Live data from Hacker News

Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

reuters.com

291–300 of 377 posts

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#291

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…

Please be clear on your definitions.

Rape is sex with a person who does not consent. Period. What Assange is accused of is rape. Anyone who thinks otherwise should get a reality check and realize that there is no shade of grey here. Her body, her rules. Have sex without her consent, and that is rape.

Having sex without birth control with someone who didn't consent to that specific activity is legally rape in both the UK and Sweden. This is based on conditional consent, do something outside of the conditions under which consent existed, and you no longer have consent. More and more jurisdictions are recognizing this. Furthermore sex with someone who cannot consent due to being unconscious or sleeping is rape in a broader set of jurisdictions. (I do think that California goes too far by saying that you cannot consent in advance to being woken that way, but that is a different story. In this case there was no indication of consent given in advance for what he is accused of.)

So Assange is not being charged with some minor crime. He is being charged with rape.

Whether the charges would be pursued if he were someone else, well, that gets into selective enforcement. But this is at worst selective enforcement of a very reasonable law.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#292

Assange himself and the rape charges have been politicized to such an extent that I find it essentially meaningless to pontificate about what may or may not have happened in Sweden. His character has been debated endlessly, but when one thinks of what WikiLeaks has actually revealed, I find it totally likely that a systematic effort was made to curtail him: https://twitter.com/SomersetBean/status/1116916146458877952/…

If we ever saw a successful CIA operation this is it. I bet in twenty years we'll be reading how it was all organized.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#293
post #253
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikileaks is not just Assange. Obviously there far more people were working in background to verify everything they can and make sure their data is legit before they show it to the public. Do you really think there was way for them to keep upcoming release like actually secret from US government?

Sure. They probably had an idea of what was going on. Don't really see why that is important though. What I was replying to stated "The charge and extradition request was made shortly after the release of the US diplomatic cables." which is incorrect. There is not anything suspicious about the timeline as I see it, the arrest warrant was issued after Assange left Sweden during an open investigation, which he was quit…

We're discussing this now, using materials available now, and discussing a historical event that differs by two weeks. It could have been that the time stamp on the warrant was backdated two weeks.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#294
post #235
post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The observable goal of these policies is maximal license for women's sexuality and maximal suppression of men's sexuality. This isn't a normative statement, it's a descriptive one, so please don't take offense and if my description is incorrect then provide examples of, say, a woman being convicted of rape because she lied about being on birth control.

How is it suppressing the male sexuality? Do you honestly think it is a normal part of the male sexuality to have sex with unconcious women/men?

Please try steel-manning instead of straw-manning. Can you think of a circumstance where a man waking his partner with sex is a consensual activity? Have you observed that in the vast majority of sexual liaisons it’s a man doing the approaching? Do you realize that many women like male sexuality and want to be seduced? Can you see how equating normal romantic actions within a relationship with raping an unconscious drunk is dishonest and oppressive?

I can’t help observe that your implicit assumption that men are sexual predators. The need to speak out against that is the primary reason I’m willing to voice my observations on the subject.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#295
post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if, instead of your wallet, it's a box by the door labeled "cab fare" and it's been previously discussed that this box is there for people in the house, me included, to use when catching a cab to the train?

Do you think the two are equivalent somehow?

It's a metaphor. In this case, for prior consent given in the most explicit terms possible to bound the discussion.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#296
post #232
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The timing of the Swedish charge is very noteworthy. The charge and extradition request was made shortly after the release of the US diplomatic cables.

The diplomatic cables were released November 28 2010. The international arrest warrant November 18 2010. Before that other documents had been released, during the course of almost a year. So, the way I see it there is nothing really special about the timeline here. It is interesting that a lot of people seem to think that he should not be held responsible (or at least investigated) for the crimes he might have commit…

The wrong event may have been cited, but the timeline was special. As https://www.npr.org/2019/04/11/712306713/12-years-of-disrupt... verifies, here is the order of events.

April, a famous video was released from inside a chopper that was mistakenly shooting journalists. May, Chelsea Manning was arrested for that. July, 75,000 documents were released about the Afghan war. August, the rape charges are filed. October, 400,000 documents about the Iraq war. November, the cable leak.

So the cable leaks did not come first. However there was lots of other stuff already released that could have motivated the US here.

And it is also quite possible that concern over the cable leaks was the motivation. You see, the US knew about everything that Chelsea Manning had already released, and had reason to believe that Wikileaks had it all and was releasing things in stages for maximum damage. (It turns out that a drip drip of bad news has much greater emotional impact on people than a single torrent.) Therefore they had the motivation to find ways to put pressure on Assange to NOT leak what he had. And what they did, didn't work.

Moving on, please check your assumptions about whether he should be held responsible. It is my belief that he is an example of selective enforcement of laws that should be more broadly enforced. Therefore my belief that he was targeted for other reasons is not in conflict with my belief that he should have been targeted. I just think that it is wrong that it takes a guy embarrassing a major military for the police to take a woman's complaints seriously.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if, instead of your wallet, it's a box by the door labeled "cab fare" and it's been previously discussed that this box is there for people in the house, me included, to use when catching a cab to the train?

Well, that would be different, because women aren't objects labelled "for having sex with".

Why are you assuming that the person who gave prior consent must be a woman?

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#298
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know some couples might have an understanding about such things, but I consider penetrating someone who is sleeping rape.

Why limit it to penetration? Sexual contact without consent to that specific form of contact immediately preceding the contact. That is the law apparently. But as a poster above said, laws need to bend to humanity, not the other way around. If I ask my wife to ride my morning wood, then charge her with rape when she tries to divorce me for being lazy, we can all agree I think that the law is no serving justice. Also…

> If I ask my wife [...]

Wow, that's a pretty good analogy to this case, provided that you'd ask her that the day before and didn't wake up until late into the act (or at all, which I shouldn't be possible without assistance of drugs? but, I've seen some people "sleep like a log" through all kinds of commotion, so maybe it is).

Anyway, if what I read in this thread is all true, that would be a marital rape 100% and she'd get (or she should, according to the law) charged with rape if any of you ever mentioned the situation to the authorities.

Well, we're a bit too old already, but it looks like my wife and I were raping each other fairly regularly some years back. We even had fun doing this, which would possibly make it even more serious crime. This is, honestly, quite scary.

EDIT: What the heck? Have my downvoters never woke up next to their loved person and initiated an act as a "good morning" equivalent? Am I just so perverted that I should stay in the closet, or should I give myself over to the police this instant?

What I'm asking is: would the law actually go after both my wife and me (we weren't even married back then, BTW)? Wouldn't that be too much? Yeah, in the case of a one night stand it's probably the correct thing to do (maybe?), but the parent comment alluded to a long-term relationship, which I happen to enjoy (a lot :P).

Again, I'm no lawyer, I've no idea what the law says in this case, I'm but a hopeless pervert who both fucked and was fucked in a variety of circumstances and ways, including while being stoned, drunk and half-asleep (always with the same person, always safe, sane and consensual... oh wait, it couldn't have been consensual! yet it was. that's what I'm asking!) If I was to be persecuted for these acts, it's actually a serious matter for me - it means I can't write about our experiences on a blog under my name, for example. I can't mention it to people carelessly. I could endanger both myself and my wife. I'd need to hide it, I'd need to be ashamed, I'd need to try forgetting about it as if it was a sort of trauma. We've been through a lot of that already, yet there's still more coming my way? This time from people in blue instead of black uniforms?

If so, then there's something wrong with the law or public morals, or both. I don't live - and don't want to, either - in Saudi Arabia, but in an ostensibly tolerant society which accepts all kinds of fetishes without problems. At least I believe in that, but reading the comments and getting downvoted for expressing my confusion - made me start to doubt it.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#299
post #291

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…

Please be clear on your definitions. Rape is sex with a person who does not consent. Period. What Assange is accused of is rape. Anyone who thinks otherwise should get a reality check and realize that there is no shade of grey here. Her body, her rules. Have sex without her consent, and that is rape. Having sex without birth control with someone who didn't consent to that specific activity is legally rape in both the…

>Having sex without birth control with someone who didn't consent to that specific activity is legally rape in both the UK and Sweden.

I don't think it is that clear in Sweden at least. Especially not if you just say birth control, i.e. what if I woman says she is on the pill and we have sex and it turns out she lied? I don't think she would get a rape charge.

I think it is also likely that someone in Sweden would get charged with a lesser crime than rape if it turns out they just removed the condom during sex. Having sex with someone that is sleeping and has not consented would be rape though.

EDIT: After having verified some more it he was not accused of rape for the condom thing. The rape charge is having sex with a sleeping person without a condom as it can be reasonably argued that she would not have consented to sex.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were about what America wants, why wouldn’t they just let America extradite him? They already have an extradition request in.

United Kingdom does not extradite people subject to death penalty.

A non-issue, USA will guarantee in writing that will not face the death penalty in a trial. USA has done it many times, including for El Chapo.
Post reply on HN