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

341–350 of 396 posts

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#341

Post by belorn »

burkaman wrote: post #298
k1m wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your original comment made it sound like they had no input in the questions being put to Assange. Merely "present" to observe Ecuador. This article suggests Sweden was involved and I don't see anything suggesting the procedure (under "an agreement the two countries made") was problematic. Who asks the questions seems to just be a technicality here.

"Isgren is allowed to ask Assange to clarify his answers, but not to put additional questions, and will receive a written transcript of the exchanges from Ecuador after the interview has concluded." - https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/14/julian-assange... This is problematic.

They could ask for a second interview and present follow up questions.

But this raise a primary question. Is the distinction of being able to instantly make follow up questions of such importance that it will swing the binary choice of charging Assange of a crime or dropping the case?

The primary cause for a guilty and not guilty verdict should not be the quality of the environment for a police interview. Not for a such serious allegation like this.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#342

Post by Sacho »

pvg wrote: post #245
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…

You don't have to conclude this since the prosecutor has spoken about it directly: From https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/world/europe/julian-assan... "“I can conclude, based on the evidence, that probable cause for this crime still exists,” she said on Friday, the deadline for prosecutors to respond to a court-ordered deadline in the case. But prosecutors felt that they had no choice but to abandon the investigatio…

I don't understand this terminology. In the US, probable cause is a set of circumstances that can lead to a stop or an arrest. "Probable cause for a crime" makes no sense, unless it has a different meaning in Sweden. If the Swedish prosecutor thought she could win the case, why did she not press on with it? Hypothetically, if Assange had shown up in Sweden but refused to answer any questions, how would her case have changed? Was the issue that Assange was not present and a judge had to rule in absentia? If so, why did the prosecutor drop the case instead of allowing the judge to rule on it?

This just doesn't add up.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#343

Post by bjourne »

cptskippy wrote: post #268
efraim wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's nice of him to offer to answer their questions where he chooses, everyone should have that choice. It wasn't Assange that refused to go back to Sweden, it was Sweden to refused to come to Assange.

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. His refusal to cooperate with the investigation on Sweden's terms wasn't about the alleged crime itself. His concern was that because he was involved in a criminal investigation, he could be taken into custody by either British or Swedish authorities at which point he could be extradited to the US.

That was his stated concern. I don't think it makes any sense because he could have been arrested by Swedish or British authorities long before the alleged rapes occurred.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#344

Post by [deleted] »

FireBeyond wrote: post #279
appleflaxen wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think assange is a victim of an effective smear campaign, probably organized by the CIA. He addresses this specific issue in his reddit AMA: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5n58sm/i_am_julian_as...

The CIA plans an intricate effort to smear someone, to assassinate his character, and the best they come up with is "might have had sleep sex which might be quasi-consensual, said he'd wear a condom and didn't"? That was the best they could come up with for their "smear"?!?

[deleted]

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#345

Post by bjourne »

Sone7 wrote: post #326
panglott wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was Assange's claim, but there are two women in Sweden who say that he sexually victimized them. The details of their claims have been out for a while: IIRC they had consensual sex with him, and later that night he had nonconsensual sex with them. It seems Sweden (rightly) takes sexual assault much more seriously than some other jurisdictions.

The two women say they were not raped, and were railroaded by Swedish police. > "On a point of law, the Swedish Supreme Court has decided Ny can continue to obstruct on the vital issue of the SMS messages. This will now go to the European Court of Human Rights. What Ny fears is that the SMS messages will destroy her case against Assange. One of the messages makes clear that one of the women did not want any charges b…

After you have brought charges it becomes up to the prosecutor. You can't take them back. If it was possible for someone to take back charges, it would be trivial for the suspect to have the charges dropped by threatening the victim.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#346

Post by [deleted] »

rmc wrote: post #58
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…

Well if you cannot question the accused, it sort of limits what evidence you can collect...

[deleted]

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#347

Post by bjourne »

draugadrotten wrote: post #184
notahacker wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(i)The case was very publicly reopened the week after it had been announced it was being dropped. I mean, it's not like headlines like this would have escaped Assange's notice http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/rape-investig... Assange spent 26 more days in the country and then flew out hours after his arrest warrant was signed. (ii) there's nothing particularly unusual about a more senior prosecutor over…

> ii) there's nothing particularly unusual about a more senior prosecutor overriding an earlier decision of a more junior prosecutor The prosecutor who dismissed the case was senior, and not junior in any sense of the word, rank or age. You say it's not unusual (in Sweden). I've never seen a single example of another rape case which was dismissed and reopened in this manner. Can you give a few examples of other re-op…

> > ii) there's nothing particularly unusual about a more senior prosecutor overriding an earlier decision of a more junior prosecutor

> The prosecutor who dismissed the case was senior, and not junior in any sense of the word, rank or age.

Marianne Ny was Överåklagare and she was senior to Eva Finnè who had the title Chefsåklagare. According to her, she reopened the case because new relevant information had become available.

> Can you give a few examples of other re-opened Swedish rape cases, seeing that it's "not unusual" from your point of view.

It's rare but it happens: http://www.nsd.se/nyheter/forundersokning-om-valdtakt-aterup... https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/vast/forundersokning-om-va... http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artik...

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#348

Post by Sacho »

rmc wrote: post #58
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…

Well if you cannot question the accused, it sort of limits what evidence you can collect...

This document[0] alleges Sweden has a right to remain silent. If Assange had shown up in court and refused to answer any questions, how would the case have changed? What was the prosecutor's plan in this eventuality?

[0] - https://www.loc.gov/law/help/miranda-warning-equivalents-abr...

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#349

Post by bjourne »

gribbly wrote: post #309
iddqd wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rape victim is still holding on to these "fake" accusations even after 7 years. Strange eh?

Who knows, the accuser, Anna Ardin left Sweden for Israel shortly after making the accusations and has not made a single comment since then as far as I know.

Doesn't twitter count? https://twitter.com/therealardin If you mean that she hasn't made "a single comment" about the allegations, then it is possibly so that she is a public figure and doesn't want to be "the girl who accused Assange of rape" for the rest of her life.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#350

Post by kpil »

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

To be fair, he was interviewed by the police in Stockholm, whereupon the investigation was terminated and he was told he could go home.

After a while, a senior prosecutor reopened the case for unexplained reasons, and asked him to fly back to Sweden on his own expenses so he could be interviewed a second time. When he offered to meat in London, but rejected coming to Sweden, she issued an European arrest warrant. I believe he was then interviewed by the British police and was held under custody, until he made the not so brilliant decision to seek asylum in the Embassy.

I've read the police investigation and while I don't want to diminish the alleged victims, I can understand why the (female) police told him to go home in the first place.

Simply put, and I'm basing this not on Assange's statement which was anyway consistent with everyone else's stories - behaving like a total wanker is not a crime, even if you happen to do that towards a politically active left wing feminist.

Everything else than the ass-hat bit in this story is a failure of the legal system in Sweden and it's a consequence of the government's self-image as infallible and that it's relatively unprotected from civil servants with personal agendas.

Post reply on HN