
So not sure what that makes me, either. There were no complaints, mind, so it's not like "We were both asleep, your honour" has had to be tested in court.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 19:47, Reply)

Shagging whilst pissed, shagging whilst dreaming, waking up not knowing what the Hell you've done due to drugs / alcohol, busting a condom yet carrying on regardless, yada yada. We're all rapists then. The whole thing's bullshit but nobody dare speak the truth in case they offend somebody.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:02, Reply)

Putting aside the shagging whilst pissed and stoned because that's not what he's accused of.
I've never had a second pop and any woman whilst they were out of it.
Let alone one i've just met.
I bust a condom I stop and put a new one on.
Wearing it for a reason.
Maybe she doesn't want some guys spunk up her?
So I for one am not a rapist.
If this was just some tourist that overstepped the bounds whilst on holiday he wouldn't get any support.
But because he's Saint bloody Julian it's all ok.
He didn't do it and if he did those women are just getting upset over nothing.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:14, Reply)

We don't know what happened and maybe never will. We don't know whether she was asleep and he tiptoed in and thought "I'll have another crack at that", rubbed his hands together in glee and jumped on or whether they both woke up in the throes of passion which she later regretted. I won't defend the chap, whoever he is, but I'm not going to polish my pitchfork until I've seen some evidence. Till then it is a few interesting articles and (mostly) opinion pieces.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:36, Reply)

face up to a court case and clear his name or face the charges I feel.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:40, Reply)

There's got to be some way of this happening.
Why can't he stand trial for it over here? Rape is rape, after all, and we would try him the same and lock him up the same if guilty.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:45, Reply)

there wouldn't be a trial about it anyway. The girls would disappear after the questioning, as would Assange.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:46, Reply)

and it took place in Sweden. They have every right to hold any trial there.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 21:08, Reply)

No country in the EU can deport someone to another country where they could potentially face the death penalty anyway, so he's not going to find himself on a plane to the United States
In the meantime, two women have made legal accusations of sexual misconduct by him, on them, that have every right to be addressed by a court of law in the country where it occurred.
He is now hiding behind conspiracy theories to not take his sexual conduct on the chin and deal with it, and either clear his name, or be exposed for sexual misconduct. You never know, he might actually be guilty of rape or one of the charges, it's not entirely beyond the bounds of possibility.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 21:28, Reply)

The longer he stays in hiding and the more extreme the lengths he goes to to avoid a trial make me more suspicious that he's actually concerned there's a case to answer.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 21:49, Reply)

Accusations of rape or sexual misconduct won't have been levelled lightly for a guy in his obvious predicament; especially not by former fans of what he's been doing. If they were two plants all along from the beginning, a court of law somewhere like Sweden would probably be one the best places on earth to expose this. He has sat himself in the middle of the cauldron, shit like this was always on the cards.
Even if this has all been not much more than a case of shagging the fans, and the disgruntled consequence when his attention moved on, these are still extremely serious accusations I personally would want to have off my back at the earliest opportunity.
Ultimately, he has himself to blame for all this; wikileaks is an extremely clumsy and irresponsible way of exposing stolen information as it does. And not everything it exposes, in the manor it does, is actually beneficial to wider public knowledge.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 22:09, Reply)

the leaked Stratfor emails, and recently an Australian intelligence confirmation www.theage.com.au/national/us-in-pursuit-of-assange-cables-reveal-20120817-24e8u.html . Given that the Swedish Government has refused to confirm that they won't extradite him, something they could easily do in a simple statement, his fears of extradition to the US seem quite reasonable.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 22:11, Reply)

if a woman feels violated then she is well within her rights to complain to the authorities.
'most people have done similar' is no excuse, brave enough to admit it or not.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:32, Reply)

I've woke up some mornings and felt extremely violated after seeing what's sleeping next to me...
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:37, Reply)

when you are paying by the hour
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:52, Reply)

the problem comes from legislating criminal behaviour around verbal consent when in a majority of cases of real human behaviour verbal consent is never given. Should people change their behaviour to comply with the law. The uk imposes an extra level that the accused "does not reasonably believe" that consent has been given for it to be rape. Given that they already had had consensual sex, is it unreasonable that Assange might have expected a second time to be consensual. And as for "feeling violated", women can also have these feeling when they regret sleeping with someone (in the assange case the two women did nothing until they found out he'd slept with both of them). Is this alone enough to condem someone. the other accuser (the condom one, not the sleeping one) was tweeting three hours later what a great party she was at.
Assange aside, (im not boasting, just giving examples), I've met a woman at a disco in Denmark, gone home with her and slept together, without saying a single word until the morning (in may ways it was the perfect one-night-stand). Why should any government legislate so we can't do this without getting verbal consent, or risk rape convictions. It changing human behaviour to suit the law, rather than having cleverer laws, and it takes the fun and spontanaity out it. Ive been married 10 years now, and I've always prefered sex where we don't negotiate it like a business meeting.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 22:28, Reply)

I have done the same. I see no problem in one night stands, for me. And yes, the fact we are going to have sex is implied.
Not now as I have a lovely fella of course.
I do get what you say about the 'she said/didnt say' thing.
But, yet again, If you are going to indulge in that behaviour, then there may just be a time when someone is going to say they didn't feel entirely comfortable with what happened. Going into the bedroom with a stranger is risky in countless ways.
He does have charges to answer to in a court of law. The women no matter what their motivations have said how they feel and he should make an attempt to clear his name.
I have friends who have been all OK about their encounters, then as reality hits, they feel awful. Smokescreen defenses going up maybe?
I dunno.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 23:00, Reply)

both occasions were with girlfriends, and we were both sober. Just Saturday morning friskiness, really.
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:42, Reply)

A mate of mine, who was cheating on his current girlfriend, was caught out via some text messaging which went to the wrong participant. Being the quick minded fellow he was, his excuse was that he must have been "sleep texting"
( , Mon 20 Aug 2012, 20:45, Reply)