Julian Assange Case

[Derrick]

This guy is wanted by the Swedish plod for an alleged rape last August.

Anybody have more info into the rape case against this bloke.

Or is it just a ploy to have him extradited to the US for summary justice as a traitor against the free world.

Derrick

[Natalie Severn]

I think,Derrick,that his case is one which because he dared expose the things he did he will be demonised to death.

[TomTomKent]

Unfortunately, what ever he may have achieved in his whistleblowing antics, it does not excuse the evidence that he did commit the sexual offence, and he has been using the claim of spy games to avoid directly confronting the evidence himself. His ex claimed he had sex with her while she was unable to give consent. Instead of doing anything to prove this wrong he has taken a non sequitor defence. He was placed in issolation at his own request for his own safety, yet the lawyer representing him talks as though this is an attack. The campaign of cyber attacks have done nothing to clear his name. On a related note, the celebrity fund to fight for his freedom somewhat eclipses that raised to ffinance the legal defence of the soldier currently serving a sentence for leaking documents to wikileaks, so perhaps if you want to support a genuine issue of freedom of information and the legality of war, the soldier would benefit more from your time and goodwill and more relevant to the issue.

[Ally]

I may be wrong but the "sexual offense" he is apparently accused of is having consensual sex without a condom. I am sorry but if they actually consider that rape in Sweden, then sweden has lost their damn mind.

I am all for punishing real sexual predators and offenders, but this is the kind of ludicrous crap that makes it hard for REAL victims to be taken seriously.

[TomTomKent]

I may be wrong but the "sexual offense" he is apparently accused of is having consensual sex without a condom. I am sorry but if they actually consider that rape in Sweden, then sweden has lost their damn mind.

I am all for punishing real sexual predators and offenders, but this is the kind of ludicrous crap that makes it hard for REAL victims to be taken seriously.

Er,actually my understanding was the girl complained she had been asleep and unable to give consent. Which I would consider rape condom or no.

[Robert]

Or maybe he used a condom but it had a leak.

[Natalie Severn]

The "rape" charge just sounds like a lot of nonsense doesn"t it?

[Tom_Wescott]

I may be wrong but the "sexual offense" he is apparently accused of is having consensual sex without a condom. I am sorry but if they actually consider that rape in Sweden, then sweden has lost their damn mind.

I am all for punishing real sexual predators and offenders, but this is the kind of ludicrous crap that makes it hard for REAL victims to be taken seriously.

I completely agree. Rape is one charge that should not be leveled against someone as a way of intimidating them or punishing them because you couldn't get them on the charge you wanted. Either someone did it or they didn't, and in this case it sounds like he didn't. But surely, even in a country that gave us Fisherman and Glenn Andersson, consensual sex without a condom couldn't be construed as rape? How do they make babies there? Or maybe there's a ban on making Swedish babies, in which case they have my full support.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[TomTomKent]

I do not find the charges against the man to be anything but clear cut. During his time in sweden Assange had relatiponships with two women, bothof whomhave complained that what began as consensual acts deviated into something else. Their consent was withdrawn, andit appears he continued to try his luck, with one report I have read mentioning the girl was woken from her sleep to find Assange, erm, assuming consent (other sources have notvarified,so take that with a pinchof salt).

Now forget any claim of conspiracy, and assume it was your friend,your sister or your daughter who made these claims. If he had betrayed her trust, even if it was to "just" go naturist when she had only consented on the condition protection was used, even if you think themolestation charge was "a misunderstanding", surely we owe it to the two complainants to take the charge seriously. These are not spies, or government pawns, they were women, who were disturbed enough by their ordeals to fight to have the rape investigation reopened.

[mariab]

Hmm hmmm. Why does this case vaguely reminds me of Tumblety been arrested for “gross indecency“?

[Ally]

I do not find the charges against the man to be anything but clear cut. During his time in sweden Assange had relatiponships with two women, bothof whomhave complained that what began as consensual acts deviated into something else. Their consent was withdrawn, andit appears he continued to try his luck, with one report I have read mentioning the girl was woken from her sleep to find Assange, erm, assuming consent (other sources have notvarified,so take that with a pinchof salt).

So just for my own curiosity, if sexual consent is withdrawn in a casual relationship without marital bonds, without a shared domicile, or any logical reason for it whatsoever, why precisely was she still sharing a bed with him? She refuses to have sex anymore with a guy she barely knows but continues to sleep in the same bed with him for several days?

Now forget any claim of conspiracy, and assume it was your friend,your sister or your daughter who made these claims.

If it were my sister, daughter or friend, I would ask why she kept a man in her bed for an entire week if she was claiming she didn't want to sleep with him. I would tell her she needs to learn to be responsible for the decisions she makes, and quit blaming other people for her own bad choices.

If a woman says no, I am tired/don't want to tonight, and her lover wakes her up the next morning, when she is supposedly rested for a little nookie, how does that POSSIBLY indicate rape? If you are in a sexual relationship, a "no" one time doesn't indicate a "withdrawal of consent" for all other times for the remainder of history. If that is the case, then every man in the history of the planet is a rapist.

These are not spies, or government pawns, they were women, who were disturbed enough by their ordeals to fight to have the rape investigation reopened.

But they weren't disturbed enough by their ordeal to cut off contact with him, and one threw him a party after her alleged rape.

I believe that rape is one of the most heinous crimes that one can commit. I don't believe these women were raped. I believe they had extremely bad judgment in men, I believe they failed to heed their own beliefs, and ignored their own judgment and rather than just sacking up and saying, "god, I need to quit dating losers and allowing myself to be manipulated into crappy sex", they are trying to make themselves out to be victims.

[TomTomKent]

If a woman gives consent to sleep with somebody, then gets uncomfortable with the things he is trying to do and says "no" but he tries anyway that is atleast molestation possibly rape. Unfortunately rape is not an easy thing to deal with and more often than not they would half believe it was somehow thier fault for being frigid (you would be surprised at how often familiar-rape victims convince themselves that. What happened was their fault) and staying on terms with him does not automatically mean they consented to have sex with him. Couples can share a bed and the woman not expect sex. I have been close to somebody who had to deal with this situation and no, she didnt dump the guy rightaway as he had her convinced she had "sent the wrong signals", and it was only as his acts became a habit she sought refuge. Until then she tried her hardest to look like all was well.

That it happened to two different girls means that it at least warrants due investigation. Even with the doubts about the rape charge (you may note the charge was dropped, but the police reinstated it after their interview with assange, which suggests something he admitted to in the interview confirms it) the molestation charge comes from common behaviour towards both girls, andis on much firmer standing. If the girls are lying? Or exagerating? That is why we have courts of our peers.

But for both girls to be certain enough of their situations to be pushing charges, despite the way we have been told by the media "it didn't happen" is pretty darned brave. The media should also be ashamed of the message they are sending to those who have abusive partners that push and manipulate in a horrible way. "What you think you consent to doesn't matter, only what we think you wanted." Or "you are less important than leaked documents".

Hopefully an open trial will reveal all.

[Ally]

If a woman gives consent to sleep with somebody, then gets uncomfortable with the things he is trying to do and says "no" but he tries anyway that is atleast molestation possibly rape.

No it's not. If she says yes, they have sex, he tries again, she says no but continues to share a bed with him, he has every reason to expect that she will consent again. If she becomes uncomfortable enough not to have sex with him, then she ought to say, Goodnight and there's the door. If you have had sex with someone consensually and you continue to share a bed with them, they have every reasonable expectation that you will consent to sex in the future.

Couples can share a bed and the woman not expect sex. I have been close to somebody who had to deal with this situation and no, she didnt dump the guy rightaway as he had her convinced she had "sent the wrong signals", and it was only as his acts became a habit she sought refuge. Until then she tried her hardest to look like all was well.

If you say no, but don't kick a guy to the curb and continue to share his bed, you ARE sending mixed signals. Continuing to share a bed implies that in the future you are open to sex, if you have had consensual sex with the person up to that time.

Women are adults. They aren't children. They don't get to be relieved of the responsibility of making bad choices. Women need to quit with the victim mentality and accept responsibility for their actions. No does absolutely mean no. But if you say no, then yes, then no, you don't get to claim that the one time you said yes was rape. Rape is not something that should be tossed into the mix because a woman is weak.

Let's turn this around, if a man has sex with a woman, and she comes on to him a second time and he says no, and the woman persists, and he gives in ...was he just raped?

But for both girls to be certain enough of their situations to be pushing charges, despite the way we have been told by the media "it didn't happen" is pretty darned brave.

Or opportunistic. Or vindictive.

The media should also be ashamed of the message they are sending to those who have abusive partners that push and manipulate in a horrible way.

No they shouldn't. Women have been fighting for equality for decades, but women are still being rewarded for making bad decisions and playing victims in situations where they are purely victims of their own bad decisions. Manipulation requires CONSENT. There is no victim in a domestic abuse situation. The first time a spouse (male or female) hits you or abuses you, it's one hundred percent their fault. The second time it's fifty-fifty fault and the third time it's the abused's fault because their dumb ass was still there to get hit. No one abuses you repeatedly without your consent.

We don't live in a society where women have no options any more. Sweden is even more feminist supportive than the US. It is high time that women start accepting the equal responsibility that comes along with equal rights.

[Tom_Wescott]

It's fascinating to see TomTom argue like a woman and Ally argue like a man. I agree with Ally both that rape is one of the worst crimes you could commit, and that what Assange is accused of is most certainly not rape, not even criminal, and it's questionable most or any of it even happened.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[TomTomKent]

I can't deny that I struggle to remain objective on this subject, having had fringes of the effects touch on my life through acquaintances, but there is a variable assumption of what the charges mean in different media coverage. So to clarify the indication I have read is that it is one major event (the accusation of rape) and several smaller charges of molestation. And again, on my personal spectrum, if the ladies gave consent to A happening, but Assange continued to do B despite their complaints, that is doing something to them they don't want and falls with in the safe boundaries of the Molestation charge (to use an example, if they had agreed to protected sex, but he tried to continue unprotected despite complaints, and so forth). If the claim he tried to have sex while they were unable to give consent is correct (but I have not been able to verify it as yet) this too would clearly be rape.

As to why not kick the guy out of bed and out of their life, all I can say again is that in my experience life doesn't happen like that, for many kinds of abuse not just sexual. From the outside looking in you can scream at the wounded parties that is EXACTLY what they should be doing, and they will listen, maybe even agree. But actually do it? That seems beyond them. Getting my acquaintance out of that house and out of that life was a decision she needed to make, and no amount of arguing or persuasion would make it happen any quicker, even after she confided (her interpretation) certain events to me in confidence she would act, around the guy concerned, as though everything was ine and they were best pals, rather than let people know something was wrong. I have no idea if that is how psychologists would expect anyone to react, or the text book reaction, but it is the one I have caught a glimpse at and has filtered my perceptions towards simaler seeming cases.

Oh, and I hope nobody for a second is under the impression I think Ally (or anybody else) is wrong in their viewpoint if it does not happen to be my own. Not at all. I read back some of my posts and they sounded a little er, ranty. They weren't intended that way, and I am not trying to suggest there is any form of ill will in the discussion just because anybody may disagee with my rather pompous outlook on life. We all observe the same evidence, some of us come to different conclusions or make different assumptions. I think the mistake the press are making is to assume that the trial for the offences should be a trial of the Wikileaks organisation. The charges should stand or fall on their own merits, not because of what America may or may not expect, or what it may or may not say about freedom of information.