Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 396 posts

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#281

Post by vidarh »

efraim wrote: post #247
vidarh wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends. Should the Swedish authority care more about convenience than about seeking justice? If they care about justice, and they are unable to get the person to Sweden, then it would seem the prudent recourse is to interview that person wherever they are. You'll note that they finally did end up interviewing Assange in London, so they have conceded that it is possible and acceptable to do so. So the question i…

So Assange should get special treatment? On what grounds? He was accused of rape, what if they decided after the interview to arrest him, should they ask nicely that he come along with them?

> So Assange should get special treatment

He is not the only person Swedish prosecutors or police will have interviewed in another country. During the extradition case, Swedish police sent investigators to Poland to interview two suspected murderers.

> On what grounds?

On the grounds that the alternative was to not be able interview him. On the grounds that it serves justice to attempt to investigate the case as far as possible even if you're not on your home turf where you have the advantage of being able to use force.

> He was accused of rape, what if they decided after the interview to arrest him, should they ask nicely that he come along with them?

What exactly was their alternative? What did waiting achieve?

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#282

Post by INTPenis »

belorn wrote: post #52

It should be noted that the prosecutor had three options: 1: Drop the charges. 2: Drop the arrest order but continue the investigation. To do so require a plan which would progress the investigation. 3: Charge Assange with rape, arguing that the evidence collected so far is enough for a case. And we got the first option, and thus we can conclude that the prosecutor don't have enough evidence to go to court and have n…

Yes but things might not be that black and white.

Another perspective on this whole story is that Swedish prosecution did what they are meant to do in such a case. They spent the time they were meant to spend trying to build the preliminary investigation and could not complete it.

So not wanting to give this case special treatment over other cases they chose to end it at this point. I'm sure this case has already received its fair share of special treatment considering the press conference today was held in both Swedish and English.

Fact is that if any other suspect of a sexual crime would flee custody and go into hiding for 5 years they would most likely drop the preliminary investigation.

What was special about Assange was that he was in a known location on foreign soil and in a politically charged situation.

So there is a more pragmatic and less conspiratorial view too but I can't say which is true. All I know is that Assange is a journalist being treated like a terrorist.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#283

Post by abritinthebay »

ttctciyf wrote: post #133
_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they really exist though? Assange travelled to the US on several occasions before the Swedish charges came up ...

I think the best indication that's emerged is in Comey's recent testimony[1] > before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Comey was asked why the United States had not charged WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange with a crime. Comey said he had to be careful with his answer, because he did not want to confirm whether there were charges pending against Assange, but then responded: “He hasn't been apprehended because he is ins…

Which, as evidence to that goes, isn't any.

Comey can't comment on classified or open cases (which Assange would be because, duh, WikiLeaks) just procedural things. Which that was.

It says nothing other than they have an investigation- well we knew that.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#284

Post by nailer »

efraim wrote: post #242
nailer wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edited: You're right. The Swedish prosecutor and police were present but indeed the questions were posed on their behalf. > On Monday morning, a Swedish deputy chief prosecutor, Ingrid Isgren, and a police inspector, Cecilia Redell, arrived at the Ecuadorean Embassy, in the Knightsbridge section of West London, as journalists gathered outside. I don't think this means that Sweden didn't get the chance to ask question…

Did you read your link? Ecuador was the one that shut him out and the questions were asked by a prosecutor from Ecuador. >The questions were prepared by prosecutors in Sweden, where an arrest warrant for Mr. Assange was issued in 2010, but were posed by a prosecutor from Ecuador under an agreement the two countries made in August. >“For some reason that I am not aware of, I am not on the list of approved persons that…

Amended.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#285

Post by FireBeyond »

crdoconnor wrote: post #171
notahacker wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strangely, the women's lawyers had a slightly different view of their desire to pursue the matter through the court than the Assange campaign to prevent the matter going to trial. It stretches credulity to argue that responsibility for the affair lies more with the "big powers" than the decision of two apparently major fans to report him to the police after comparing notes on his sexual behaviour. And suggesting the…

>Strangely, the women's lawyers had a slightly different view of their desire to pursue the matter through the court than the Assange campaign to prevent the matter going to trial. You mean the politician-lawyer Claes Borgstrom who was subsequently fired by the woman in question because he wasn't representing her and "he just wanted to be attached to a high profile case"? Yeah, nothing suspicious about that. >It stre…

Apropos of anything else, let's not pretend that a press release from "justice4assange.com" is going to be any kind of impartial, let alone be used as an authoritative source as to the thoughts and motivations of his accusers. That stains credibility, to say the least.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#286

Post by k1m »

burkaman wrote: post #272
baldajan wrote: post #238

Reading the comments, many people seem unaware that Assange was indeed interviewed by Swedish prosecutors in London [1]. And before that, for years, Assange gave them that offer, but they refused time and time again (until they reluctantly accepted) [2]. As @belorn noted [3], the prosecutors had 3 options, and given it seems like they didn't have enough to make a case or a plan to continue the investigation, it had t…

No he wasn't, he was interviewed by Ecuadorians. Swedish officers were just "present". > The Swedish assistant prosecutor, Chief Prosecutor Ingrid Isgren, and a Swedish police investigator have been allowed to be present at the interview. They will report the findings to Sweden. Edit: For people wondering what the problem is, Ecuador asked the questions and "[the Swedish prosecutor] is allowed to ask Assange to clari…

Are you suggesting the Swedish prosecution agreed to fly over to London just to sit and watch Ecuador interview Assange? I think we'd have heard more from Sweden about that if that were the case. :p

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#287

Post by FireBeyond »

rmc wrote: post #59
beagle3 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assange was basically, from his POV, defending his future freedom and poasibly his life, and still is. Very likely, he was right. How is Assange showing "idiocy" here? Also, from the perspective of a government, any government, 10 million is not even a rounding error of a rounding error in the defense budget. The intimidation might have stopped the forming of another Wikileaks or the rise of a 2nd assange. From this…

> Assange was basically, from his POV, defending his future freedom and poasibly his life, and still is. And I suspect, his reputation/good name. If he'd gone to trial, and lost, he'd be called a "convicted rapist" for the rest of his life.

True. How very noble of him. Did not want to see his reputation challenged, so refused to deal with consequences of his actions...

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#288

Post by vidarh »

ptaipale wrote: post #220
vidarh wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the "unusual persistence" I was not referring to keeping the case open, but with e.g. continuing to refuse not to interview him for four years for no good reason, while giving reasons that she eventually proved were false by finally agreeing to do it anyway.

You ignore the procedural limitations imposed by Swedish law. The law is a perfectly "good reason" for authorities to act the way they did. It is a rather common meme to accuse Swedes of not conforming to concepts of British/U.S. law (common law system) when Swedish has another system, not any worse but somewhat different in the usage of terms like "charge".

Which procedural limitations? The ones Ny proved doesn't exist when she finally after four years interviewed him in London after all?

I'm not expected Sweden to be like the UK/US - I'm Norwegian, and our system is much closer to the Swedish and to the UK/US systems.

I am expecting a prosecutor to not stubbornly refuse to take actions for fours years while claiming it to be impossible, while being contradicted by legal experts, just to suddenly decide it's possible after all.

If that's too much to ask of Swedish prosectors, you have a big problem with your legal justice system.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#289

Post by burkaman »

k1m wrote: post #286
burkaman wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No he wasn't, he was interviewed by Ecuadorians. Swedish officers were just "present". > The Swedish assistant prosecutor, Chief Prosecutor Ingrid Isgren, and a Swedish police investigator have been allowed to be present at the interview. They will report the findings to Sweden. Edit: For people wondering what the problem is, Ecuador asked the questions and "[the Swedish prosecutor] is allowed to ask Assange to clari…

Are you suggesting the Swedish prosecution agreed to fly over to London just to sit and watch Ecuador interview Assange? I think we'd have heard more from Sweden about that if that were the case. :p

Yes, because that's what happened. "The questions were prepared by prosecutors in Sweden, where an arrest warrant for Mr. Assange was issued in 2010, but were posed by a prosecutor from Ecuador under an agreement the two countries made in August." - https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/world/europe/assange-wiki...

I think a key part of a police interview is asking new questions based on responses and having an actual conversation, which the Swedish prosecutors couldn't do.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#290

Post by k1m »

staffanj wrote: post #269
baldajan wrote: post #238

Reading the comments, many people seem unaware that Assange was indeed interviewed by Swedish prosecutors in London [1]. And before that, for years, Assange gave them that offer, but they refused time and time again (until they reluctantly accepted) [2]. As @belorn noted [3], the prosecutors had 3 options, and given it seems like they didn't have enough to make a case or a plan to continue the investigation, it had t…

>Reading the comments, many people seem unaware that Assange was indeed interviewed by Swedish prosecutors in London [1]. This is simply not true. The questions was asked by Ecuadorians and had to be approved beforehand. Swedish prosecutors where allowed in the room but could not talk to Assange. IE no follow up questions etc

Do you have any sources for how the interview took place? And any indication that it was unfair? (I'm pretty sure Sweden would have refused to do it if they were unhappy with the process.)

I don't know who asked the questions, or what the procedure was, but I read the Swedish prosecutor's statement issued today and they do not mention the London interview being an issue.

Post reply on HN