assange a guarantee that they will not extradite him on to the US under a secret arrangement agreed between Stockholm and Washington." Weeeell, maybe because Sweden is a democracy and has no "authorities" that can guarantee the outcome of hypothetical future legal proceedings. Also, note that Assange was obviously in Sweden when the…

> Also, note that Assange was obviously in Sweden when the rape allegedly happened, and only became conveniently afraid of extraditiom to US after those allegations surfaced. The allegations surfaced in August 2010, four months after Collateral Murder and one month after the Afghan War Diary was released. Also earlier that year the diplomatic cable releases began, and while most hadn't been released yet by August, so…

No, the charges are that the crimes were committed in August 2010. See the UK High Court appeal to the extradition[1].

[1] http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#155

Post by maus42 » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 8:05 PM UTC

ryanlol wrote: post #147

gamblor956 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extradition is a legal proceeding between two countries with an existing extradition treaty. It only becomes a diplomatic proceeding if extradition is sought for charges not covered by the treaty.

Treaties are not laws.

In Sweden, it looks like these treaties at least are very similar to laws: extradiction would be handled by their judicial system and the decision would be ultimately up to their supreme court.

Source: http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=2054&art...

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#156

Post by takinola » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 8:12 PM UTC

afarrell wrote: post #118

stephengillie wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying that if I take something that belongs to another person, but I believe that I should have it, no crime has been committed? That sounds like an interesting theory on Crime and Punishment . Edit: If you feel I've misunderstood the parent comment, please provide a better explanation.

If you take something that belongs to another person, but you believe you do own it, no crime has been committed. For example, if walk out of a store thinking you paid for a bag of groceries when in fact the card reader had errored and you need to swipe again. That isn't shoplifting, that is a mistake of fact. This concept is called "mens rea" or "guilty mind". A statute for each crime should define what type of mens…

Actually that is not quite right. Some crimes require both "mens rea" (intent) and "actus rea" (action) but some require just "actus rea".

For instance, murder requires both intent and action but manslaughter only requires action. Which leads to the canonical law school example of a hit man who shoots his victim with the intent to kill him but the victim does not die. Mistakenly thinking the victim is dead, the hitman leaves the body in a deserted spot in the woods whereupon the victim finally dies of exposure. The hitman technically did not commit murder because when he shot the victim, he intended to kill him but did not actually succeed. However, when he did finally kill the victim (by leaving him out to die of exposure), he had no intention of killing the victim (because the hitman thought the victim was already dead).

Of course, this is all theoretical and if you did try to pull off a crime by manipulating mens and actus rea, you would find prosecutors very creative in finding ways to throw the book at you.

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#157

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 8:43 PM UTC

stenl wrote: post #129

Bohahahaha wrote: post #79

"Those doubting the degree of ruthlessness Assange can expect should remember the forcing down of the Bolivian president's plane in 2013 - wrongly believed to be carrying Edward Snowden." If you think of Sweden as ABBA, think again: "In December 2010, The Independent revealed that the two governments had discussed his onward extradition to the US." "The rendition and subsequent torture of two Egyptian political refug…

From that link: "the Swedish authorities have never explained why they refuse to give Assange a guarantee that they will not extradite him on to the US under a secret arrangement agreed between Stockholm and Washington." Weeeell, maybe because Sweden is a democracy and has no "authorities" that can guarantee the outcome of hypothetical future legal proceedings. Also, note that Assange was obviously in Sweden when the…

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#158

Post by afarrell » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 8:53 PM UTC

takinola wrote: post #156

afarrell wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you take something that belongs to another person, but you believe you do own it, no crime has been committed. For example, if walk out of a store thinking you paid for a bag of groceries when in fact the card reader had errored and you need to swipe again. That isn't shoplifting, that is a mistake of fact. This concept is called "mens rea" or "guilty mind". A statute for each crime should define what type of mens…

Actually that is not quite right. Some crimes require both "mens rea" (intent) and "actus rea" (action) but some require just "actus rea". For instance, murder requires both intent and action but manslaughter only requires action. Which leads to the canonical law school example of a hit man who shoots his victim with the intent to kill him but the victim does not die. Mistakenly thinking the victim is dead, the hitma…

You should read through the linked section, as it specifically discusses an example mens rea requirement for manslaughter.

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#159

Post by Tloewald » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 9:32 PM UTC

philh wrote: post #138

Tloewald wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assange is claiming they can talk to him any time and the Swedes are saying they've tried and can't. That's a pretty direct conflict. Either one or the other is being disingenuous at best and outright lying at worst.

> Assange is claiming they can talk to him any time The closest I can see to this is: > From the beginning I offered simple solutions. Come to the embassy to take my statement or promise not to send me to the United States. which doesn't contradict the Swedes saying they've tried and failed. I guess you can argue that it's disingenuous.

If the Swedes have tried and haven't been allowed in then it's disingenuous on Assange's part. If the Swedes haven't really tried, then they're outright lying. Someone is lying, and it would be worth knowing who.

Maybe some Swedish comedian (or Sacha Baron Cohen in a blonde wig with a fake Swedish accent) will rock up to the Ecuadorian embassy, claim to be a Swedish prosecutor and ask to be let in and we'll finally learn the truth.

Re: Julian Assange 'disappointed' as sex assault case dropped

#160

Post by knodi123 » Thu, Aug 13, 2015, 11:11 PM UTC

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #117

knodi123 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I imagine the UK courts would hold that a rape charge in the UK is similar to a rape charge in Sweden. Although to be clear, there are no rape charges involved in the Assange case. The crime he is accused of in Sweden is not even illegal in some countries.

The BBC [1][2] and Guardian [3] are describing the remaining charge as rape. [1] quotes the Swedish prosecutor (in 2010): "There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed," she says in a statement. "Considering information available at present, my judgement is that the classification of the crime is rape." Wikipedia [4] gives the Swedish term as "våldtäkt", which Google translates as "Rape": "On 18 Novembe…

okay, the first version I heard of this was that none of the charges are rape.

However, I think we can all agree that it doesn't do the conversation any justice to discuss it in such a way as to give people the impression that he held somebody down or used violence or anything. All he did was something creepy and gross, and the only reason the woman brought it up with the cops was because she wanted him to get an STD test.