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

321–330 of 377 posts

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#321

Post by pvg »

tarcyanm wrote: post #154

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/…

They're striking graphics but that is an Assange advocacy account. A bunch of these things weren't 'revealed' by Wikileaks, the most famous one being the incident at the heart of their 'Collateral Murder' video.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#322

Post by akvadrako »

JoeSmithson wrote: post #222
akvadrako wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I see no indication that this was “weaponized.” Then you haven't been following this story very closely. A few brief examples: (1) The case was closed before he left Sweden. (2) They could have questioned him remotely, which they often do, but declined to. (3) The women didn't even want to charge him. (4) There is a USA extradition order in place. How can you doubt the USA wants to extradite him? (5) This isn't "ra…

> (5) This isn't "rape" by any standard definition. The "Miss W" allegation in particular is rape by almost every country's legal definition.

The legal definition of rape in many US states include two drunk people having sex together or two underage kids doing it. But almost nobody considers that rape so the legal definition is irrelevant.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#323

Post by akvadrako »

mikeash wrote: post #247
JoeSmithson wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (5) This isn't "rape" by any standard definition. The "Miss W" allegation in particular is rape by almost every country's legal definition.

Quick tip to anyone taking Assange’s side in this: your argument will work a lot better if you leave out all the stuff about whether his alleged crime is really “rape” or is just some lesser crime involving his wiener and another person. It just makes you sound like a redpiller and will turn people against you.

And a tip for anyone trying to defend Sweden - calling this rape shows your bias right away - that word is just used to discredit him.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#324

Post by trevelyan »

tdcbfdct3 wrote: post #290
tarcyanm wrote: post #154

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/…

Who's politicized the rape charges other than Assange himself continuously calling them a government conspiracy against him? The Swedish government doesn't discuss them (which is what's allowed Assange's version of events to get so popular). The US hasn't mentioned it. The UK gave him a fair trial based on them.

The UK trial was not on the rape charges (there was no permitted discussion of the evidence or total lack of it). The ruling was over whether the UK was bound to extradite given the Swedish government's refusal to interview Assange in England or indict him in Sweden. The tortured legal conclusion was basically that the UK couldn't definitively conclude the Swedes were acting in bad faith, and they couldn't be entirely sure that Assange was only being extradited for questioning (technically illegal).

As far as the Swedes go, the Swedish government discussed the case when it closed it for the first time. If the government hasn't been public about the case since it was re-opened by a political appointee, perhaps it is because there is zero evidence against Assange. We know this because the pretext for re-opening the case was the "discovery" of new physical evidence (a broken condom) that lacked any of Assange's DNA. This is all public knowledge, btw. Funny how it isn't discussed much in the press.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#325

Post by belorn »

duxup wrote: post #169
Cyph0n wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So he is accused of a crime and he go to the police station and give his statement. He lets the investigator know he is staying in the country for several week, in the case they have any more questions. The case get closed.

Months later he publish the leaks and travel to the UK, and a European arrest warrant is issued. After which there is a report that US diplomats visited the justice department before the case was reopened, but the department head swears that it did not influence the decision.

Just like Sweden has laws against extraditing people for political crimes and espionage, its justice department has laws that forbids it from being influenced by politics. The official statement is that the chain of events is just a coincident and the leaks, US diplomats and everything else did not effect the decision of the prosecutor when they decided to reopen the case and issue the European arrest warrant.

Some other minor details is that not only is the Assange case the most expensive UK police case in UK history, but this European arrest warrant is also a record in Sweden. No other warrant that Sweden has issued has as low maximal punishment. This is official also just a coincident.

I personally are not that surprised that Assange do not believe it to be coincident. I wonder if not most people would become a bit paranoid if they were under similar circumstances, and not accept the claim that it is just a coincident and that the Sweden and UK legal system are just following standard procedure.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#326

Post by belorn »

kemayo wrote: post #234
repolfx wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how I remember it at all. Assange left Sweden because the allegations had been dismissed by prosecutors. He didn't run from Swedish justice, quite the opposite, he hung around longer than necessary until he was told there was no further business to be done. It was only once he was in the UK that Sweden decided, for no obvious reason at all, that the allegations maybe weren't bogus after all.

The timeline given in this 2012 summary suggests that the allegations weren't dismissed before he left, but rather were still in a "we'd like to talk to you more" stage: https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/media/2012/09/legal-mytho... EDIT: I found this timeline from the Swedish Prosecution Authority which seems to agree with that: https://www.aklagare.se/en/news-and-press/media/the-assange-...

On 20 August 2010 the accusations was reported.

On 21 August 2010 the case was looked at by a prosecutor.

On 25 August 2010 the case was dismissed, a decision which the lawyer representing the women objected and requested a review.

On 30 August, Assange was questioned by the Stockholm police.

On 1 September, the case was reopened.

On 27 September, Assange left the country. Assange's London lawyer Mark Stephens said that Assange had asked to be interviewed by prosecutors before leaving Sweden but was told he could leave the country without being interviewed. Swedish prosecutors said that on the day Assange left Sweden they had informed Assange's Swedish lawyer Björn Hurtig that an arrest warrant would be issued for Assange. Assange is arrested in his absence.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#327

Post by belorn »

ChrisSD wrote: post #233
repolfx wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how I remember it at all. Assange left Sweden because the allegations had been dismissed by prosecutors. He didn't run from Swedish justice, quite the opposite, he hung around longer than necessary until he was told there was no further business to be done. It was only once he was in the UK that Sweden decided, for no obvious reason at all, that the allegations maybe weren't bogus after all.

This was not true. https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2011/5.html > In cross-examination the Swedish lawyer confirmed that paragraph 13 of his proof of evidence is wrong... He then confirmed that on 22nd September 2010 at 16.46 he has a message from Ms Ny saying: “Hello – it is possible to have an interview Tuesday”. Next there was a message saying: “Thanks for letting me know. We will pursue Tuesday 28th at 1700”.…

Context:

"The lawyer gave live evidence covering in some detail the attempts made to secure an interview with his client. On 15th September Ms Ny told him there were no “force measures” preventing Julian leaving the country, i.e. he was allowed to leave. ... He phoned his client to say he was free to leave the country to continue his work."

"He conceded that it is possible that Ms Ny told him on the 21st that she wanted to interview his client... Then he was then cross-examined about his attempts to contact his client. To have the full flavour it may be necessary to consider the transcript in full. In summary the lawyer was unable to tell me what attempts he made to contact his client... He said “I don’t think I left a message warning him”"

"In re-examination he confirmed that he did not know Mr Assange was leaving Sweden on 27th September and first learned he was abroad on 29th."

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#328

Post by notahacker »

bdamm wrote: post #293
ivarb wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Except that it was widely reported by mainstream media on 18th November, as the culmination of a long, drawn out and widely reported appeal process dating back to earlier in the year. It really is astonishing how creative people can get with the well-established facts in order to make their conspiracy theories have legs...

Ockham's razor says if there's any connection at all between the two dates, it's Assange ordering Wikileaks to release the files as soon as possible after the arrest warrant was issued to get himself more sympathetic news coverage.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#329

Post by dang »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #227
viivaux wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone interested, here are the actual facts surrounding this case. https://justice4assange.com/note-to-editors-sweden.html The way media has "covered" this, it is not all that surprising to see ignorant comments and cynical speculation. Such deliberate and thorough ignorance as the above is a little more rare.

Seems like a credible and unbiased source, thanks for the link.

Please don't post unsubstantive comments here.

Re: Sweden reopens Assange rape investigation, to seek extradition

#330

Post by dang »

viivaux wrote: post #284
SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a credible and unbiased source, thanks for the link.

There are links to primary evidence and unbiased sources throughout. It's absolutely riddled with them, as this thread is with people like you. So, you're welcome. Except, from your recent comments you seem highly averse to becoming familiar with the facts, even when people have put them right in front of you.

Personal attacks will get you banned here, regardless of whether someone else posted a bad comment. We've had to warn you several times before. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and fix this, so we don't have to ban you?
Post reply on HN