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

Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 784 posts

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#31

Post by himinlomax »

criley2 wrote: post #21
ceejayoz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assange isn't a great example of someone escaping justice (or "the arm of the law", if you'd prefer). He spent years in a prison-like environment, and is now in prison for skipping out on bail - he's been in jail-like conditions far longer than the original crime would've incurred. He's likely to wind up in US hands later on, too.

1. His self-imposed sequester was not in prison and had NOTHING to do with justice or serving time. He willingly chose his location and is allowed to leave it at any moment. Can you say that of any prisoner? He had free access to internet and visitors and many many luxuries rightfully denied to criminals serving time 2. Even if you think his "self-imposed punishment" was bad, it categorically by definition is not jus…

He chose conditions that were arguably worse in most respects but one (access to communication/internet) than a Swedish prison.

Prison sentences in Sweden are hardly ever longer than his stay in the embassy, except for the most heinous crimes.

His claim all along was that he seek refuge in the embassy were because he feared US extradition. Those claims were ridiculed by his opponents. They are now incontrovertibly verified as true.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#32

Post by walterstucco666 »

ceejayoz wrote: post #17
Shihan wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but the testimony was surely recorded already some years ago? Or did they just wait.. I doubt so.

If admissible, there'd still be the opportunity for cross examination. Any competent defense attorney should be able to easily impeach ten year old testimony by eliciting a whole bunch of "I don't remember" responses.

Sweden is not U.S.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#33

Post by gutnor »

ivl wrote: post #2

> "The reason for this decision is that the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed since the events in question." I'm not sure I understand what's meant by this. Did the victims testimony change? How does evidence weaken over time?

Maybe the victim have moved on.

Rape without physical violence like this rely entirely on the victim testimony and even if there is a record and everything that will weaken the case terribly if the victim is no longer on board.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#34

Post by Nerdfest »

ceejayoz wrote: post #10
lettergram wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I recall the evidence was always pretty weak. I don’t have time to find the news article from back then, but it was “sexual assault” because he didn’t wear a condom and at the time the woman (perhaps plural) didn’t want to really participate. Could be wrong though... Does anyone have some news from back then?

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/julian-ass... > Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge. > Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state. It…

There was also some chatter about the woman being a former CIA operative. The whole thing has smelled so bad right from the start.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#35

Post by k1m »

Worth mentioning that Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, visited Assange and described his treatment as psychological torture:

> “It was obvious that Mr. Assange’s health has been seriously affected by the extremely hostile and arbitrary environment he has been exposed to for many years,” the expert said. “Most importantly, in addition to physical ailments, Mr. Assange showed all symptoms typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture, including extreme stress, chronic anxiety and intense psychological trauma.

> “The evidence is overwhelming and clear,” the expert said. “Mr. Assange has been deliberately exposed, for a period of several years, to progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as psychological torture.

https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?N...

This article by the UN expert is also well worth reading:

Demasking the Torture of Julian Assange - https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian...

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#36

Post by rzwitserloot »

willis936 wrote: post #26
jakelazaroff wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eyewitnesses’ memories get worse, records get lost, etc. This is one of the reasons that statutes of limitations exist.

And they probably shouldn’t. Statute of limitations should only be to protect against fast changes to the law that apply retroactively.

The notion that a new law does NOT retroactively apply to acts done before the law was enacted is not called a 'statute of limitations'.

A statue of limitations serves a few purposes.

1. At some point closure is better than justice, or at least, that's a theory. Better to get a crime on record because the committer of it confesses to it than not. The idea being that after, say, 10 years, the odds that the criminal would get caught have drifted off to as near to 0 as can be.

2. Records eventually get shredded if you wait long enough; eyewitness recollections in particular slowly mutate into conjecture (whilst said eyewitnesses will believe what they remember is accurate, there's plenty of proof out there that given enough time what they remember is not at all accurate and it gets worse over time). This makes it easier to accidentally convict on flawed evidence, and makes it harder for the defendant to defend themselves.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#37

Post by pjc50 »

willis936 wrote: post #26
jakelazaroff wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eyewitnesses’ memories get worse, records get lost, etc. This is one of the reasons that statutes of limitations exist.

And they probably shouldn’t. Statute of limitations should only be to protect against fast changes to the law that apply retroactively.

? Law is almost never retroactive, especially not for criminal law.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#39

Post by ceejayoz »

Nerdfest wrote: post #34
ceejayoz wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/julian-ass... > Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge. > Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state. It…

There was also some chatter about the woman being a former CIA operative. The whole thing has smelled so bad right from the start.

There's chatter that the Queen of England is a lizard shapeshifter. The claims that one accuser was a CIA operative appear very, very thin.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/07/rape-claims-ju...

> What has most engaged the conspiracy theorists and Assange's more excitable defenders, however, are a few key incidents in Miss A career, in particular that she is said to have worked in the Swedish embassy in the US, and wrote her university thesis in 2007 on a vision of Cuba after the death of Castro.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#40

Post by celticninja »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #4
ivl wrote: post #2

> "The reason for this decision is that the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed since the events in question." I'm not sure I understand what's meant by this. Did the victims testimony change? How does evidence weaken over time?

Eyewitnesses’ memories get worse, records get lost, etc. This is one of the reasons that statutes of limitations exist.

Yes but eyewitness testimony is first written down, their testimony in court is based off that specifically for this reason. This is also why police use notebooks. Neither of which are very reliable anyway, but courts don't rely on a witness making his/her testimony unsupported.
Post reply on HN