So if it turns out that Julian Assange is guilty of rape....

[Scuba]

.... does that mean that helicopter DIDN'T shoot all those civilians?

Does that mean all those embarrassing cables just go away, kinda like Bush's National Guard record after Dan Rather's brain fart?

Considering the 30 seconds of national angst expressed over what Assange released, I don't know how you can charge him with jaywalking.

I can only assume they're hunting him down to serve as a deterrent for the next whistleblower, kinda like why Bradley Manning lives in a cell with just a blanket.

[Robb]

1. Flip that around.

How many people do you get to rape if you've facilitated the release of important information that exposed war crimes?

[Scuba]

4. Your question would be the "flip" of "How many war crimes do you get to commit....

if you've exposed a rape?"



What's your point?

[sabrina 1]

34. The point is pretty transparent.

[treestar]

46. Logic fail

Robb's question is the flip of yours.

It's people saying he should be immune from all prosecution. Unlike others who have to face courts for accusations.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

53. If Assange is guilty none of the evidence goes away.

So there's no threat in having the matter settled openly.

If he is guilty there is no threat to future whistleblowers, only future rapists. It's not having the issue settled openly that discredits the presumed cause of transparency. If Assange buried himself any deeper he could hider himself under Mitt Romney's tax returns.

[MrMickeysMom]

71. OH, balls...

You know full well what the OP is saying, Robb.

Whatever charges are brought up, they aren't on the level with what has been thrown at Assange.

The rape charges are the false flag. When considered themselves, they bring whatever the due process is... Meanwhile.... look at the shiny object, America... Look the other way as military commands go haywire with the murder of innocent people and media. Look the other way as Bradley Manning is physically and psychologically tortured for whistle blowing.

It's like a bad episode of the Twilight Zone, seeing what we've become distracted with and have argued over, while the crimes are camouflaged and "renditions" continue.

[jerseygal]

2. But he probably wasn't guilty of forcible rape or

legitimate rape - probably it was illegitimate rape.

And besides, the woman didn't get pregnant since women can secrete a magic hormone that keeps them from getting pregnant when raped.

I'm waiting for Congressman Akin to come out for freedom for Julian Assange.

In that case, I think a lot of us will want to support him against those in the Republican party who are asking him to resign.

[littlewolf]

42. so was it rape .. or was it rape rape ...

with apologies to Whoppi ...

[Egalitarian Thug]

43. I'm pretty sure that the victim's opinion is paramount for a rape charge, and sadly for the

authoritarians, neither of these women agree with the state's position.

[treestar]

48. That one was shown to be false yesterday

The women DO want him prosecuted. And it doesn't matter whether they want it or not. It's up to the state to prosecute crimes.

And anyway that does not deal with the hypothetical. He's guilty in the hypothetical.

[Egalitarian Thug]

66. Really? When/Where? n/t

[The Doctor.]

89. Having a history of inventing intentions out of thin air,

It might behoove you to provide some evidence that what you say is true.

[treestar]

95. I'll have to search DU

There are so many threads about him.

However, I do not make up things. Quit with the personal attacks and the lie about these women.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021161655#post11

[The Doctor.]

96. Like so many, you have assigned intentions that aren't there

and put words in people's mouths.

Maybe I'm mistaking you for someone else, and I'm angry with myself for not bookmarking every instance, but it's like a plague on humanity when people read shit that simply isn't there.

[treestar]

97. Nice try, but the women DO want the law to continue to proceed against him

for what they reported he did to them.

supporters work very hard to try to muddy the facts and even lie in order to get their hero into martyr / victim position.

[dipsydoodle]

3. Thought you were going to ask

"if it were to be found that Julian Assange was guilty of rape then could he still be extradited from Sweden to the USA."

[CabCurious]

5. Separate the principles of whistle blowing vs the creepiness of Assange

I genuinely consider him a creep. I think he's damaged whistle blowing more than he's supported it.

What we must prepare for is the chance that he IS guilty of trying to impregnate these two women (and perhaps others) against their will, WITHOUT ALLOWING THAT STORY TO DISCREDIT THE IDEA OF WHISTLE BLOWING.

[xchrom]

8. just for the CRAZY...

[randome]

11. Because anyone who holds a different pov from you is just craaaazy!

[CabCurious]

18. Crazy to think these two women deserve to be heard in court...

[pinboy3niner]

6. I hide Assange threads that aren't posted in Swedish

Just so you know.

[Scuba]

9. No prob. I cross-posted in the Sweden forum.

[pinboy3niner]

20. Tack.

[CabCurious]

23. hah! :D

[vaberella]

7. He's guilty of rape?! Any links that state this? n/t

[pinboy3niner]

12. OP posits a hypothetical. nt

[CabCurious]

13. The 2 women in sweden accuse him of trying to impregnate without their consent

The first woman said he intentionally used a broken condom.

The second woman said he engaged in unprotected sex while she was asleep.

While that is certainly creepy, I don't think it rises to what Americans consider "rape." However, in Sweden that behavior does constitute their definition of rape. And he fled the country before they finished the investigation.

And he claims it's all some big US conspiracy to get him.

[gollygee]

27. Uhm, I think most Americans consider sexually penetrating someone who is asleep and

therefore can't consent to be rape. In fact, I think it's illegal here as well as in Sweden, but I don't know if rape laws are state-specific so I can't speak for every state.

But it is rape if you sexually penetrate a woman while she's asleep regardless of whether she's had sex with you before, regardless of whether she's had sex with you that night already, and regardless of whether you are wearing a condom. The fact that he didnt' wear a condom just shows that he knew he was doing something against her wishes.

(I am not anti-Assange. I just don't like to see anyone - on the right or left - try to redefine rape to fit their political issues.)

[LadyHawkAZ]

33. Indeed

because Sweden has such a fantastic record of prosecuting rape when the accused is right there on the spot, doesn't go anywhere and isn't named Assange. Nothing suspicious going on there at all.

"Rape convictions are already rare in Sweden. In 2010, there were 4,134 rapes reported to police, but only 313 resulted in indictments that were brought to trial, and of that figure, 33 percent were acquitted."

Try to look past the R word to the rest of the stuff that's going on.

[gollygee]

35. this is what makes me very skeptical of the pursuit of him

I wish rape charges were taken so seriously but they aren't, by any government, unless you are wanted for some other reason.

[LadyHawkAZ]

37. Bingo n/t

[CabCurious]

41. Technically, the reason he's being pursued is because he FLED

Obviously there is pressure to hold this twit accountability for SOMETHING.

Yes, he's a twit.

He takes credit for real whistle blowers who end up in prison while he runs around sexing fawning women.

[LadyHawkAZ]

77. As I said further down

Sweden doesn't prosecute rape cases. The ones that DO make it are the exception, not the rule. This has been noted for YEARS. Let me repeat that: they do not prosecute rape cases when the accused are in-country and not going anywhere. So: feel free to explain to me why a case that was already dropped for lack of evidence- and the subsequent evidence has actually weakened the original case- is so uniquely, magically credible that Sweden is pursuing it across international borders. I'm listening.

[CabCurious]

40. So we should allow him to run because????

Sweden's record is suspicious?

[LadyHawkAZ]

50. Yep

not only their record, but their pursuit in spite of that record, is suspicious. I said it before: the way this case has been handled has destroyed any possibility for justice even if the women had been raped. They dropped the original warrant for lack of evidence, remember, in the way that Sweden is famous for- before someone apparently noticed the name on the file and it got political.

Like I said, get past the R word. Set it aside. Focus on the actions of the authorities surrounding the case and put what he's charged with away for awhile. You're reacting to the charge the way people should react to the idea of rape- and it's appreciated, believe me- but you're not looking at the bigger picture.

[treestar]

51. That does not matter in the legal system

Merely because there were "only" 4000 rapes reported to the police does not mean that the next victim is supposed to be suspect. That's evil. And the indictments and convictions are based in evidence in those cases. The evidence in each case is unique. Each case is judged on its own merits and the evidence, not a percentage based on prior convictions. This is despicable to suggest that women in Sweden should not get justice because of prior cases.

[LadyHawkAZ]

54. Way to misinterpret what I said

(honestly, I'm not sure why I bother with these threads, there are none so blind etc.)

What I am saying is that it's highly improbable that Sweden, after years of blatantly ignoring their rape victims and continuing to ignore them (that article is dated March 2012), has suddenly decided to become an advocate for rape victims to the point of an international incident. After dropping the charges for lack of evidence the first go-round.

As for evidence- what evidence do you feel has made this case so uniquely credible that Sweden is so willing to pursue it, after years of a horrible track record?

[struggle4progress]

74. So your theory is: A state with a poor record of rape prosecution isn't allowed to prosecute anyone?

[gollygee]

76. They're allowed to

it just seems odd that no one ever cares about rape until it involves someone wanted for other political reasons.

Maybe all the discussion about rape will make that crime taken more seriously? I can hope so. But I am skeptical of their sudden concern about rape. I wish I weren't so cynical but it comes from experience.

[struggle4progress]

80. In the early Fall of 2010, Assange supporters were assuring us Swedish women cry rape! as a hobby

and that the country was in the grip of radical feminists who wanted to put anybody with some testosterone behind bars. We heard about the demented feminism of the women making the accusations, the extreme feminism of the prosecutor, the the self-loathing crazy male feminism of the women's attorney ...

The field seems pretty well plowed to me, and I think we all have thoroughly muddied our boots trudging to and fro across it

[gollygee]

82. That sounds like something someone accused of rape might say

Particularly if he is very mysoginist, but that doesn't explain why Sweden hasn't been particularly concerned about rape in their country until this one. Even stranger rape, which even rape apologists usually are bothered by, gets less outrage than these charges. Women who charge people with rape after having consensual sex are often not taken seriously. Very often. It would be more like, "Are you sure you don't want to sleep on this and reconsider tomorrow whether you want really to press charges?" Not talk of extradition and all this. And I do wish rape were taken so seriously, but it isn't. Him being a sexist jerk doesn't explain why this case is being pursued to vigorously when most rape charges are not taken seriously.

[gollygee]

83. And I apolgoize for my typos

but I'm using an ipad and don't have the patience to edit myself as I go. Sorry!

[LadyHawkAZ]

78. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1181629

It's right above this post. How did you miss it?

[struggle4progress]

92. ... Sweden has the second highest number of rapes in the world ... Only the small African country

of Lesotho reported more rapes ... The unflattering statistics are in a new report from UNODC. It shows that in Sweden reported 53.2 rapes per 100 000 population ... The high figure does not necessarily mean that Swedes are actually more likely to be raped than others. The propensity to report a rape may be higher here than in other countries ... In Sweden, around 80-90 percent of rapes remain secret, and it is difficult to know the numbers for other countries ...

... Sverige har näst flest våldtäkter i hela världen ... Bara i det lilla afrikanska landet Lesotho anmäls fler våldtäkter än här ... Den mindre smickrande statistiken finns i en ny rapport från FN-organet UNODC. Den visar att det i Sverige anmäls 53,2 våldtäkter per 100 000 invånare ... Den höga siffran behöver inte betyda att svenskar faktiskt löper större risk att våldtas än andra. Anledningen är att benägenheten att anmäla en våldtäkt kan vara högre här än i andra länder ... Problemet är att knappast något annat brott har så högt mörkertal som våldtäkt. I Sverige kommer omkring 80–90 procent av våldtäkterna aldrig till samhällets kännedom, och det är svårt att veta hur de siffrorna ser ut i andra länder ...
http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/article12417039.ab

Cross-country comparisons on such matter are notoriously difficult. If you want to meaningfully compare (say) conviction rates, you really should have some idea how reporting rates vary and in particular how reporting might vary with the circumstances of the assault. Many different explanations might seem to fir the data if Sweden seems to have rather high reporting rates and rather low conviction rates

[LadyHawkAZ]

94. Good thing I wasn't making a cross-country comparison then

although I could... and it still wouldn't be in Sweden's favor. They don't have an over-reporting problem- why would women come out in droves, higher than any country in the EU, to report rapes that they know won't be prosecuted? That's a ludicrous excuse. Sweden has a rape problem because Sweden has little interest in punishing rapists not named Assange. THAT was the point I made.

I also asked a fairly important question that three of you have now ignored and I find that telling.

[Spider Jerusalem]

10. Assange is not Wikileaks; his supporters are making the mistake of conflating the two.

To believe that Assange should return to Sweden to answer allegations of rape and sexual assault is not to believe that he should be extradited from Sweden to the US on espionage charges; nor is it to believe that corruption and war crimes ought not to be exposed. Nuanced thinking is apparently an alien concept to a lot of people, though.

[CabCurious]

14. It's really depressing

That so many progressives have dropped all principle and logic in blind support of this man.

[Scuba]

17. What about the things he exposed?

[CabCurious]

19. The whistle blowers exposed them. Assange just took the credit.

This is what his fans don't get.

[Scuba]

25. What about the things that WERE exposed, then?

[CabCurious]

38. What about the bank records he refuses to publish & other intel he holds for his own leverage?

Stop defending this guy.

He is NOT what he's made himself out to be, seriously.

[Scuba]

47. I'm not defending him. I'm trying to shift focus to the wrongs that were exposed, then forgotten.

[Spider Jerusalem]

26. Those don't give him a pass on criminal charges.

And if we're going to talk about the things he exposed let's talk about everything, shall we? What about his release of a cache of unredacted cables that exposed the names, contacts, and locations of many whistleblowers and informants living under oppressive regimes? Is that an acceptable price of transparency?

Personally I supported the mission of Wikileaks when the information released was treated responsibly and with care not to expose sensitive and confidential sources, and not to put informants and whistleblowers at grave risk. Naming regime opponents in Belarus, or Sri Lanka, or anti-Taliban informants in Afghanistan? I can't really support that, so much. I don't think the US has any grounds to extradite Assange, and would strenuously oppose any attempts by the US to do so; I also think he should respond to the criminal allegations in Sweden.

[Scuba]

29. I would never suggest they should. But the point is the crimes that were exposed have been lost ...

... in the noise about Assange's alleged crimes.

Where is the outrage over the war crimes and the buffoonery of our State Department????

[gollygee]

30. It isn't impossible to have outrage for both. n/t

[Scuba]

31. But we don't, do we?

[gollygee]

32. I don't know, it depends on whom you mean by "we"

I think the issue at DU is that most people here are at least generally supportive of Wikileaks. The area where there is disagreement is rape. We don't argue about stuff where we agree.

[Spider Jerusalem]

36. Some of us do?

You seem to be presuming that either one thinks Assange is the victim of a sinister US-orchestrated conspiracy aimed at silencing him, or one is an opponent of Wikileaks and transparency. I'm not sure why this should be; it's possible to believe that Assange should respond to the allegations in Sweden and to think that the actions of the US government in Afghanistan and Iraq have been disgraceful and that the exposure of some covered-up incidents has been beneficial. They are not mutually exclusive.

[Scuba]

58. I'm all for Assange for facing justice for rape or any other crime he committed....

... and I'm opposed to the suppression of the war crimes and diplomatic idiocy that were exposed by Wikileaks.

Sadly, the former gets giant headlines while the latter is forgotten.

[Spider Jerusalem]

60. Those exposures happened 2 years ago

the Assange Extradition and Asylum Theatre Show is currently ongoing. People are going to focus on what's currently in the news, like it or not.

[Scuba]

61. OK, but what was the volume two years ago compared to today?

On edit: what's the average amount of coverage a rape committed in Europe gets in the US?

[Spider Jerusalem]

62. That depends on who's accused of it

Assange was a very public and internationally known figure when the allegations came out. If he'd been an unknown they would have received no notice at all. But then the allegations against Dominque Strauss-Kahn would have received less attention had he not been head of the IMF.

[Scuba]

63. I'm pretty sure the US military is also well known internationally...

... DSK didn't shoot up a van full of kids.

[Spider Jerusalem]

64. Which has nothing at all to do with...

Assange being wanted in Sweden to answer the allegations of rape and sexual assault. Pretending that it does is disingenuous. And whatever Wikileaks may have exposed, it doesn't give Assange a get-out-of-jail-free card.

[Scuba]

68. Are you avoiding my point on purpose? What I've been saying is that Assange's crimes ....

... shouldn't give the US military (or State Dept) a get-out-of-jail free card, which is exactly what is happening, just as it did with Bush's Guard service and the Dan Rather fiasco.

[Spider Jerusalem]

73. Has anyone said they should?

I haven't; no-one here arguing that Assange should face the allegations in Sweden has. Again: Assange is not Wikileaks.

[CabCurious]

39. You are crediting Assange for work done by whistleblowers and journalists

[Scuba]

16. I may have proven my point. This has become about Assange, not war crimes nor diplomatic assholery.

[CabCurious]

21. Yes, it's about Assange's behavior with these two women

Then again, his character flaws also show up when he refuses to release bank records and withholds leaks for his own leverage.

This is certainly not a hero willing to go to prison for what he believes... let alone face accusations of sexual misconduct.

[KoKo]

59. I think that there are many fervent supporters of our President

who somehow feel that Assange and Manning is a threat to his Presidency and therefore those who post anything in defense of either Manning or Assange are trashed as not "loyalists.'

I really wonder if our President would approve of those tactics...if he knew about them. I think not.

[TBF]

93. +1 nt

[KoKo]

69. Not Really...you haven't yet got enough folks who really want to go through

the efforts of posting links about "WarCrimes and Diplomatic Assholery because they are tired of no one reading the links or (in many cases) they have been on DU for Years...and figure: "If you don't know by now then it's useless trying to spend time educating you."

So...you shouldn't rush to judgement about the replies you've seen here, I would think. But, then, what do I know...

[randome]

15. OCCUPY!!!!!!!

I'm sorry, I don't know what came over me.

[pinboy3niner]

24. Kinda flabbergasted me, too

[DeSwiss]

22. K&R

- Actually, Sweden isn't accusing Mr. Assange of rape:

Swedish prosecutors told AOL News last week that Assange was not wanted for rape as has been reported, but for something called “sex by surprise” or “unexpected sex.”

One accuser, Anna Ardin, may have “ties to the US-financed anti-Castro and anti-communist groups,” according to Israel Shamir and Paul Bennett, writing for CounterPunch. Raw Story Link

[Spider Jerusalem]

28. The European Arrest Warrant specified "rape"

[KoKo]

65. Well I like to know details...Do you have a link to the European Arrest Warrant?

That would be helpful to the discussion.

thanks for your efforts in finding this.

[Spider Jerusalem]

70. It was examined extensively in his appeals against extradition.

I do not have the text. However a search for "Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority" should find the UK court judgements.

[KoKo]

86. You don't have a link...nor do you have the "text." Do yu know how to use Google?

[Spider Jerusalem]

88. You apparently don't?

There can be no doubt that these allegations are serious: far more serious than they have been represented by many internet commentators. The EAW for the arrest of Assange sets out the allegations:

Unlawful coercion

On 13-14 August 2010, in home of the injured party [A] in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs while lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.

Sexual molestation (1)

On 13-14 August 2010, in home of the injured party [A] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. 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 sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.

Sexual molestation (2)

On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [A] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity; that is, lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.

Rape

On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party , Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state. It is an aggravating circumstance that 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, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party's integrity.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2011/02/assange-eaw-sexual-sweden

[KoKo]

90. Are YOU David Allen Green or are you "Jack of Kent" who supports "Sound Science?"

Is he the guy that Wikileaks thinks is their enemy, too?

----------

David Allen Green also writes blog as "Jack OF KENT."


(He's described as a "Liberal Blogger."

http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/
So...David Allen Green is an "enemy of WikiLeaks?

https://twitter.com/wikileaks


AND he's also a member of "Sense about Science" which is mentioned here on Wikipedia:

SENSE ABOUT SCIENCE:
Reception

Sense About Science and their publications have been cited a number of times in the popular press,[13][14] most notably for encouraging celebrities and the public to think critically about scientific claims,[15][16] criticizing marketing unsupported by research,[17][18][19] decrying the unsubstantiated claims of homeopathy,[20][21] supporting genetically modified crops,[22] criticising 'do-it-yourself' health testing,[23][24] denouncing detox products,[25][26] warning against 'miracle cures',[27][28] and promoting public understanding of peer review.[29] They have received positive coverage in publications from the Royal Society[30] and the U.S. National Science Foundation,[31] and in the writings of scientists such as Ben Goldacre[32] and Steven Novella.[33]

Lord Taverne, chairman of Sense About Science, has criticised campaigns to ban plastic bags as counter-productive and being based on "bad science".[34]

Anti-genetic-modification campaigners and academics have criticised Sense About Science for what they view as a failure to disclose industry connections of some advisers,[35] and Private Eye reported that it had seen a draft of the Making Sense of GM guide that included Monsanto Company's former director of scientific affairs as an author.[36] Tracey Brown, managing director of Sense About Science, rebutted these claims on the SAS website.[37]

Journalist George Monbiot has commented on the connections Tracey Brown, assistant director Ellen Raphael and others working with Sense About Science have with the former Revolutionary Communist Party and Living Marxism magazine.[38] Claims of a Living Marxist 'network' have been denied.[39][40]

Homeopath Peter Fisher criticised Sense About Science, who have been working closely with NHS primary care trusts on the issue of funding for homeopathy, for being funded by the pharmaceutical industry; SAS responded in a statement to Channel 4 News that "Peter Fisher's desperate comments show about as much grasp of reality as the homeopathic medicine he sells."[41]
Funding

Funding for the trust has been increasing. Some is derived from industrial organizations engaged in scientific dispute, clinical trials and research for which SAS is supportive (e.g. genetically modified crops) as well as major publishing houses. For example for the fiscal year ending 5 April 2008, the trust received £145,902 in donations. Disclosed corporate donations comprised £88,000 with pharmaceutical company Astra Zeneca donating £35,000.[42] Previous donations included other pharmaceutical industries such as Pfizer.[42] This dependency has now been diminished since for the fiscal year ending April 2010, the trust received £183,971 in donations of which only £17,500 was derived from the pharmaceutical industry (Unilever and G E Healthcare), in 2011 the amount diminished further to less than 6% funding derived from industry sources (the trust received £268,184 in donations with £15,000 from industry) with the rest derived from Science Bodies and individuals.[42][43]

MORE AT:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Allen_Green

[LaydeeBug]

44. if Sweden wants to CHARGE him, let them CHARGE him. Thus far, they have not

innocent until proven guilty, and all that.

Also, does Sweden treats ALL rape "not charges" like this? As a two time rape survivor, I can honestly tell you no one went on an international manhunt for my assailant/s, so you'll spare me your sanctimony, right?

[Spider Jerusalem]

55. ...

Ground of appeal 3 - Was Mr Assange accused of an offence in Sweden? (paras 128 - 154)

It was common ground that extradition is not permitted for investigation or gathering evidence or questioning to see if the requested person should be prosecuted. Mr Assange's contention was that, although he was required for the purposes of being prosecuted, he had not been accused of an offence in Sweden as he had not been charged. The Court therefore had to consider whether Mr Assange was 'accused' for the purposes of the 2003 Act and Framework Decision.

The President of the Queen's Bench Division said:

"In the present case, as is accepted there is nothing on the face of the EAW which states in terms that Mr Assange is accused of the offences. ... The fact that the term “accused of the offence” is not used does not matter if it is clear from the EAW that he was wanted for prosecution and not merely for questioning." (para 148)

He went on to say:

"In our judgment Mr Assange is on the facts before this court “accused” of the four offences. There is a precise description in the EAW of what he is said to have done. The extraneous evidence shows that there has been a detailed investigation. The evidence of the complainants AA and SW is clear as to what he is said to have done as we have set out. On the basis of an intense focus on the facts he is plainly accused. That is ... decisive." (para 151)

He added:
"... even if the court was constrained to determine whether someone was an accused by solely considering the question of whether the prosecution had commenced, we would not find it difficult to hold that looking at what has taken place in Sweden that the prosecution had commenced. Although it is clear a decision has not been taken to charge him, that is because, under Swedish procedure, that decision is taken at a late stage with the trial following quickly thereafter. In England and Wales, a decision to charge is taken at a very early stage; there can be no doubt that if what Mr Assange had done had been done in England and Wales, he would have been charged and thus criminal proceedings would have been commenced. If the commencement of criminal proceedings were to be viewed in this way, it would be to look at Swedish procedure through the narrowest of eyes. On this basis, criminal proceedings have commenced against Mr Assange." (para 153)

The Court dismissed this ground of appeal.

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/assange-summary.pdf

[treestar]

45. No, and it is the supporters who must think this

those who hero-worship him and just can't believe he'd do any such thing.

It does not matter one whit what the result is under the Swedish system. The problem is he's trying to be above the law, saying he should not be tried and making up an overdramatic charge of what the US would do to him. He's no OBL.

[Scuba]

49. What about the wrongs that were exposed? Why do they get so little attention?

[treestar]

52. They have nothing to do with what happened in Sweden

Which is the OP's point, I think.

Julian is making it all about him. He's getting himself into the news, not whatever revelations of the evils of governments.

[Scuba]

56. I wrote the OP. My point was that what happened in Sweden had nothing to do with the ....

... crimes and buffoonery that was exposed, not the other way around.


This has become all about Assange, and the horrific things that were exposed by Wikileaks have been lost in the noise.

[robinlynne]

67. and yet Australia has already confirmed the US' intention.

[struggle4progress]

75. Sweden unlikely to extradite Assange to US: Australia

By Madeleine Coorey (AFP) – 20 hours ago
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jVIlsQsfxuXLEL4IzsR6dFlDn75g?docId=CNG.142c66644e0443d216d5f6d376a00d4f.221

[KoKo]

57. We don't have any evidence of CIA Ops....but,

We don't have any evidence of CIA Ops....but,

as we have seen....new information often comes to light...awhile later. In Assange's case...there have been some things that raised "Flags."

Some of us older DU'ers have seen things work out that what you think you are seeing at the beginning isn't how it all comes out in the end. So, some of us are very cautious about the constant focusing on "RAPE" with Assange when it's much more nuanced about whether that ever occured and if it is "rape" in the way it's intended to protect true victims of heinous crimes.

Since Assange's case is now reaching international ramifications....the possibility of there being something else going on with the two women who were friends of Assange possibly one or both being compromised in some way....and NOT by Assange.

It's good to keep up with all the information going on. We "Cold War" survivors have learned that the "Truth" is a thing that often takes years or decades to find...and even then we still argue over JFK and other high profile's deaths.

[gollygee]

72. Wait hold it, did you use "jaywalking" as an equivalanet to rape?

"Considering the 30 seconds of national angst expressed over what Assange released, I don't know how you can charge him with jaywalking."

I hope I'm misunderstanding that.

[Scuba]

81. Sorry, my poorly-constructed sentence....

I should have made clear that I was not referring to any rape charges in Sweden at this point, but whatever it is the US wants him for, which, considering the lack of fuss over what he released, must be akin to jaywalking.

[Spider Jerusalem]

87. The US doesn't.

And it's been conceded that the US probably has no standing to seek extradition, see here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/62565424/Espionage-Wikileaks-Congress-Kindle

[still_one]

79. I remember a story on Scott Ritter trying to connect with a minor came out right in the middle of

Saying there were no wmds

Suddenly the wmds didn't matter anymore it was Ritter who tried to connect with a minor

If the media did their job they would have pursued both stories, instead they dropped the wmds until after we were way into the war

[KoKo]

91. Yes...I remember that....and agree. n/t

[Matariki]

84. 30 seconds of anger of what WikiLeaks released

and 30 months of faux rage over Assange himself

Yeah, we got our priorities straight.

[Coyotl]

85. So if it turns out Mitt Romney is guilty of tax fraud

Get a grip man!! Focus!! Can't you think of a relevant question?

So, if it turns out Ronald Reagan was guilty of murdering Ben Linder?