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

UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 287 posts

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#121

Post by objclxt »

mkramlich wrote: post #108
bluesnowmonkey wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be more to the point to say that they are harboring him from espionage charges. We don't have an international incident every time somebody refuses to wear a condom.

> We don't have an international incident every time somebody refuses to wear a condom. bingo. that's why, in part, this is clearly about something other than the alleged sex incidents. it's pretty obviously about Wikileaks, trying to impede/stop/punish it and him.

That's nonsense. You only have to look at Roman Polanski, who fled rape charges to a foreign jurisdiction and the amount of press generated over that.

The women accusing Assange have a fundamental human right to due process. It is extremely unusual for someone to deny that process by fleeing into a foreign embassy. Wikileaks adds to the press, but it is noteworthy regardless of that.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#122

Post by abhimishra »

arrrg wrote: post #25
billswift wrote: post #4

If the UK really is threatening that, then that is more evidence that the Swedish charges are politically motivated rather than being from an actual crime.

Or he is someone who flees from serious charges and the British authorities don’t want to look like idiots in front of the whole world because they can’t do something simple like extradite him. Why is there this willingness to believe everything this idiot says? He’s a pompous ass, pure and simple. No conspiracy required. Meanwhile the idea of an anonymous leaks platform dies because everyone focuses on his stupid an…

> He’s a pompous ass, pure and simple. No conspiracy required.

I don't get where this sentiment comes from - care to explain?

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#123

Post by quink »

objclxt wrote: post #115

I strongly advise anyone who isn't familiar with English law (so, you know, most people here) to actually read what lawyers have to say about the matter. There is a very good legal analysis here: http://www.headoflegal.com/2012/08/15/julian-assange-can-the... Whenever I see a story here about Julian Assange I just sigh. I don't understand how on the one hand people can be absolutely appalled when stories about sexism…

> Sweden would like to question Julian Assange about allegations made be two women. These women have a right to make these accusations, and they have a right for the state to investigate them. Nobody could possibly deny this.

You may have missed this bit in the article, at the very end:

"An offer to the Swedish authorities by Ecuador for investigators to interview Mr Assange inside the embassy, was rejected."

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#124

Post by twinsnes »

objclxt wrote: post #115

I strongly advise anyone who isn't familiar with English law (so, you know, most people here) to actually read what lawyers have to say about the matter. There is a very good legal analysis here: http://www.headoflegal.com/2012/08/15/julian-assange-can-the... Whenever I see a story here about Julian Assange I just sigh. I don't understand how on the one hand people can be absolutely appalled when stories about sexism…

If all they want to do is question him, they can easily do that without extraditing him. That said, I don't know the details of the case nor any of the evidence. For me it looks like this could have been easily solved using technology, but someone is not willing, and that makes it smell like politics.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#125

Post by objclxt »

guelo wrote: post #118
elemeno wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the world tends to have different views on requesting asylum due to political persecution vs requesting it to avoid accusations that you've committed a fairly serious criminal act.

Ecuador's justification is that they believe there is a chance that the USA is planning to extradite him from Sweeden and then charge him with a crime which is punishable by death. Ecuador believes that a death sentence is a violation of Assange's human rights.

Which is of course a highly suspect claim to make, since both Sweden and the UK do not extradite for crimes that are subject to the death penalty.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#126

Post by vidarh »

mkramlich wrote: post #103
philwelch wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember another time when a country used the diplomatic immunity of their embassy to harbor a fugitive from rape charges. We're in fairly uncharted territory.

there are no rape charges. rape != sexual assault. and one could argue that "sex without a condom" with a naked woman already in bed with you by her own will is not rape, certainly. also there are no charges. merely an accusation. and they merely want to "question" him, which of course they could do easily without forcing him to go to Sweden. The whole thing is a pretty blatant sham, a masquerade for some other goal…

Note that the arrest warrant does explicitly claim rape, though it does so in a very vague manner.

Someone pointed out at the Guardian's site last night that the warrant presented to the UK courts actually is worded in a very contorted way to claim an allegation on rape on the basis that one of the women was in a "state of sleep" without actually stating whether she was asleep or half asleep and whether or not there's a claim that she was not consenting or unable to consent.

If she was claiming to be "half asleep", which is what has been stated previously in the Swedish press, and aware of what was going on, she might very well have been in position to legally consent, and there's to my knowledge not been a claim in Sweden that this in itself is what gave rise to rape claims, but that the rape claim was predicated on him not using a condom in that instance, despite her previous insistence that he had to.

It could be just an innocent bad wording, but given the rest of this case, and how this curiously misrepresents the claims presented in Sweden, this does seem rather odd. It would have been trivial to precisely express the claims presented in Sweden in unambiguous terms in far fewer words than they used.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#127

Post by youngtaff »

vidarh wrote: post #111
youngtaff wrote: post #57

About time we started applying the pressure... Assange is taking his supporters for a ride, if he's not guilty why doesn't he go back to Sweden and face the questions? As for this "I offered to talk to the Swedes in the UK" business it's bollocks, since when has law-enforcement done things at the convenience of the 'accused' The whole extradition to the US is a red-herring - have you seen how easy it is to extradite…

If he IS guilty, and knows that this isn't politically motivated, then why doesn't he go back to Sweden? The worst possible sentence he is likely to get under Swedish law is so short that he'd likely have been out by now, after serving in a low security prison of a standard better than many British hotel rooms. If he ISN'T guilty, then he has every reason to be concerned over the bizarre situations surrounding this c…

Yeh, but McKinnon may well be mentally ill. Look at the Natwest Bankers, the guys with the battery for other cases where it happened fairly quickly

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#128

Post by MiguelHudnandez »

mkramlich wrote: post #103
philwelch wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember another time when a country used the diplomatic immunity of their embassy to harbor a fugitive from rape charges. We're in fairly uncharted territory.

there are no rape charges. rape != sexual assault. and one could argue that "sex without a condom" with a naked woman already in bed with you by her own will is not rape, certainly. also there are no charges. merely an accusation. and they merely want to "question" him, which of course they could do easily without forcing him to go to Sweden. The whole thing is a pretty blatant sham, a masquerade for some other goal…

From an article about the charges [1] "...one of the women alleges that Assange behaved threateningly with her and held her down to prevent her from reaching for a condom. He did end up wearing one, but she thinks he ripped it and deliberately ejaculated inside her. He also later rubbed up against her with his pants off, she says, against her will. The other alleged victim claims that she struggled with Assange over the condom all night, had consensual sex with him when he finally put it on, and then woke up later in the night to find Assange having sex with her, without her consent and without a condom. In my personal and professional experience with rape, these kinds of allegations are both credible and common."

These are definitely allegations of sexual assault, and the described behavior treads perilously close to what everyone would agree is rape.

[1] http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2010/12/the_p...

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#129

Post by timrogers »

objclxt wrote: post #115

I strongly advise anyone who isn't familiar with English law (so, you know, most people here) to actually read what lawyers have to say about the matter. There is a very good legal analysis here: http://www.headoflegal.com/2012/08/15/julian-assange-can-the... Whenever I see a story here about Julian Assange I just sigh. I don't understand how on the one hand people can be absolutely appalled when stories about sexism…

Part of the issue though is that Assange has volunteered to speak to Swedish authorities to answer these accusations but they have refused to do this.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#130

Post by objclxt »

quink wrote: post #123
objclxt wrote: post #115

I strongly advise anyone who isn't familiar with English law (so, you know, most people here) to actually read what lawyers have to say about the matter. There is a very good legal analysis here: http://www.headoflegal.com/2012/08/15/julian-assange-can-the... Whenever I see a story here about Julian Assange I just sigh. I don't understand how on the one hand people can be absolutely appalled when stories about sexism…

> Sweden would like to question Julian Assange about allegations made be two women. These women have a right to make these accusations, and they have a right for the state to investigate them. Nobody could possibly deny this. You may have missed this bit in the article, at the very end: "An offer to the Swedish authorities by Ecuador for investigators to interview Mr Assange inside the embassy, was rejected."

So? Sweden is well within their rights to refuse that offer. They have an outstanding, legitimate European Arrest Warrant that was subject to many appeals, all of which were denied. I do not blame them for refusing that offer: are you suggesting if they did interview Assange in the embassy and decided they wanted to charge him he would just walk out happily? I doubt it.
Post reply on HN