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

171–180 of 377 posts

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#171

Post by lawlessone »

mieseratte wrote: post #164
gsnedders wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They're trying to extradite him based on the legalities not "the humanities" whatever you're trying to mean there..

>Interesting that the Europeans seem to have gone with the latter.

Yeah we've gone the same way on marital rape too.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#172

Post by lawlessone »

5040 wrote: post #166
gsnedders wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>It turns the kissing of a sleeping lover into a violent sexual assault. Passion and spontaneity become criminalized.

Right...

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#173

Post by Wowfunhappy »

mieseratte wrote: post #113
JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having sex with someone who is sleeping is definitely (alleged) rape, unless she agreed to it beforehand or something. Even if they had consensual sex previously. Am I misunderstanding your comment?

> 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…

Ezra Klein (a journalist for Vox) made this analogy on a podcast:

If I go to visit a very close friend, I might take something of value off their shelf as I'm walking out the door, without asking first. There's not necessarily anything wrong with this.

But, I had better be pretty fucking sure that I know my friend as well as I think I do, because if I misjudged, I'm a thief, and liable to be prosecuted by the full force of a law. Not "kind of" a thief—just a thief.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#175

Post by mieseratte »

lawlessone wrote: post #171
mieseratte wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They're trying to extradite him based on the legalities not "the humanities" whatever you're trying to mean there.. >Interesting that the Europeans seem to have gone with the latter. Yeah we've gone the same way on marital rape too.

I'm not talking about Assange, just the notion that "I didn't get a formal Yes equates to Rape" because human relations are more complicated than that.

You're creating talking points that I never did, then fighting them down to make me sound like some kind of rape apologist. Kindly piss off.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#176

Post by learc83 »

DanBC wrote: post #56
sedeki wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”And at the centre of all of this, that everyone seems to have forgotten, are these two women that have accused him of rape.” As far as I know, and at least Assange has claimed this publicly in a video at least once, these two women themselves did not make rape charges against Assange. The case was picked up by some prosecutor who initiated the charges.

"Pressing charges" may be a thing in US law, but it isn't elsewhere. In many jurisdictions prosecutors don't need the permission, nor cooperation, of the victims to bring a case to court. This is especially important in crimes of sexual violence because the fear of retribution causes many victims not to report; and because some victims will be being coercively controlled by their partners.

It's not a thing in US law either (at least in the states I'm aware of). "Do you want to press charges" is just a colloquialism that means "do you want the prosecutor to press charges, and will you cooperate as a witness."

In less serious cases the victim's wishes are taken into account. However, the prosecutor is the one who charges the accused, and consent or cooperation from the victim isn't needed. It is hard to convict in cases where an uncooperative victim is the only witness, but it happens in domestic abuse cases all the time.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#177

Post by 5040 »

saagarjha wrote: post #27
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…

> unprotected sex should be agreed by both This is what forms the definition of “rape”. People might have a different idea when they hear this word, but this is the correct term from a technical standpoint.

That some use the word in its technical sense knowing full well that it will be interpreted to mean something entirely different is troublesome.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#178

Post by pluma »

mieseratte wrote: post #113
JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having sex with someone who is sleeping is definitely (alleged) rape, unless she agreed to it beforehand or something. Even if they had consensual sex previously. Am I misunderstanding your comment?

> 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…

Let's put it this way:

If I tell you to take a fiver from my wallet and you do it, that's consensual. If you then later take another fiver out of my wallet without my permission, it's not consensual. If I catch you doing it, I might still be okay with it but that doesn't mean it wasn't non-consensual when you did it.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#179

Post by e40 »

roenxi wrote: post #148
JauntyHatAngle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having sex with someone who is sleeping is definitely (alleged) rape, unless she agreed to it beforehand or something. Even if they had consensual sex previously. Am I misunderstanding your comment?

It is certainly possible, but in this instance there are a couple of issues that reduce that to a pretty weird complaint. I mean, if two people have sex and then sleep in the same bed overnight, 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. Just a technical one. It is diluting the word to the point where it is meaningless. In t…

And at this point, it must be known if she contracted an STD from him. I'm assuming if she had, there would be additional charges for it. So, we pretty much know he didn't give her one, so it's a little weird to me that this is being discussed as a could have.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#180

Post by [deleted] »

saagarjha wrote: post #75
olalonde wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If someone consents to have sex only on the condition of protection from disease and pregnancy I had sex with a girl who lied about being on birth control. Was I raped?

I would say so: you only provided consent under certain conditions, but these ended up being violated.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN