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

Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 377 posts

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#161

Post by ChrisSD »

gsnedders wrote: post #138
ChrisSD wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been mentioned multiple times, it was rape. The European Arrest Warrant says: ( https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html ) > 4. Rape > On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state. This was ruled by the [High Court] to be rape under [Eng…

> This was ruled by the highest court to be rape under UK law. Technically untrue. That ruling is from the High Court of Justice, making a judgment under English law (they made no declaration as to its criminality under Scots or Irish law, nor are they competent to do so). The later Supreme Court appeal didn't consider the question of dual criminality at all (it almost solely rested on the "judicial authority" of the…

Yes, English Law. I thank you for the correction.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#162

Post by Mary-Jane »

Kiro wrote: post #121
GordonS wrote: post #83

I'm not sure why the charges keep being reported as "rape", when there's no suggestion he did any such thing. The charges relate to a Swedish law about not using a condom. The woman alleges that Assange removed the condom at some point during sex, without her consent to do so, and that she noticed afterwards. Is it wrong? Yes, of course it is. Is it "rape"? No, but the media has repeated it often enough that now the…

You forgot to mention that he also had sex with a sleeping woman without her consent. How is that not rape?

Because the alleged victim isn't claiming rape. The state's position here is essentially that women don't have enough agency to know when they've been raped so they need to be "helped" to take the correct position. Bravo!

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#163

Post by duchenne »

duchenne wrote: post #26

Assange is accused of unlawful coercion and "lesser-degree rape" (mindre grov våldtäkt). In the first case, the complainant willingly had an intercourse with him. But after sex, she realized that the condom had a hole. She claims that he made it. In the second case, the complainant also willingly had an intercourse with Assange, they slept naked together. The next day in the morning, he penetrated her without a condo…

I feel sad, because this is not the right debate to have, and I initiated it.

First, I repeat: What he allegedly did is a serious and horrible crime.

Also, people need to see the elephant in the room. These two victims' case is weaponized by some governments to scare whistle-blowers. Assange directly or indirectly exposed many horrible crimes, including war rapes, group rapes, mass murders. People need to remember this video of soldiers in Irak shooting at human beings from far away while laughing and listening to rock music, and shooting again at wounded survivors crawling on the floor. People need also to remember the images of war prisoners tortured, humiliated, forced to be naked and raped with sticks.

But, more importantly, people need to make sure that future whistle-blowers fell safe to expose this kind of hideous crimes.

Prisoners' case [nsfw]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisone...

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#164

Post by mieseratte »

gsnedders wrote: post #132
mieseratte wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having sex with someone who is sleeping is definitely (alleged) rape, unless she agreed to it beforehand or something. I mean, that's a very grey and complicated area. I had an ex who would do that type of thing, and it was never discussed but was absolutely welcome. I suppose after the first time you could argue some type of implicit consent. Or maybe I'm just a Stockholm Syndrome candidate. I have no idea the dyn…

At least in England and Sweden, it is definitely the case that one cannot consent if one is not conscious, and therefore consent has not been given, therefore an offence has been committed. I believe this is true in the US as well. Consent has to be given prior to each occurrence, and therefore prior consent means nothing about future consent. See, for example, the High Court judgment (linked elsewhere in this thread…

I'm not commenting on the legalities, only the humanities.

One can either build an overly-tight system that can incidentally put innocents in trouble or an overly-loose system that risks criminals getting away. Interesting that the Europeans seem to have gone with the latter.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#165

Post by notahacker »

duchenne wrote: post #163
duchenne wrote: post #26

Assange is accused of unlawful coercion and "lesser-degree rape" (mindre grov våldtäkt). In the first case, the complainant willingly had an intercourse with him. But after sex, she realized that the condom had a hole. She claims that he made it. In the second case, the complainant also willingly had an intercourse with Assange, they slept naked together. The next day in the morning, he penetrated her without a condo…

I feel sad, because this is not the right debate to have, and I initiated it. First, I repeat: What he allegedly did is a serious and horrible crime. Also, people need to see the elephant in the room. These two victims' case is weaponized by some governments to scare whistle-blowers. Assange directly or indirectly exposed many horrible crimes, including war rapes, group rapes, mass murders. People need to remember th…

It has to be said that many other journalists who reported on war crimes (including collaborating with Wikileaks on Manning stories) are entirely safe and well and have not been accused of rape.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#166

Post by 5040 »

gsnedders wrote: post #139
thecatspaw wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> one cannot consent if one is not conscious would that negate previously established consent? As in "hey if you wanna wake me up tomorrow with sex that would be nice"

At least under English law, you cannot provide consent in advance; you must have the ability to provide and withdraw consent at the time of the act.

This recent development in English law strikes me as inhuman. It turns the kissing of a sleeping lover into a violent sexual assault. Passion and spontaneity become criminalized.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#167

Post by Cyph0n »

duxup wrote: post #146
Vinnl wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understood it, he fled to the embassy because he was afraid the Swedish allegations would be used as an excuse to extradite him to the US. Now that his UK charges can be used for that, that's no longer an objection.

>would be used as an excuse to extradite him to the US That makes no sense. Sweeden does not extradite people for political crimes and espionage is considered a political crime in Sweeden. His chance of being extradited to the US for espionage from Sweeden was extremely low from the start ... and going to the UK out of fear of being extradited to the US makes no sense considering UK and US relations.

I’m sure that Assange saw it differently, because otherwise he wouldn’t have trapped himself in an embassy for years.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#168

Post by lawlessone »

roenxi wrote: post #160
lawlessone wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I mean, if two people have sex and then sleep in the same bednight, and one of the two attempts to continue having sex in the morning ... if you wanna call that rape, rape might not even be a moral crime. Nah , that's rape, one of the parties was unconscious .

Are you talking legally or practically? Because practically being asleep and unconscious [0] are different things. Legally I'm not sure what the common jurisdictions accept. And, again, that is trivialising rape. Under that sort of definition, there would be a lot of men and women who get raped and literally just wouldn't believe a crime had happened. Might be the legal state of affairs, but it is also clearly stupid…

>Because practically being asleep and unconscious are different things. Legally I'm not sure what the common jurisdictions accept.

Try that as a defence and see how far it gets you.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#169

Post by duxup »

Cyph0n wrote: post #167
duxup wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>would be used as an excuse to extradite him to the US That makes no sense. Sweeden does not extradite people for political crimes and espionage is considered a political crime in Sweeden. His chance of being extradited to the US for espionage from Sweeden was extremely low from the start ... and going to the UK out of fear of being extradited to the US makes no sense considering UK and US relations.

I’m sure that Assange saw it differently, because otherwise he wouldn’t have trapped himself in an embassy for years.

I think it is more of a question of if he is being honest about the reasons for going to the UK.... "I was avoiding being arrested for rape" doesn't fit his narrative.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#170

Post by dragonwriter »

roenxi wrote: post #160
lawlessone wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I mean, if two people have sex and then sleep in the same bednight, and one of the two attempts to continue having sex in the morning ... if you wanna call that rape, rape might not even be a moral crime. Nah , that's rape, one of the parties was unconscious .

Are you talking legally or practically? Because practically being asleep and unconscious [0] are different things. Legally I'm not sure what the common jurisdictions accept. And, again, that is trivialising rape. Under that sort of definition, there would be a lot of men and women who get raped and literally just wouldn't believe a crime had happened. Might be the legal state of affairs, but it is also clearly stupid…

> Because practically being asleep and unconscious are different things.

Sleeping is a form of unconsciousness, not a different thing. It is different from.ither forms, as those other forms are from eachother.

Post reply on HN