best summary in english so far re. assange and rape allegations

[..]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010...assange-sweden

Definitely the best summary in english re. the rape allegations, still the article has quite some issues and problems of it's own. (as soon as i find some time i'll add a few remarks.)

However it's almost impossible to give a fair and unbiased summary on this causa. To be totally frank I've seen more background material than the Guardian currently has in this case and I've known Julian Assange long before he co-founded WikiLeaks [0], and yet I personally don't really feel qualified to comment on it, except calling it rape is problematic. [1]

[0] However, I'd also like to stress that, he and /me have never been close.

[1] Also if i were a woman, i would never have sex with him -- but would still opt to have small-talk with him.

[charlestudor2005]

Interesting article. I don't know about the rules of evidence in Sweden, but in the US it would be difficult, I think, to get much of A's or W's story into evidence. The case, like most "rape" cases, would come down to a swearing match. In those cases, the case generally turns on how credible the complainant is.

If anyone can shed light on the Swedish evidentiary system, I would appreciate it.

[One of the problems I see with this story is that all this time, I thought Assange was gay. lol]

[..]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Interesting article. I don't know about the rules of evidence in Sweden, but in the US it would be difficult, I think, to get much of A's or W's story into evidence. The case, like most "rape" cases, would come down to a swearing match. In those cases, the case generally turns on how credible the complainant is.

If anyone can shed light on the Swedish evidentiary system, I would appreciate it.

In this case with rape allegations and possible "forced" sex btwn. Julian Assange, Anna Ardin, and Sofia Wilen the Swedish evidentiary system is quite the same as the US or any other anglo-saxon system.

A difference btwn. the Swedish evidentiary system and the US system however would be in the case that involved Valerie Plame, "Scooter" Libby, Judith Miller et al.
(e.g. in the Swedish evidentiary system, Judith Miller could never be jailed for contempt of court for refusing to reveal her source. In fact Swedish law would require her NOT to reveal her source. Libby would also have special rights under swedish law, since he's member of a political party.)

Hope this was somewhat helpful.

[..]

Originally Posted by ..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010...assange-sweden

Definitely the best summary in english re. the rape allegations, still the article has quite some issues and problems of it's own. (as soon as i find some time i'll add a few remarks.)

more remarks maybe later -- if i find time.

anyway what is IMO important:

the article above was written by Nick Davies, who was a key person in arranging the prior-access conditions of WikiLeaks material for the Guardian.

However Nick Davies and Julian Assange also had a major "clash" or quite intense "verbal" fight. (Not defending anyone here -- both are smart but both also have big "egos")

-------------------

Now re. the article itself:

"That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent.""

This is essentially quite true Anna Ardin was sexually dissapointed from Julian Assange. However she did not communicate this to anyone except her extremely close friends; NOT even close friends of her knew it AND she was VERY proud to host Julian Assange in her home.

To be totally honest I personally would never fuck with Julian, but I would also never choose Anna. What I absolutely do not believe is that she is a paid sex trap.

Sofia Wilen is a different -- and quite complex story -- and she might be indeed an paid sex trap or part of a "smear campaign" as Julian Assange claims.

What is also important neither Anna Ardin, nor Sofia Wilen filed an official and formal complaint against Julian Assange.

[charlestudor2005]

Originally Posted by ..

Now re. the article itself:

"That evening, Miss A held a party at her flat. One of her friends, "Monica", later told police that during the party Miss A had told her about the ripped condom and unprotected sex. Another friend told police that during the evening Miss A told her she had had "the worst sex ever" with Assange: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent.""

This is essentially quite true Anna Ardin was sexually dissapointed from Julian Assange. However she did not communicate this to anyone except her extremely close friends; NOT even close friends of her knew it AND she was VERY proud to host Julian Assange in her home.

To be totally honest I personally would never fuck with Julian, but I would also never choose Anna. What I absolutely do not believe is that she is a paid sex trap.

Sofia Wilen is a different -- and quite complex story -- and she might be indeed an paid sex trap or part of a "smear campaign" as Julian Assange claims.

What is also important neither Anna Ardin, nor Sofia Wilen filed an official and formal complaint against Julian Assange.

Let me preface by saying I know absolutely nothing about Swedish law.

Having said that, here are some of the problems I see with the story: (1) nowhere is there any inkling that either "A" or "W" requested that Assange stop, or that what he did was @ their will; (2) the story, as it exists right now, is hearsay--and there does not appear to be any corroborating evidence for either story; (3) it's doubtful that "A's" story would be admitted as an excited utterance or any other exception under the hearsay rule unless it implicates her in a crime (same for "W"); (4) according to their stories themselves, it's doubtful that Assange had the requisite intent necessary to be charged with rape.

Again, I don't know how Swedish (or, indeed British extradition) law works, but here in the States, I think it is doubtful that the prosecutor's case would make it past the motion docket or the probable cause hearing.

[..]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

(3) it's doubtful that "A's" story would be admitted as an excited utterance or any other exception under the hearsay rule unless it implicates her in a crime (same for "W")

The "crime" would be if the "rape allegations" are true. However, neither Sofia, nor Anna said or suggested that there was rape. What they did is, they "sought advice" from the police and the police (Klara policestation in Stockholm) decided to file a formal report.

The report itself is full of factual and technical errors, but suggest that Julian fucked Sofia vaginally, without a condom while she was still asleep. This is in the legal sense sufficient reason for "rape" hence the allegations.
(However, there's some technical evidence and witness reports that Sofia was only half asleep while Julian fucked here; and if this evidence can be shown the "rape" allegations would be completely baseless, but if still would not invalidate the claims for sexual molestations against Anna and Sofia.)

Again, I don't know how Swedish (or, indeed British extradition) law works,.

both countries are part of the EU, hence the European Extradition System applies. It's a complex mess of its own unfortunately.

Formally in this case it means the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) in the UK represents the Swedish Justice.

but here in the States, I think it is doubtful that the prosecutor's case would make it past the motion docket or the probable cause hearing.

actually the chief-prosecutor (swedish: "chefsaklagare") Eva Finne dismissed the case after she got the police-report and had short private talks with Anna and Sofia.

Some days later another chief-prosecutor Marianne Ny decides otherwise and reopens the case, but constantly drags it out.

So far nobody charged Julian with anything.

ps: to understand the legal bullshit going on, or why Julian smells a "smear-campaign" against him, one has to know at least that Marianne Ny, Claes Borgström and Thomas Bodström are close friends.

[Laurentius]

If Assange could have sex with a woman and her sleep through it without having first been drugged, he must have a very very very small penis.

[..]

Originally Posted by Laurentius

If Assange could have sex with a woman and her sleep through it without having first been drugged, he must have a very very very small penis.

True, but to be fair Sofia to this day never said exactly that. This in this logical absurdity is only in the police report and was further supported by quite absurd statements from Claes Borgström.