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

311–320 of 377 posts

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#311

Post by dang »

kermitismyhero wrote: post #207
jcranmer wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't had much respect for Assange long before the Podesta/Clinton emails. WikiLeak's big coup was cablegate, the main revelations of which boil down to "diplomats are very frank about people when they're not speaking in public." At the same time, Assange seemed to want it to be compared to the Pentagon Papers leak, which revealed that the US military was covering up the course of the Vietnam War. Instead cablega…

>WikiLeak's big coup was cablegate Don't gaslight. Wikileaks' big coup was Collateral Murder, which showed to the entire world how US soldiers enjoy committing war crimes at the behest of senior US military leadership whenever they think they can get away with it.

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. Escalatory snark and jabs like "Don't gaslight" don't belong here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#312

Post by saalweachter »

JamesBarney wrote: post #252
SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure why you're trying to hand-wave this away by using language like "alleged sleep-sex-offenders" and "having sex with their sleeping sex partner without a condom". If this falls under the definition of rape in Sweden then the extradition request is for just that - a charge of rape. This is a very serious crime. Whether you agree with their definition or not doesn't really affect the legality or validity of…

Here's the longest most explicit story on the incident I could find. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange... It definitely paints a picture of him being a dirtbag but I don't know if this would even be illegal in the U.S. or what people would conventionally describe as rape.

If only there were some system of international law by which a country could decide if they found the other country's laws to be compatible with their own, both in the definition of crimes and their punishments, and could then decide whether they wanted to comply with an individual extradition request on a case by case basis.

It's such a shame that any country in the world can issue an extradition request to any other country in the world for any reason, and that other country has no choice but to immediately comply with it.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#313

Post by cc81 »

btilly wrote: post #305
cc81 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 ge…

I have no evidence that you're wrong. I know that the UK court which agreed to extradite him concluded that, under UK law, removing the condom was rape. But I'm not as familiar with the actual Swedish charges.

Are you sure that they extradited him for the removing condom thing? Because that was one of the lesser charges in Sweden but he was also charged with rape due to the sex with the sleeping woman without a condom. I assume he was extradited because of that charge.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#314

Post by thatoneuser »

whateveracct wrote: post #283
thatoneuser wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why isn't it rape/sexual batter for a woman to have sex without bc then? Or at least to have sex without bc if she made the guy think she had it? How did men's reproductive rights get passed over while women's are comprehensive?

This is the most "what about men" comment I've read in a while. Every man should be prepared for every one of their sexual partners to become pregnant, even if BC or condoms or other contraception are involved. It comes with the territory, and you can be sure that women are aware of the risk (since pregnancy is a first-person risk for them).

It's a first person risk for men too. The only difference is women have viable options.

"What about men comment" - what misandrist ignorance. Men need rights and they currently have none.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#315

Post by dang »

turk73 wrote: post #90
bjourne wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is the general public? Clearly, him running away from the Swedish police was a bad thing to do. I also don't like him because he supported/supports Trump. However, prosecuting him for his journalistic work is insane!

[flagged]

Please don't take HN threads on offtopic flamewar tangents.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#316

Post by thatoneuser »

icebraining wrote: post #258
thatoneuser wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why isn't it rape/sexual batter for a woman to have sex without bc then? Or at least to have sex without bc if she made the guy think she had it? How did men's reproductive rights get passed over while women's are comprehensive?

> Or at least to have sex without bc if she made the guy think she had it? Isn't it?

I've never seen a law in the US that would make it so, but I'd be happy to see one.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#318

Post by cpach »

cwyers wrote: post #307
cpach wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it would be great if we could avoid Assange threads here on HN. Nothing good will come out of it.

It would be better if we had a community here that could handle discussing topics like this in a sensitive and respectful way.

Maybe, but I’m afraid I can’t see that happening. Too many people lose their marbles when the topic of Assange comes up.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#319

Post by ascorbic »

sjwright wrote: post #238
_Microft wrote: post #158

Would the people who argue that the described situation was not rape please remember that it actually is under swedish law and the situation in your own jurisdiction is irrelevant here?

If Swedish law used the word arson to describe the situation, would you accept that term and call Assange an arsonist? As a commentator, I am not beholden to novel terminology used elsewhere, let alone in a country that doesn’t even use English as their primary national language.

The UK Supreme Court ruled that the accusations would be classified as rape under English law too. That was ones of the ground that he used to challenge the original warrant.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#320

Post by btilly »

cc81 wrote: post #313
btilly wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no evidence that you're wrong. I know that the UK court which agreed to extradite him concluded that, under UK law, removing the condom was rape. But I'm not as familiar with the actual Swedish charges.

Are you sure that they extradited him for the removing condom thing? Because that was one of the lesser charges in Sweden but he was also charged with rape due to the sex with the sleeping woman without a condom. I assume he was extradited because of that charge.

I am sure that they concluded that because I read that part of their conclusion at one point.

I don't know what else they may have concluded. But standard legal practice is to come to a conclusion about each charge regardless of what others you decided in case some of your conclusions are overruled on appeal.

For example if you conclude that either the condom or the sleep charge is sufficient, then the extradition can go forward even if the sleep charge got dropped.

Post reply on HN