![This is a question](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Have you ever said something and wished the ground would open up and swallow you? Tell us your tales of social embarrassment.
Thanks to BraynDedd for the suggestion
( , Thu 16 Aug 2012, 14:12)
« Go Back
![This is a QotW answer](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Imagine my shame when I was all over the newspapers after hiding out from police questioning in an embassy in London.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 13:42, 185 replies)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
A proper 'Supermatt' going on there.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 13:45, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
in any of the zero references you provided.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:07, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I'm sure the jury will look kindly on Julian though
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:12, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
His legal defence against extradition (or one of them) was that what he did, while it consitutes assault and rape in Sweden, it doesn't in the UK. This was shown to be demonstrably wrong at every level of UK legal process. It is very clearly rape to have sex with someone when they are not in a position to consent.
The purpose of questioning and a trial would be to decide if there is enough grounds to believe he thought he had prior consent (if he did, he's merely a fucking creepy cunt, becuase having sex with someone who isn't conscious is a pretty disturbing thing to do) or if he didn't have prior consent, in which case he's a rapist. It's pretty simple.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:40, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
since the post was a defence against me pointing out you have no references.
"Google them" isn't a reference. It's not up to anyone else to find out whether there's information that supports what you're saying.
You have no references for what you're saying.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:00, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Why the sweet fuck should I waste my precious time? You've provided no reference to your tinfoil hatted idiocy that he's at risk of extradition to the US, either.
In any case, my post wasn't to provide references to back up B_D, it was to provide more depth of information, to clarify the point. If you don't believe it, fine, suit yourself, but don't whine when your bollocks is shot down on here, eh?
Magistrates court
high court
supreme court
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:08, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You're just floundering now because you know that ten seconds on Google will prove you wrong.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:09, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
anonymous are on the case, DDSing websites that nobody takes any notice of.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 13:45, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
...that's the rules that is.'
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:00, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
He said that he was happy to be questioned in Britain, OR to go to Sweden if the Swedish government guaranteed not to extradite him to America. The Swedish government refused both.
See here and here.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:08, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I don't think the Swedes should be asked to make promises on America's behalf.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:10, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Yes. Obviously.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:14, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
does anyone think he is likely to be extradited from Sweden? He's more likely to be extradited from the UK, and even that's basically somewhere between unlikely and impossible.
Although, he's massively increased his chances of that happening, the stupid fucking twat, by commiting an actual crime in the UK rather than merely being wanted for questioning over one in Sweden
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:43, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I don't think the Swedes should be asked to make promises on America's behalf.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:50, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
These crazy Romans!
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:39, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
you crazy rapist australians
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:14, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
and his lawyers know that full fucking well. It's a dodge to avoid him facing questioning.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:39, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
1) He is required for a second interview. The one that is done before charges are pressed. It is in accordance with Swedish law that this be done in Sweden. If it were the first interview then this may have been conducted in England. From a legal standpoint Assanges "offer" is not legally possible and he knows it. Doesn't mean his supporters can't keep repeating it, though.
2) Regarding the condition of not being extradited to America, it's very simple to say the Swedes are refusing to make this promise when the fact of the matter is that it's not lawfully possible to make that promise. Extradition requests are considered by an independent court that the government cannot influence. From a legal standpoint Assanges "condition" is not legally possible and he knows it. Doesn't mean his supporters can't keep repeating it, though.
Fuck Assange and fuck his supporters. Well done all of you for trivialising rape and sexual assault. That's beautiful of you all. You must be very proud.
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 8:59, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
that there's no reasonable doubt he's being set up?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:19, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Personally, I'm not convinced that the witterings of various tinfoil hatters counts here.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:22, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
It depends what you call 'reasonable doubt'.
Which you declined to answer.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:04, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
There's no proof other than 'IT'S A CONSPIRACY WAKE UP SHEEPLE' to suggest anything otherwise.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:48, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
where no matter if you did it or not.. psychologically - you are still seen as a rapist. Its the ultimate Smear crime.
If they had claimed he had robbed a shop... the shop would be able to prove accounts. With 'accused' rape... its down to a persons claim.
Even though the women in question spent the following few days inviting him to dinner, and functions.... doesn’t scream victim to me, really.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:26, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 18:47, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:33, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Y'know, dressing provocatively and that.
He is probably the real victim here. Probably.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:40, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
he might not be. He might just be George Galloway.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:45, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 18:44, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
but given how this has panned out, it wouldnt surprise me if its true. (that its a smear campaign only. No rape occured)
His assistant who helped uncover the crimes, has been held without trial for over 800 days. Makes you wonder why?
And then to the 'rape victims' who could have exposed him when ever they liked, but chose - quite unusually to bring it up when Assange started to look a threat to international government. Either they were on the side of the American government to begin with, or have been manipulated to say he raped them.
When was the last time governments Chased someone for Rape in the manner that our governments have? When they are threatening to break into a foreign embassy?
Seems like the government are handling this like it isnt a Rape prosectuion at all.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:45, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:47, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
he is being forced to be arrested for crimes I am dubious that he committed. With the only evidence taken from a witness. No physical evidence.
In Jail you cant carry on your wikileaking. It silences you.. whilst you await trial.. which in his friends case, is looking like indefinite trial date.
Without wanting to shout Tin foil hats and all, it reminds me of the case of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_v._Strauss-Kahn
Removed from a position of power by an accusation of rape.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:06, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
in the US and in France. What happened in your example was "powerful man got off an accusation of rape because the US legal system tends to favour money and power over truth"
Of course I don't know the details any more than you, so maybe he was innocent. Maybe he's been inncoent of every other rape accusation he's bought his way out of, too.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:10, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
you're trolling, aren't you? because I'm struggling to believe you're this daft actually.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:11, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Im merely pointing out, that people of power are easily removed by an alligation of rape...
its such an easy one to setup and watch them fall.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:12, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:15, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
they should probably stop fucking raping people, then, eh?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:17, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
what if they didnt though?
That wouldnt be nice...
you know, a guy being accused of rape, would it? it wouldnt destroy any credibility in him at all would it.... even if it was an "Allegation"
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:19, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Strauss-Kahn didn't lose his job because he was accused of rape. He lost his job because, whether it was rape or not, he fucked a hotel maid and several other women who weren't his wife, whilst not telling his wife, and it's considered pretty poor form to be head of the IMF if you're a liar. Doesn't inspire confidence in the whole thing, really.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:22, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
but he resigned.
having an affair isnt that bad... but WAPE? no way.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:28, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
oh, except if you hold a position where your honesty must be unquestionable, and you lie about it. Like he did. A lot.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:41, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Shall we deal with these points one by one?
- his "assistant" is a serving member of the military and has been detained as such. Why? because they can. Personally, no, I don't like that, but what on earth has that to do with whether Assange raped someone or not?
- You know absolutely nothing (I am assuming, please correct me if I'm wrong) about Swedish judicial process, so how can you comment on this? And I seriously doubt any goverment regards Assange as a "threat". And even in the highly unlikely event these two women are "setting him up" (which isn't really the issue now, is it, becuase he's admitted to what he is accused of, via his lawyer) the Swedish judicial system clearly is not. So, he has nothing to fear from questioning if he isn't guilty. The Swedish legal system is widely held up as a model of fairness and honesty.
- you don't have the faintest idea when someone last pursued someone for rape like this because the newspapers don't bang on about it unless it is someone in the public eye. Extraditions for crimes much lesser than rape happen on almost daily basis.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:56, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
he can't be extradited from Sweden or UK or anywhere fucking else in europe to face the death penalty. Not won't, or isn't likely, but CAN'T. given that "fear of facing the death penalty" is one of the legal bases of his spurious appeals against extradition to Sweden, he's at the very least a massive fucking liar.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:01, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
It concerns me that his lawyer went ahead with that one though, as it suggests he either doesn't understand the law himself, or is just parroting whatever Assange tells him to.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:06, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You know that lawyers have to follow their instructions right? That's sort of the basis of the whole thing.
Another fine legal mind.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:37, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I mean, they are supposed to follow instructions, but any half-decent lawyer would have told Assange the grounds for appeal were idiotic.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:40, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
and underneath, you just say what we're both thinking. It's like a double-team of sexy.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:00, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
But I can see this is just an easy way to stop assange hooking up a PC with his wikileaks friends and continuing his project to expose the governments.
Its all a little bit too convenient.
Im not denying they had sex.. they did, they both admit that. But to come out and say he raped them, just hours after he was exposed as mr.wikileaks, is a tad rather suspicious.
Why didnt she exclaim at an earlier point? Why wait til the hour he is exposing the very people she was also working to expose?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:10, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
And it's not going to stop him being anywhere near a PC. This is Sweden. SWEDEN. not fucking China. He won't even be remanded in custody if he's charged, unless he demonstrated a massive flight risk. Oh, wait, the idiot fucker jumped bail and saught political asylum? Ah. bit of a problem there. Probably a flight risk after all. So, the only reason he'd be locked up awaiting trial is purely and totally down to his own stupidity. If that's a government seeking to silence someone they've got a seriously roundabout way of doing it.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:16, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
He'd been known as the founder of Wikileaks for fucking ages before this, and they can easily carry it on without him. It's not about stopping Wikileaks, it's about applying the justice system correctly because an accusation has been made.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:18, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
but the allegation came out at the peak of the wikileaks ability of headline hitting.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:30, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:37, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
showing you that his accomplice has already been arrested and silenced.
Which i believe is what is happening here. I think alot of people can also see it, hence his support.
It has nothing and everything to do with the rape.
Whether the Rape accusation is true or not... Assange will be held in jail... away from the press, wont be able to communicate, and any data he has will be destroyed whilst we wait for a trial.
They could of course kill him, but then - that attracts bad press, as we saw with that Russian guy with the radiation poisoning.
I agree, if has raped the girl - Then he is a massive dick.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:16, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
the only reason he would be held in jail is if he was a flight risk. Which he's just demonstrably shown he is. Making it a fairly odd conspiracy, don't you think, since it relies on him fucking everything up for himself?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:19, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
If she'd have screamed, it would definitely have been rape?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:44, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
but good old prejudice towards what is quite possibly - an innocent man. Proven til found guilty and all that.
If the UK government are threatening to break into a foreign embassy - then surely they are treating him like a known criminal?
or could it be the UK govment have the US breathing down their necks?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:47, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
They merely pointed out that they had the option of revoking embassy status, at which point the police would be free to enter the building that would no longer be an embassy.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:51, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Had this been in China or North Korea, would you be suspicious?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:54, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
He's broken the law in the UK.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:58, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You have transmitted an offensive message (language) via the web.
You are guilty under the same laws that the UK arrests internet trolls.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:39, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
no I fucking haven't. Calling an adult an idiot for being an idiot is not offensive. Could I be arrested for saying it to him in a pub? nope. So good luck getting a prosecution on that one.
Although, in the same breath comparing me calling Dan an idiot with skipping bail to avoid questioning about rape ... that's special.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:43, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:55, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Read the case, precedence has been set
( , Thu 23 Aug 2012, 10:41, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
that's for a court to decide. he may be being set up by the women, he's certainly not being set up by the Swedish judicial system.
And he can't and won't be extradited from either Sweden or the UK to face the death penalty, or any of the other shit his legal team have played in a weasel attempt to avoid answering to the crime he is accused of.
or, just, y'know, read a proper legal analysis of the whole thing rather than listening to tinfoil hatted arse, eh?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:32, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:40, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
and manage to spend all your time convincing idiots that you're the victim rather than go for the more traditional approach of demonstrating your apparent innocence.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:46, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
He thinks he is far more important than he is.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:49, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
probably puts him off the idea of wanting to be caught.. guilty or not.
you can see why assange has a lot to be weary of
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 14:52, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
he's like an international criminal. I hope he gets locked up for like a million years
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:01, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
that they reserve the right to treat people they perceive as enemies however they like.
They've also stated that they see Assange as an enemy.
There's reasonable doubt that, if he goes to Sweden, he won't be extradited to the US and treated as an enemy.
Therefore he shouldn't be extradited to Sweden.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:39, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
What with the US not having made any extradition requests and all that.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:45, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Reasonable doubt should be resolved in favour of the accused.
"He might not be being fitted up" isn't a valid counter-argument to "he might be being fitted up."
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:02, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
How's that?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 17:36, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:15, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:52, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
or, as AB so right points out, extradite him at all, since THE US HASN'T ASKED TO...... arrgggghh.
It's like banging your head against a wall made of tinfoil-coated retard, B_D
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:57, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
If so, that could be the deal breaker.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:01, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:06, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
right at the start of this shenanigans.
And it's ALMOST as if that article doesn't contain direct links to the court transcripts in question that apeloverage was demanding.
Which would suggest it's ALMOST as if people were arguing half-baked incoherencies blindly in the face of straight-up evidence that they are being idiots.
I'm starting to have some sympathy for Rory here, I have to say.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:17, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:19, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
if the countries share an extradition agreement. however there is absolutely nothing, legally, that would make it easier to extradite him from Sweden than the UK, which is where he already was. In fact, it would be twice as hard, as it stands, as if he were in Sweden he would need to be extradited from both the UK AND Sweden.
So, his argument that if he goes to Sweden he is at risk is rubbish, he's at less risk than he was in the UK.
And he can't be extradited to face the death penalty at all, from either country, so that's just complete bollocks.
And anyway, no one has asked to extradite him. Which is kind of a crucial flaw.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:12, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
I can feel it, do you know what I mean? Sometimes I can just sense these things.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:45, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Scrolling upwards WAS becoming a bit of a nuisance
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:50, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
He done a rape in Sweden maybe, therefore he should go to Sweden to face due process. The rest is irrelavant.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:46, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
look on the bright side, this entire thread is full of people that prove beyond doubt that you are far from the bentest spastic on B3ta.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:52, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
that's fucking internet bullying and I'm going to sound the drama horn.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:59, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You're just on the futlile arguing side of the fence.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:04, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
did you consider that?
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:13, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
and the best transfer fee I've been offered so far is a couple of pints and some haribo. I think I might be past my prime, old chap. Sad times.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:47, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Im exhausted of all Internet Argumental strength...
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 15:57, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:04, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
if they don't say no. And if they're asleep they ain't saying shit.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:11, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:35, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
there would have been a lot of sleeping 15 year old girls in Sweden. Who knows?
This does actually raise my biggest issue with this whole thing. How do you fuck someone who's asleep without them noticing? He must have an absolutely TINY cock.
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 10:55, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
And to tell Apeloverage he's a cunt again.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:40, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Although, I'm warming to that Dan chap as he actually appears to be reading stuff and listening to things and maybe changing his opinion about certain things when extra info is provided, rather than rocking in a corner singing "lalalalalala I'm not listening"
Top internetting, all round.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 16:45, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
i would change my user id to this...
but i dont, so i wont.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:34, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Initially neither of the victims accused Assange of anything we would call "rape" in the UK. One did go on to accuse him of "sleep rape" (though said she was awake on Twitter) but, even then, she stated she consented on being awoken. This would, apparently, not result in a prosecution under the standard scheme of things due to there being insufficient indication of lack of consent.
The two women were interviewed together. This does not happen and would constitute another grounds for the case not making court.
Two alleged rape victims are being allowed to take on the same (corporate) lawyer. Apparently a legal first in Sweden.
So there is some evidence that Swedish procedure was not followed correctly (there is more if you look). The fact that the UK courts didn't seem to take that into account seems odd too -- though I don't suppose it's their job to check whether the charges look "trumped up".
As for the US being after him -- the US are well known for using snatch teams and other illegal methods to grab people to torture and kill and, apparently, Mr Assange and his legal team see more threat from that in Sweden than the UK. Why they think that is hard to ascertain. The UK intelligence services admitting to being party to rendition to torture on a number of occasions and having to answer for it before been "warned off" may have something to do with it? There's mention of Sweden allowing CIA snatch teams to operate there but I can't be arsed grepping through Wikileaks etc. to look for it.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 19:02, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
If my points don't at least show you that the case in Sweden is unusual then you're deliberately ignoring them.
Funny how there was to be no prosecution until Claes Borgström persuaded his friend Marianne Ny they should pursue a case against Assange. Nothing fishy about that, no.
The above has nothing to do with the US government, you'll notice. My point is Swedish law is not being followed by Swedish courts and the Swedish prosecutors made some odd decisions. This was all brought up at the time by many people.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 20:09, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 22:04, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Forget all the other crap for a minute, how is this a normal Swedish case?
I see no responses to my points (all raised by people conversant with Swedish law at the time of the original accusations).
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 0:21, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You've waved your hands about and repeated the same bland assertion that there is something unusual about the timing of the accusations and now you're assigning it to unnamed "experts" to give your non-point the weight of authority.
Null points.
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 7:41, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
read the transcripts of the UK court documents (i've kindly linked them at the top since apparently knowing how to google for reliable information seems a little challenging for some here) rather than some generic "the internet" as a source of your knowledge of the case notes regarding the charges made.
Conclusions: at every court level in the UK what he is accused of, and has always been accused of, is demonstrably rape both in Sweden and the UK. Doesn't make him guilty, does mean he must be questioned and arrested if needs be. Swedish law is being entirely followed, hence why the UK courts questioned an absolute fuckton of Swedish law experts during the course of all three court cases
The only serious thing the UK courts found was odd was the leaking of information to the press, but that was found to be a local police station, not the victims or the prosecutors. On the other hand, they found Assange's lawyer to be a lying, manipulating fuckweasel at every turn, who repeatedly "forgot" to arrange for his client to be questioned, amonst other things, while he helped arrange for him to leave Sweden. You want a conspiracy? that's the only one here. Lawyer aids wanted man in fleeing rape charge shocker.
Am I allowed to get on with my life, now, or do I still have to keep coming back and explaining the difference between reality and Assange-based tinfoilery?
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 10:48, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
you can't be arsed trawling through Wikileaks? Information placed on the internet by Assange*, to which no-one could possibly verify the authenticity of, which magically might show Assange is at risk of some CIA thing, and you can't see the epic fucking flaw in that?
Jesus wept. I need to stop wasting effort writing actual proper peer reviewed scientific papers and just start publishing on the web I can cure cancer and make new organs from scratch. As if I say it that's apparently enough to make it true.
*I appreciate not actually directly by him, but the point is the same
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 10:53, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Bonus points for using your academic standing to discredit anyone who dares to question your methods, or even just ask for the raw data.
( , Thu 23 Aug 2012, 1:20, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
in links up there. The actual facts, the court transcripts, as opposed to half baked persecution complexes. No-one cares about what's actually true.
The academic comment is a completely valid point. "because someone on the internet says so" has become the currency of truth. Wikipedia is, apparently, a valid reference resource in science (at least according to some of my younger and more gullible students). The press leap on things pre-peer review. It's a fucking shambles.
( , Thu 23 Aug 2012, 10:35, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Bitching about politics is exactly what we all come here for, I'm sure!
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 15:04, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You have kept every troll on this site occupied for a considerable amount of time. Whoever "Julian Assange" is, you've definitely stirred the spastics' nest and roused pretty much every subhuman this subsector of the site has to offer.
I doff my hat to you.
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 19:34, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
Seems to me that this is apt: www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEUsHnae7z0
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 19:41, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
You have kept every troll on this site occupied for a conSMUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUG
( , Thu 23 Aug 2012, 1:16, closed)
![This is a QotW comment](/images/board_posticon.gif)
as to how offering clear factual evidence to attempt to convice people that they are talking shite counts as trolling. Good stuff.
( , Thu 23 Aug 2012, 10:32, closed)
« Go Back