Thoughts on Julian Assange

[MasterHamster]

Which is why they are extraditing him. So they can prosecute him in Sweden. Because, you know, that's where he allegedly committed the crimes.

And until he can get some kind of jurisdictional guarantee that the US won't be able to extradite him later, he'll never agree to come here.

People and web addresses:

JA – Julian Assange. Founder of Wikileaks http://www.wikileaks.com
AA – One of the women accusing JA. Spokeswoman for ”Broderskapsrörelsen” (”The Brotherhood Movement” which is the Christian wing of the Social Democratic Party) AA´s cousin Mattias is Lt Colonel with the Swedish peace keeping forces in Afghanistan. http://www.ardin.se http://www.socialdemokraterna.se/broderskap
SW – The second woman accusing JA. Lives in the town of Enköping, 50 miles north west of Stockholm. Since all police reports about her are classified, the identity of this woman has not been 100% verified.
MHK - Maria Häljebo Kjellstrand, duty prosecutor in Stockholm City. Her husband works as a legal expert to Minister of Justice Beatrice Ask.
EF – Eva Finné, Chief Prosecutor.
CB – Claes Borgström. Legal representative of AA och SW
LS – Leif Silbersky. Legal representative of JA until Sep 7.
BH - Björn Hurtig. Legal representative of JA from Sep 7.
MN – Marianne Ny. Head of the Public Prosecutor's Office; Development Unit in Gothenburg. Handles the appeal from CB.

Prosecutors office: http://www.aklagare.se/ (Some statements regarding JA are in English).
Background:

JA is on a longer stay in Sweden for various reasons. Among other things, he will speak at a “Brotherhood” seminar. AA handles JAs invitation and is in contact with JA before the visit. It is generally believed that JA spends his first nights in AAs apartment in Stockholm. (Fri, Aug 13 – Mon, Aug 16?). Probably even Wed night, Aug 17 – Friday, Aug 19. AA is probably working outside of Stockholm some of these days.

Friday Aug 13:
During this night (or maybe during the night between Saturday and Sunday), the incident that makes AA report JA to the police, occurs.

Saturday, Aug 14:
- JA delivers his speech at the Brotherhood seminar. SW acts as a photographer during the seminar although it seems as she has not been invited as a photographer. SW manages to get invited to the lunch (with JA) held after the seminar.
- JA och SW hang out in the afternoon.
- Crayfish party in the home of AA in the evening. Participants:
AA
JA
Possibly: Pirate Party member 1 (The Pirate Party is a small, Swedish Political Party).
Possibly: Pirate Party member 2
Possibly journalist 1
Possibly journalist 2
Perhaps a few more persons.

Monday, Aug 16:
JA travels by train with SW to Enköping and stays the night in her home. During the night or in the morning, the incident that makes SW report JA to the police, occurs.

Wednesday, Aug 18:
AA and SW – who have not met before according to their own statements – get in touch during the day (or maybe during Thu, Aug 19). Then the following happens:

Friday, Aug 20:
- During the afternoon (possibly around 2 p.m.) AA and SW enter the Klara Police Station in central Stockholm to discuss some things they say they have experienced while being with JA.
- The police officer handling the case creates one report concerning rape involving SW and one concerning molestation (which is not necessarily a sexually related crime in Sweden) involving AA..
- Rumours say that AA claims that JA intentionally broke a condom. (Later, JA denies this while being interrogated by the police).
- MHK decides to arrest JA in his absence for one count of rape and one count of sexual molestation.
- Within hours, someone leaks information about MHKs decision (including JAs name) to tabloid ”Expressen”.
- Against good practice, MHK confirms the story when a reporter from Expressen calls her. Her excuse seems to be that she got the impression that Expressen already knew all the details, and thus, she might just as well confirm(!).
- Within 24 hours, the story is in the media all over the world.
- The source/leak is still unidentified.
- Perhaps SW takes a test for some diseases.

Saturday, Aug 21:
- Chief prosecutor EF cancels the arrest warrant for JA. Says EF: “I do not believe that there is any reason so suspect him of rape”. The report on molestation remains, but it is now unclear whether it is considered sexual or not..
- http://www.aklagare.se/Media/Nyheter...-sin-franvaro/

Tuesday, Aug 24:
- Attorney Claes Borgström (CB) is suggested as legal representative of AA and SW.
- Attorney Leif Silbersky (LS) is suggested as legal representative of JA
- At http://rebellabloggen.wordpress.com/...puckade-saker/ (a blog for young feminists from the social democratic party) blogger Sara Gunnerud publishes what seems to be AAs version of what happened. It gives the impression that JA has had unsafe sex against AAs will. And that AA and SW went to the police to find out if it possible to force JA to take a test för sexually transferred diseases (STD). Sara Gunnerud also gives a negative description of JAs attitude towards women. But she gives praise to Wikileaks.

Wendesday, Aug 25:
- EF issues a statement where she announces that a preliminary investigation concerning one count of molestation (the word “sexual” is not mentioned) will be opened.
- As to the rape charges, EF says that she does not question the information delivered by SW, but that this information is such that there is no suspicion of rape at hand. Link: http://www.aklagare.se/Media/Nyheter...rendet-onsdag/
- In conversation with LS, JA says that he is completely innocent both from a legal point of view and from a moral one. He also adds that he has already suffered “enormous damage” from what has occurred.

Friday, Aug 27:
- Just before swedish authorities close their offices for the weekend, CB delivers an appeal of EFs decision. CB now requests that JA be charged with two counts of rape, one against AA and one against SW

Sunday, Aug 29 – Tuesday, Aug 31:
- According to Swedish newspaper Resumé, the first hint to tabloid Expressen came by SMS from a source which is yet to be identified. The SMS was delivered to free lance photographer Stefan Söderström who was at the governmental residence of Harpsund for a gathering with the Swedish government. Also at Harpsund was political journalist Niklas Svensson who works for Expressen. Svensson informs Expressen reporter Diamant Salihu, who digs up more information by contacting at least one other source. Then he calls duty prosecutor MHK who, inexplicably, confirms the fact that JA is arrested in his absence.
- According to a stubborn rumour from several sources, the incident between SW and JA should be that they had unsafe sex. It is not known whether, or in which way, safe sex had been agreed upon between the parties.

Monday, aug 30:
-JA is interrogated about the molestation charge against AA (but not about the rape charges). The charge seems to be that JA deliberately made a hole in a condom. JA denies doing so. Expressen publishes parts of the interrogation: http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/1.21...ge-ord-for-ord

Wednesday, Sep 1:
- The case has now been handed over to the Public Prosecutor's Office´s “Development Unit” in Gothenburg, where the head of the department, Chief Prescutor Marianne Ny (MN) decides to reopen the preliminary investigation of one count of rape (against SW) and that the preliminary investigation of one count of molestation (against AA) is to be reopened and expanded to include “all events” in the police report.
http://www.aklagare.se/Media/Nyheter...ssangearendet/


Friday, Aug 3:
- SW is interrogated a second time about the alleged rape.
- MN and her assistant prosecutor go through all existing material

Monday, Sep 6:
- JA requests that his legal representative LS be replaced by attorney Björn Hurtig (BH).

Tusesday, Sep 7:
- JA is granted the switch from LS to BH.

Saturday, Sep 11:
In an interview in the legal newspaper “Dagens Juridik” (a low profile newspaper for the legal community), BH says that his client has received a very unfair treatment from the authorities and that he will surely demand compensation from the state. http://www.dagensjuridik.se/sv/Artik...n-fran-staten/

Sounds to me like it's more a case of women fighting for their rights after a condom broke, rather than rape.
Assagne requested to talk to police before the warrant but was denied.

[Deleted]

(I'm gonna copy paste what I've said before + edits).

I wish people would stop feeding that attention whore. He isn't some sort of heroic freedom fighting whistleblower that people make him out to be, he is just a suspect fleeing from one of the most open goverments in the world - and seeking refuge at one of the worse.


Deep Throat (Mark Felt) was a great whistleblower. Assange sullies the heroism he represents.

nicely put, its hard to take him seriously when he goes on about freedom of the press and transparency, then claims asylum in Ecuador.

im a bit undecided on the whole thing though, i think he needs to be careful about what he released, and needs to make sure he never puts any one in serious danger, releasing names/addresses of certain people or something. the BNP thing they released a few years back springs to mind, they released a database with all the BNP party members names/addresses, which imo is an incredibly stupid thing to do

[Deleted]

Which is why they are extraditing him. So they can prosecute him in Sweden. Because, you know, that's where he allegedly committed the crimes.

---------- Post added 2012-08-20 at 11:33 AM ----------


Then you clearly didn't read much. There is nothing "dodgy" about it, two British courts have even held that the allegations constituted rape under laws of the UK. It is a clear allegation of rape in any civlised country. Here's the alleged offenses laid out in the warrant for his arrest:


3. Sexual molestation [/B]

On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.

so he violated her sexual integrity against her will, still she let him sleep in her bed for a few more days? sounds legit

[Janaa]

What criminal wrongdoing has he exposed, specifically in Cablegate? I am dead serious. No one has ever given me an answer that didn't get invalidated later.

- Hillary Clinton ordered illegal (in contravention of existing US-ratified treaties) intelligence gathering on UN members. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spying_...ates_diplomats
- Condoleezza Rice covered up (through ordering an investigation into a crime, ceased) the kidnapping and torture of German citizen Khalid El-Masri, and then tried to coerce other nations not to issue arrest warrants for those responsible. Arrest warrants have since been issued, and the US is still denying justice. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/11/hbc-90007831

To be fair, there's not much about US wrongdoing in the cables. It's more about the wrongdoings of other nations, and US knowledge thereof. The US tends not to broadcast its covert actions in DIPLOMATIC CABLES. Pointing out there's not much American "misbehavior" in diplomatic cables is merely stating the obvious. They're not any sort of smoking gun, and aren't meant to be - they're information which the US is sending out TO OTHER PEOPLE. Which is why I find it so interesting that people who hate him can rage on about how he's "doing it for attention", and call him "an anarchist" or "promoting chaos", then at the same time claim "oh, but he didn't release anything important or even secret". So.. which is it? Did he release something important that shakes up peoples foundations and promotes anarchy, or did he release nothing important and didn't make anyone aware of anything new?

Disappointed to see so many people here calling him a rapist when he's never been convicted of any such crime. And I'm really not fond of rape victims who take off their clothes, get in bed with someone, then part way through the act decide they don't want to do it... BUT THEN DON'T STOP IT! And sometime the next day or week then make the claim. Not only has he not been convicted or rape, but he'd be unlikely to lose the case. Both women admit they had consensual sex with him. One claims the condom broke and at that stage she didn't want to continue having sex but DIDN'T TELL HIM THAT, and her position is "well, he was on top of me, so there wasn't much I could do.." Umm.. TELL HIM TO STOP. And the other woman claims that they had consensual sex, and then fell asleep, and claims she awoke an indeterminate time later and he was still having sex with her - although she can't establish whether the initial act had ended, only that she fell asleep (which doesn't say much for his prowess, but doesn't make him a "slimey rapist", necessarily). So.. two counts of consensual sex.. check. Both "rapes" apparently happened during the consensual sex.. check.

And so immediately afterward the women went to the police, right? At least they told their friends, right? Actually, they discussed the events on Facebook for a few days, then they spoke to friends, who registered domains relating to his name and "rape" (in Swedish, I can't read it myself ), THEN they went to the police A WEEK LATER, and the initial investigation found no justifiable claim of rape. This went on for some weeks, as they got more members of the press involved, attempted blackmail emerged, and certain members of the investigation friends started turning up as "friends" on the girls Facebook pages, who then recanted their original findings and "discovered" how distressed the girls had been when they first came to them weeks ago.. Oh I could go on and on. There's little chance he'd lose the case if he went to Sweden, however the US has continued to refuse to rule out extraditing him from Sweden if he went there. They could solve all this by saying "we won't", but they won't say it, because they will do it. And there'll be no justice for anyone.

[Deleted]

And until he can get some kind of jurisdictional guarantee that the US won't be able to extradite him later, he'll never agree to come here.

Thats the thing tho. He will NEVER get that guarantee. Becouse if one of our politicians were to give such a promise it would break our constitution. Everyone are equal in the court of law. Assange is and never will be an exception.

[semaphore]

Sounds to me like it's more a case of women fighting for their rights after a condom broke, rather than rape.

Why don't you read the actual allegations being levied against him by a proper judicial authority? Instead of trying to come up with your own readomg based on some random timeline with obviously abbreviated information?

Assagne requested to talk to police before the warrant but was denied.

The police tried to talk to him. He fled the country. Besides they want him in Sweden for prosecution. The law should not compromise over one person's paranoia.

[Eats Compost]

The police tried to talk to him. He fled the country. Besides they want him in Sweden for prosecution. The law should not compromise over one person's paranoia.

Extradition rather than a video link or other measure for the sake of questioning already raised a red flag. There are certain elements of this situation that are suspicious without a doubt, just in terms of how the proceedings have panned out. The US has been quite hard on some whistleblowers in the past, and it's far from paranoid to think that they might wish to extradite him from Sweden.

[semaphore]

- Hillary Clinton ordered illegal (in contravention of existing US-ratified treaties) intelligence gathering on UN members. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spying_...ates_diplomats

Good point. But, let's be serious here. Who didn't expect them to?
(BTW not too sure if this is considered criminal under US laws, does anyone know?)

- Condoleezza Rice covered up (through ordering an investigation into a crime, ceased) the kidnapping and torture of German citizen Khalid El-Masri, and then tried to coerce other nations not to issue arrest warrants for those responsible. Arrest warrants have since been issued, and the US is still denying justice. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/11/hbc-90007831

The incident itself was not exposed by Cablegate. It was well known and highly publicised years before cablegate. The cable you linked to doesn't describe a cover up, it only refers to the US trying to pressure Germany into not issuing the the warrants. Is that what you mean by Rice ordering a stop to investigations? Or is there another cable? If it is the latter, I would like to read it.

---------- Post added 2012-08-20 at 12:24 PM ----------

Extradition rather than a video link or other measure for the sake of questioning already raised a red flag.

It's not really for the "sake of questioning". They want him back in Sweden so they can prosecute him, like I said.

The US has been quite hard on some whistleblowers in the past, and it's far from paranoid to think that they might wish to extradite him from Sweden.

It is paranoid when you can't even name a single law under which the United States can request extradition from Sweden. Or give us a reason why the US doesn't just extradite him from the UK - which is a much closer US ally.

---------- Post added 2012-08-20 at 12:26 PM ----------

so he violated her sexual integrity against her will, still she let him sleep in her bed for a few more days? sounds legit

In her statements, IIRC, she askled Assange to leave. He refused. She went to stay with a friend.

[Eats Compost]

It's not really for the "sake of questioning". They want him back in Sweden so they can prosecute him, like I said.

I'd say that regular proceedings would involve charging someone when attempting to extradite them, if your intent is to prosecute.

It is paranoid when you can't even name a single law under which the United States can request extradition from Sweden. Or give us a reason why the US doesn't just extradite him from the UK - which is a much closer US ally.

I don't think any of us here are savvy enough with extradition law to give a solid answer to that, but ignorance to it isn't a reason to say it isn't possible.

[Jackmoves]

And until he can get some kind of jurisdictional guarantee that the US won't be able to extradite him later, he'll never agree to come here.

Thats never going to happend. Our Government or Parliament can not give such guarantees. It's up to our courts to decide, and the government can not(or should not) make the ruling. The courts are supposed to be independent from the government. So people who think Sweden can just send him over to USA is pretty much giving our Courts the finger.

I guess we got no justice or law in this country.

[Deleted]

It is paranoid when you can't even name a single law under which the United States can request extradition from Sweden. Or give us a reason why the US doesn't just extradite him from the UK - which is a much closer US ally

I think this guy believes Sweden is more likely since they deported 2 Egyptian men back to Egypt where they were taken by american agents. And it was also rumoured that CIA was involved in the deporting. I'm not to sure about all this. I've never been one that reads/listens to news that much.

Trollmode activated... ASSange... hehehe...

[Deleted]

In her statements, IIRC, she askled Assange to leave. He refused. She went to stay with a friend.

according to assanges statement they continued to share a bed, and she could not tell which night it was (the protocoll states 17 or 18 I think), so it sounds like it wasent the last night where they shared a bed, otherwise she would be able to recall the date of the exakt night

[semaphore]

I'd say that regular proceedings would involve charging someone when attempting to extradite them, if your intent is to prosecute.

Apparently in Sweden, the charges are filed when the investigation finishes and the prosecution are about to go to court. "Regular proceedings" are different in different legal systems.

I don't think any of us here are savvy enough with extradition law to give a solid answer to that, but ignorance to it isn't a reason to say it isn't possible.

Extradition law is irrelevant for this stage. There needs to be a law under which the United States can charge Assange with, before the US can request extradition at all. If there is in fact such a law (there isn't), then the US can move to extradite him from a country, and only then do you need to consider extradition laws.

However there is no applicable American law against Wikileaks. I feel like you're going to make an argument from ignorance, so let me just refer you to the fact that other American organisations took part in publishing Wikileaks and they can't be held responsible. In fact with these leaks, the people getting into trouble is the people providing the material, not the people publishing it (Bradley Manning in this case).

[Nask]

In her statements, IIRC, she askled Assange to leave. He refused. She went to stay with a friend.

Oh yeah! How did I forget that when you rape someone you just stay there, sounds even more legit.

[semaphore]

according to assanges statement they continued to share a bed, and she could not tell which night it was (the protocoll states 17 or 18 I think), so it sounds like it wasent the last night where they shared a bed, otherwise she would be able to recall the date of the exakt night

Sure, and Assange is free to raise that point in a trial. However the allegations are justifiable grounds for prosecution. It is up to the jury to decide if he is innocent or not. It is not up to Assange to raise a contrary statement and then claim therefore he shouldn't be extradited. And anyway you were appealing to the common rape myth of "not normal rape victim behaviour".

[Cthulhu 2020]

In a world where people are all too willing to blindly accept their government's lies, he's something of an information liberator.

Is he a rapist? Probably. Although those rape chargers are rather convenient. Is he a saint? Nope. But in a society where corporations are spreading their roots further and further into politics, he's doing a bit of necessary weeding.

[semaphore]

Oh yeah! How did I forget that when you rape someone you just stay there, sounds even more legit.

He obviously doesn't think his actions constituted rape. I mean, a bunch of you clearly don't (consider the allegations rape).

[Eats Compost]

Apparently in Sweden, the charges are filed when the investigation finishes and the prosecution are about to go to court. "Regular proceedings" are different in different legal systems.

I've heard differently from third-party commentators (straying as far away from the Fox News standard of commentators as possible), describing the proceedings as odd, even when they are supporting the notion of extraditing Assange. I wouldn't rely on the statements of commentators to back such a thing up normally, but I wouldn't know where to find a definitive source of information on when charges are laid in Sweden. When I mention commentators, I mean commentators with relevant areas of expertise, mostly regarding foreign law and international law.

Extradition law is irrelevant for this stage. There needs to be a law under which the United States can charge Assange with, before the US can request extradition at all. If there is in fact such a law (there isn't), then the US can move to extradite him from a country, and only then do you need to consider extradition laws.

However there is no applicable American law against Wikileaks. I feel like you're going to make an argument from ignorance, so let me just refer you to the fact that other American organisations took part in publishing Wikileaks and they can't be held responsible. In fact with these leaks, the people getting into trouble is the people providing the material, not the people publishing it (Bradley Manning in this case).

Is there no law against the knowing distribution of information that has come from such illegal leaks? On top of that, isn't there a law that would act against those distributing information that could potentially endanger lives, as the US government has argued? I'm not too familiar with US law, so it's not a rhetorical question.

Extradition law is also relevant - it may be that a different standard is required of the party seeking extradition in Sweden than the UK. If I'm not mistaken, the UK had legal proceedings to establish whether or not it was likely that Assange had committed acts that fit Sweden's allegations, and that such was a requisite of extraditing him on those grounds. Different extradition laws may make a large difference in the US's chances of success in an extradition bid, especially if the legal basis of the charges they bring forth isn't definitive (which it likely won't be if they have to apply a law at a stretch).

[Jackmoves]

I think this guy believes Sweden is more likely since they deported 2 Egyptian men back to Egypt where they were taken by american agents. And it was also rumoured that CIA was involved in the deporting. I'm not to sure about all this. I've never been one that reads/listens to news that much.

Trollmode activated... ASSange... hehehe...

That happend, CIA was in Sweden collecting them. The Swedish army has even had surveillance teams assigned to keep check on Planes from the US since then, esp if there are any suspicios circumstances involved.

The Swedish defence forces has conducted a secret surveillance operations since 2005 monitoring US government planes at Stockholm Arlanda Airport.

"The assignment to carry out these operations came from the defence ministry to the defence forces," according to a source who confirmed that the Swedish government harboured suspicions that the CIA was using so-called rendition flights to force people out of the USA against their will.

The surveillance teams confirmed these suspicions and found at least one CIA plane filled with chained prisoners clad with black hoods and unable to move, the newspaper reports, citing several independent anonymous sources.

The Swedish defence forces on Friday confirmed to the newspaper that the surveillance operations took place.

"We have inspected planes but make no further comment," Roger Magnergård, press officer at the Swedish defence forces, said to Expressen.

The operation's findings were reported back to the defence department, then headed by defence minister Leni Björklund, Expressen writes.

There is however no record of any formal protest lodged by the Swedish government to the US authorities.

[Nask]

He obviously doesn't think his actions constituted rape. I mean, a bunch of you clearly don't (consider the allegations rape).

Wasn't the case dropped more than once by swedish prosecutors, "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape,".