[dead]
Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
61–70 of 784 posts
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#62Earlier 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.
[deleted]
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, he still has to serve 50 weeks for jumping bail in the UK.
He's served that time already. He's now being held awaiting extradition to the US.
> The 48-year-old Australian was evicted in April and sentenced to 50 weeks in jail for breaching his bail conditions.
Still a couple of months to go (April + 50 weeks = ~March).
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#64Does it mean he is free again?
Nah, he's gonna be extradited to the U.S. where we'll stick him in prison for life to set an example.
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
"didn't really want to participate" is basically the definition of sexual assault.
Your definition of sexual assault is dangerously lacking in nuance. Most people who have had long term sexual partners have had a time or two where they "didn't really want to participate" but did anyway without much/any complaining for the sake of their partner. Are all all those instances "basically sexual assault"? Watering down the definition of sexual assault to include instances where nobody felt assaulted in a…
Spousal rape and sexual abuse were legal in many places for a long time (and still are in some), doesn't make it not rape and sexual abuse, though.
"Informed enthusiastic consent" isn't so hard to figure out, is it? If you feel like you're being pressured into something you don't want, that's still non-consensual even if you don't put up a fight.
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
"didn't really want to participate" is basically the definition of sexual assault.
Your definition of sexual assault is dangerously lacking in nuance. Most people who have had long term sexual partners have had a time or two where they "didn't really want to participate" but did anyway without much/any complaining for the sake of their partner. Are all all those instances "basically sexual assault"? Watering down the definition of sexual assault to include instances where nobody felt assaulted in a…
While there are situations like you describe where "didn't really want to participate" represents something immoral and selfish but less insidious than what we think of as rape, there are also plenty of situations where it does represent the weighty event of sexual assault. I think your simplification is less nuanced and much more dangerous than the parent's simplification. I also think "overwhelming majority" is a scary assumption, in terms of what it says about your experiences, unless we are mapping "didn't really want to" very differently onto real examples of emotional state.
*Disclaimer: The parent post was edited after I began replying to be worded a bit less absolutely.
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#67Earlier 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…
The elites that he would attack would easily do the same, so I suppose these accusations are all tit for tat. I mean it's totally acceptable in this day and age to attack someone for something that you yourself do all the time.
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#68Earlier 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?
I do think it's likely that, assault or not, Assange behaved in an unaceptable way toward these women. He has often been quoted mentioning that he has children all over the world with various women. Surreptitiously removing a condom would be in character. If true, his attitude reminds me of Jeff Epstein's plan to "seed the human race with his DNA" by impregnanting a bunch of women on a ranch he owned. These people se…
Or the fuckingham palace apparently.
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
? Law is almost never retroactive, especially not for criminal law.
It is something that is within the lawmakers’ power to do.
In the US Ex Post Facto laws are constitutionally forbidden. Other jurisdictions is not so clear but it is generally frowned upon.
Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I don't care if his voluntary embassy stay was "similar to a Nordic prison" because he was not made to stand trial and face justice for his crimes. Justice isn't "well I did a bad thing and locked myself in a comfy house with internet and takeout food for a few years". Could you even imagine? His "freedom of movement" is self-restricted by his fear that he will have to face justice for acting as an agent of Russian m…
Really depends on what you mean by 'got away with rape'. He spoke to one judge who questioned him and left him free to go. The case got closed and the reopened by a completely different judge and he was called back. The political ties of the woman he slept with leaves a lot of unknown questions in place.
He had a modicum of interaction with the justice system and offered to be questioned over the phone which they religiously denied.
Nobody should get away with rape, but it's not clear to me that's what the story is in regards to justice.