Turn on thread page Beta
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by TKC)
    Wasn't he questioned before and the charges dropped, and then they suddenly resurfaced after the US cable leak?

    Hmmm...

    Sweden have been known to send detainees abroad to be tortured on the basis of a flimsy assurance.

    I'm not normally one for conspiracy theories, but...
    The UK has just as bad of a record though?

    http://www.liberty-human-rights.org....tion/index.php
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...s-rendition-uk
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Well you can't just declare him innocent because you approve of him leaking US secrets.
    you'd be pretty cheesed off if you / your sister accused someone of rape and they couldn't be put on trial because they were riding a fashionable political bandwagon.

    Sweden and the uk don't have crap courts like russia (see todays pussy riot verdict) and they won't extradite him to face a death penalty.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    Well you can't just declare him innocent because you approve of him leaking US secrets.
    you'd be pretty cheesed off if you / your sister accused someone of rape and they couldn't be put on trial because they were riding a fashionable political bandwagon.

    Sweden and the uk don't have crap courts like russia (see todays pussy riot verdict) and they won't extradite him to face a death penalty.
    I would presume he's innocent, since to the best of my knowledge none of the information gathered PERSONALLY by him was done on US soil.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joinedup)
    Sweden and the uk don't have crap courts like russia (see todays pussy riot verdict) and they won't extradite him to face a death penalty.
    Are these the courts that tried to jail a man for saying he will blow an airport skyhigh on twitter?

    The same ones that let a gang of racist immigrants cause GBH to a white woman and then decided it wasn't racist, despite "white ****" being chanted by them?

    Your point is complete tripe. Our courts are ****.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    He's not being charged with rape, but wanted for questioning over alleged sexual misconduct. Since both encounters were, by the women's own admission, consensual, Swedish law descends into a nasty grey area.

    EDIT: In any case, habeus corpus, innocent until proven guilty, all that jazz.
    Offline

    15
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    I believe he stayed in plain sight in Sweden for long enough for any allegations to have been looked at around the time of the incident.
    1000 times this. This is an important point to remember. He was in Sweden when the accusations came to light for weeks, and I think he even asked permission to leave. Why couldn't they have dealt with him then?

    I think it's pretty obvious this 'rape' situation is a giant ruse to get him transported to the USA.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He specifically chose to base himself in Sweden before the rape charges because he respected their justice system and thought he was unlikey to be extradited to the US as Sweden do not extradite anyone who faces a potential death penalty, which is what he would face. Thats why he invested himself and wikileaks in going to Sweden in the first place. He is not fleeing because he thinks he wont get a just hearing. He's a sex offender running because he knows he will get justice.

    If the US planned to extradite him, they'd have gotten us to do it. We actually do that stuff quite easily and freely, whereas Sweden only does it secretly and to egypt, once or twice, and has strong legal protections against it, when there is public pressure. He was much more at risk here than he will be in Sweden, and even then we and sweden have a veto.

    the only reason there have been no charges is because, constitutionally speaking, Sweden cannot charge someone who hasnt been interviewed and held by police unless in cases of murder.

    In my view, he is a sex offender running from justice, hiding behind a facade of the 'US' who were in a prime position to go after him, but didnt. Delusional fools who see the US as the devil and are irrationally assuming that they are propegating a prolongued gambit to get him dont understand that Sweden have one of the most advanced justice systems in the world, and are insulting Sweden, the UK, the US, and international law by just asserting that 'its all a convoluted plot to send him to the US'. Sweden is the closest thing the world has to a properly developed justice system, and are also covered by the EU's protections

    It would have been really easy to just abduct him, or extradite him directly from the UK. GOING THROUGH SWEDEN MAKES NO LOGICAL SENSE FOR THE AMERICANS

    sorry. this story annoys me.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I find it odd that the U.S. Government hasn't issued a statement saying that they will not prosecute Assange. That would solve this entire problem. The fact that the Swedish authorities have flatly refused to assure Ecuador that they won't extradite Assange to the States doesn't help. Neither does the fact that the U.S. has convened a grand jury to assess whether Assange is guilty of conspiracy to commit espionage.

    Given the Swedes track record with extradition in the face of human rights concerns (cf. Agiza v Sweden) I don't think it is a simple issue of 'Assange is wanted on the basis of a rape allegation and therefore should stand trial'. Of course he should, but there are some serious obstacles to that which would be easy to remove by certain governments and aren't being.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    Are these the courts that tried to jail a man for saying he will blow an airport skyhigh on twitter?

    The same ones that let a gang of racist immigrants cause GBH to a white woman and then decided it wasn't racist, despite "white ****" being chanted by them?

    Your point is complete tripe. Our courts are ****.

    (Original post by TurboCretin)
    I find it odd that the U.S. Government hasn't issued a statement saying that they will not prosecute Assange. That would solve this entire problem. The fact that the Swedish authorities have flatly refused to assure Ecuador that they won't extradite Assange to the States doesn't help. Neither does the fact that the U.S. has convened a grand jury to assess whether Assange is guilty of conspiracy to commit espionage.

    Given the Swedes track record with extradition in the face of human rights concerns (cf. Agiza v Sweden) I don't think it is a simple issue of 'Assange is wanted on the basis of a rape allegation and therefore should stand trial'. Of course he should, but there are some serious obstacles to that which would be easy to remove by certain governments and aren't being.
    It's all very well holding Assange up as some sort of saviour of the Western World but you and your tin-foil-hat-wearing comrades consistently and repeatedly fail to explain
    • why the Americans don't just take him from Britain, if they really want him
    • where you get your idea of Sweden's record of ferrying the innocent to die in America (ie not Egypt)
    • why you are so happy for Britain to just ignore its duties to fulfil the EAW
    • why someone you think stands so resolutely for free speech is so determined to obstruct his alleged victims' free speech in court

    If there is any conspiracy theory here, it is as much on the part of the justice-evading hide-where-he-can Assange as anyone.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingsholmmad)
    It's all very well holding Assange up as some sort of saviour of the Western World but you and your tin-foil-hat-wearing comrades consistently and repeatedly fail to explain
    • why the Americans don't just take him from Britain, if they really want him
    • where you get your idea of Sweden's record of ferrying the innocent to die in America (ie not Egypt)
    • why you are so happy for Britain to just ignore its duties to fulfil the EAW
    • why someone you think stands so resolutely for free speech is so determined to obstruct his alleged victims' free speech in court

    If there is any conspiracy theory here, it is as much on the part of the justice-evading hide-where-he-can Assange as anyone.
    If you want people to take your posts seriously, you shouldn't attribute opinions to them which they have never expressed.

    I am not advocating Britain's shirking of its responsibility to see that Assange be tried. I don't think that Assange shirks this responsibility either, given that he remained in Sweden for five weeks after the accusations were first levied against him, leaving only with the prosecutor's authorisation. I don't think that the suppression of his accuser's freedom of speech is his primary motive either. It's not a matter of free speech at all, to be honest. It's a matter of due process. As I said, Assange should go to Sweden and face trial. I have little doubt that if either the United States promised not to prosecute him or Sweden promised not to extradite him, this would happen.

    The reason he has not been extradited to the United States is that the United States is yet to charge him with anything. Their convening of a grand jury to investigate Assange for conspiracy to commit espionage would suggest that they may yet do so.

    http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/nati...817-24e8u.html
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazzini)
    If he is innocent, why would he run to the Ecuadorian embassy? :holmes:
    Er, because nobody is guaranteeing he won't be shipped off to be extradited in America? Which fuels conspiracy theories even more.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by catoswyn)
    This has been done before and he himself has said he is willing for this to occur.

    Precisely.

    I mean, he hasn't even been charged with anything! If they want him for questioning, they could just as easily do it over a video-link.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by f1mad)
    Er, because nobody is guaranteeing he won't be shipped off to be extradited in America? Which fuels conspiracy theories even more.
    But if he can successfully defend himself in a court of law then why run?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mazzini)
    But if he can successfully defend himself in a court of law then why run?
    The bigger issue here is: is the whole the fiasco politically motivated? If the three countries involved, refuse to provide guarantees of him not being extradited to the US; that theory would hold substantial substance. No?

    If they really want to question him, it could be done over a video-link, yet the Swedish haven't taken that up. Too many questions; not enough answers,
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sweden say they want to question him. He allows them to question him in the Ecuadorian embassy, yet they refuse.

    If it was that they simply wanted to question him on a sexual assault charge, then they would simply question him.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    He is not charged with rape. Change your OP because at the moment you're committing libel.

    Here's a helpful alternative "wanted for questioning by a Swedish prosecutor to discuss allegations of not wearing a condom during consensual sex".
    As I understand it, the two women gave consent providing a condom was used. They did not give consent for sex without a condom, so it may have constituted as rape. According to my source (the i daily newspaper), Assange used force in one way or another.

    I don't know whether this is entirely correct, but I don't see why your source is correct and mine isn't? What is your source, anyway?


    I'd like to see Assange extradited to Sweden to face these charges as long as Sweden can guarantee he won't be extradited to the USA, but since they cannot confirm that it's very difficult. I'd read somewhere that he couldn't be extradited to the US if he was to be tried for the death penalty, but I'm unsure on that one. Either way, I wouldn't like to see him extradited to the USA anyway. But that doesn't change the fact that Assange shouldn't think he's above common and international law, which evidently he thinks he is. People should stop believing all these conspiracy theories, in my opinion.
    #
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by benpearson1)
    As I understand it, the two women gave consent providing a condom was used. They did not give consent for sex without a condom, so it may have constituted as rape. According to my source (the i daily newspaper), Assange used force in one way or another.

    I don't know whether this is entirely correct, but I don't see why your source is correct and mine isn't? What is your source, anyway?


    I'd like to see Assange extradited to Sweden to face these charges as long as Sweden can guarantee he won't be extradited to the USA, but since they cannot confirm that it's very difficult. I'd read somewhere that he couldn't be extradited to the US if he was to be tried for the death penalty, but I'm unsure on that one. Either way, I wouldn't like to see him extradited to the USA anyway. But that doesn't change the fact that Assange shouldn't think he's above common and international law, which evidently he thinks he is. People should stop believing all these conspiracy theories, in my opinion.
    #


    Start at 25mins, it talks about the rape situation.

    Assange says that if he is taken to Sweden, he won't be able to get political asylum from USA.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    Are these the courts that tried to jail a man for saying he will blow an airport skyhigh on twitter?

    The same ones that let a gang of racist immigrants cause GBH to a white woman and then decided it wasn't racist, despite "white ****" being chanted by them?

    Your point is complete tripe. Our courts are ****.
    The courts didn't do that. The courts prevented him going to jail. It was the CPS that took him to court looking for a conviction.

    I don't think our courts are ****.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DudeRugs)


    Start at 25mins, it talks about the rape situation.

    Assange says that if he is taken to Sweden, he won't be able to get political asylum from USA.
    I know, which (as I said) is why it makes it very difficult.

    I still stand by what I said in that I think he should be extradited to Sweden provided that they can (which they won't, I know) guarantee he won't be extradited to the USA. I wouldn't like to see Assange punished for exposing what were some absolutely shocking documents regarding the USA, but some things I can't say I agree with, e.g naming Taliban informants and then justifying it by saying they shouldn't have snitched in the first place. Does he not realise how important it is that these people remain anonymous?

    Cheers for video as well, will watch in full tomorrow when I can get some quiet.
 
 
 
Poll
Were you ever put in isolation at school?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.