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

571–580 of 784 posts

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#571

Post by kick »

jeffdavis wrote: post #560
blattimwind wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US justice system is possibly the most cruel justice system in the West, and by quite a margin, too. It is one of a few aspects in which the US is far closer to today's developing and third world countries than to the Western average. Also over many decades many organizations have called out the conditions in parts of the US justice system as torture(-like).

The US is a leader in many respects, due largely to our Constitutionally-protected rights. I'm not a fan of the US prison system. But are you seriously claiming that the whole justice system is worse than Venezuela or Honduras?

It's not as clear-cut as you think. Venezuela was the first country to abolish the death penalty, and it's still gone. The United States still willingly, and gleefully in some cases, executes citizens. For non-citizens, whether you get justice or not is a toss-up.

We have three types of penal systems here in the United States: the actual court system, the unconstitutional-yet-protected-in-court 100-miles-from-the-border Constitution-exemption zone that contains two thirds of the US population (and a large portion of the country's non-citizens),[1-2] and the unconstitutional-yet-barred-from-being-contested-in-court intelligence agencies.[3-5] It's hard to claim that you're doing that much better when you're only so far from Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay, or one of the other hundreds of black sites. Worst is when these systems mix, but it happens more and more often now.[6]

[1-2 I realized this is a weird claim, but it's true, and here are two of the outlets furthest from one another politically claiming it's true to give evidence that it is]

[1] https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

[2] https://www.rt.com/usa/court-upholds-laptop-border-searches-...

[3] https://www.wired.com/2015/08/hard-sue-nsa-prove-spied/

[4] https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/privacy-and-surv...

[5] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/04/judge-dodges-legality-...

[6] https://theintercept.com/2017/11/30/nsa-surveillance-fisa-se...

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#572

Post by chrisco255 »

jeffdavis wrote: post #565
tyingq wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of arrested, but not convicted, prisoners in city and county jails in the US. Often for months or longer.

Progress is being made with the elimination of cash bail in some places, and Trump's First Step Act.

To point made above, yes, it's just Federal, but the Federal stance on this could influence states to follow suit, especially since it had bipartisan support...a precious commodity in public policy these days.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#573

Post by matthewdgreen »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #339
matthewdgreen wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Let's assume for a moment that your premise is true, and Assange got the DNC documents from Russian intelligence. Should he have buried the documents? The idea that Wikileaks took a non-partisan, journalistic attitude towards these leaks is a fantasy. He repeatedly contacted the Trump campaign and told them that he had "damaging leaks" on the way, and made it clear in internal chats that he wanted to use Wikileaks t…

Journalists aren't required to be non-partisan. You don't seriously believe that journalists working at the NY Times or Washington Post are non-partisan, do you? What matters is whether the information Assange published was true and in the public interest. Do you believe that it would have been better for Assange to cover up for the DNC and Hillary Clinton and decide not to publish their dirty laundry?

Being partisan is fine for a journalist! But your premise in the OP is that Assange had to choose between burying the documents and publishing them -- because he had a responsibility to inform the public over what were matters of public interest. I don't think he did either of those two things, I think he did a third thing.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#574

Post by papito »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #563
magduf wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of them have already said they'd be fine with him shooting someone in broad daylight on a NYC street, and think that this isn't an impeachable offense.

That's hyperbole though. they're just showing that they are trumpers until something ridiculous like that happens. I'm sure there are some zealots but 99% of them would not be cool with him murdering someone in cold blood.

They actually brought that hyperbole up to one of the supporters and they asked "well, so what did that person do that he would shoot them?"

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#575

Post by MuffinFlavored »

undersuit wrote: post #422
MuffinFlavored wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is he in police custody? Excuse my ignorance, I don't know a lot about him other than he's a popular whistleblower who was involved in WikiLeaks. Is he in police custody for that?

>Excuse my ignorance I really, really want to be mean to you, but I'll copy and paste the second and third sentences from the article. Assange, who denies the accusation, has avoided extradition to Sweden for seven years after seeking refuge at the Ecuadorean embassy in London in 2012. The 48-year-old Australian was evicted in April and sentenced to 50 weeks in jail for breaching his bail conditions.

I mixed up Snowden + Assange, thank you for not being mean. :)

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#576

Post by sammex »

buboard wrote: post #277
ChrisSD wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having sex with an unconscious (due to sleep) woman counts as rape in the UK. Only the UK and Sweden's laws matter when extraditing between those countries.

waking up with sex isnt the same as unconscious sex. and its apparent from the description in the article that it was consensual

it is absolutely rape.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#577

Post by lyudmil »

joshuamorton wrote: post #471
lyudmil wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, but that's the issue. As currently constructed, the espionage act cannot be challenged in court. Assange would want to argue that he isn't a spy, but a whistleblower. The argument would be that he willingly broke a law in order to expose more illegal behavior by the government. In order to make that argument, he has to be allowed to talk about what the government does. Under the espionage act, though, the governm…

This is plainly false. The judge is the one who decides if the actions of the government bare relevant. If the judge believes they are, they will be admitted, and parts of the trial will be closed, but other parts will remain open.

I would urge you to do research to confirm your assertion here. What I described is not a fringe view, it's literally a summary of the Criticism section in the Wikipedia entry for the law in question:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917#Criticis...

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#578

Post by rndgermandude »

samdfonseca wrote: post #348
ckastner wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You quote: > “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.“ That quote lacked information on who was exposing him and what that exposure actually was, so I followed your source. That source elaborates as follows: > “In the co…

> "arbitrary confinement in the Ecuadorian embassy, to his oppressive isolation, harassment and surveillance inside the embassy, and from deliberate collective ridicule, insults and humiliation" Not only hyperbole, but it's entirely self-imposed. He wasn't confined to the embassy, he chose to stay there rather than face trial. He chose "deliberate collective ridicule, insults and humiliation" over defending himself a…

What trial was he to face? Sweden hadn't charged him with anything. They wanted to interview him as a witness, against himself essentially, so they could use what he said against him if (not when) they might have actually charged him in the future. He offered repeatedly to be interviewed, first in the UK and later in the Embassy.

This whole situation was ridiculous and kafkaesque. Charge him or do not charge him, and if you do charge him then, any only then, demand extradition.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#579

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

matthewdgreen wrote: post #573
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Journalists aren't required to be non-partisan. You don't seriously believe that journalists working at the NY Times or Washington Post are non-partisan, do you? What matters is whether the information Assange published was true and in the public interest. Do you believe that it would have been better for Assange to cover up for the DNC and Hillary Clinton and decide not to publish their dirty laundry?

Being partisan is fine for a journalist! But your premise in the OP is that Assange had to choose between burying the documents and publishing them -- because he had a responsibility to inform the public over what were matters of public interest. I don't think he did either of those two things, I think he did a third thing.

What he did was perfectly in line with what he's always said he would do. The only reason people are upset is that they wish he wouldn't publish embarrassing things about politicians they support. If Assange had instead published Trump's dirty laundry, the very same people would be praising him. But as Assange said, it's hard to imagine what he could have published about Trump that would be worse than what was already publicly known.

Re: Sweden Drops Julian Assange Rape Investigation

#580

Post by joshuamorton »

lyudmil wrote: post #577
joshuamorton wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is plainly false. The judge is the one who decides if the actions of the government bare relevant. If the judge believes they are, they will be admitted, and parts of the trial will be closed, but other parts will remain open.

I would urge you to do research to confirm your assertion here. What I described is not a fringe view, it's literally a summary of the Criticism section in the Wikipedia entry for the law in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917#Criticis...

And the response is simple and straightforward: civil disobedience doesn't result in an immunity to consequences.
Post reply on HN