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

81–90 of 784 posts

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#81

Post by kkarakk »

ceejayoz wrote: post #39
Nerdfest wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

In may she was quoted as saying "she wanted to reopen the case at any cost" and "get justice". I guess she's cool with it now? /s

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#83

Post by sambe »

k1m wrote: post #42
pjc50 wrote: post #38

It's not torture if you can leave at any time. He wasn't being held in the embassy, he was hiding there.

"Melzer was accompanied during his prison visit on 9 May by two medical experts specialised in examining potential victims of torture and other ill-treatment." Are you saying we should take your word over theirs?

He could leave the embassy at any time, which is where the purported damage was done. He is now in prison, where he cannot leave it any time. Melzer visited him recently in prison, thus your quote. It seems pretty clear. The parent may be lacking in nuance for his situation, but it is correct.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#84

Post by lucozade »

djsumdog wrote: post #9

So he still gets almost another full year in a UK jail. After that, where can he go? Let's just say he's somehow successful at avoiding US extradition (unlikely), he's not going to be able to stay in the UK (unless he has dual citizenship or can somehow claim dual citizenship through a relative). He'd have to request asylum from another European nation that he can safety get to without flying. Australia did little to…

I wouldn't imagine that he'll be offered a choice. He'll be shipped back to Aus. I can't see any reasonable defence against the deportation that would stand a chance in a UK court.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#86

Post by geofft »

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?

Sweden already announced in 2017 they were giving up prosecuting the case because of the futility of proceeding.

https://theintercept.com/2017/05/19/sweden-withdraws-arrest-...

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#88

Post by colejohnson66 »

pjc50 wrote: post #38

It's not torture if you can leave at any time. He wasn't being held in the embassy, he was hiding there.

Ah, the old “he was free to leave anytime” argument. No. He wasn’t. Yes, technically, he was free to leave, but arguing that is ignoring the fact that leaving would mean jail.

It’s victim blaming. Would you say a victim of Stockholm Syndrome is “free to leave at any time”? No, because that’s a ridiculous argument. Would you say Snowden is “free to leave [Russia] at any time”? No!

So why is it an acceptable argument when it’s Assange? Because he possibly committed a crime in Sweden? Because he indiscriminately blew the whistle on the US government’s crimes?

Sure, he’s a puppet of Russia, but to say he doesn’t deserve the same protections as the rest of us is to argue for tyranny.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#89

Post by BigJ1211 »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #11
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?

"didn't really want to participate" is basically the definition of sexual assault.

If we go by that definition then everytime your partner is horny and you're not, but you have sex with them regardless you're "sexually assaulted". As you didn't really want to participate.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#90

Post by zepto »

pluma wrote: post #65
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think most people feel like they are sometimes pressured into work they don’t want to do, but we don’t call that slavery.

Frankly maybe we should, but until we do it’s going to be hard to make this a bright line.

Post reply on HN