Julian Assange (remember him?) update

Great Debates
161

How so, since an essential component of his entrapment has fallen ?

Plus he’s avoided spending that time in a Supermax in America.
If Trump has any sense — not that he does — he, despite his previous threats to Assange, or any other president imaginable would best draw a line under the whole affair, and not prosecute Assange, Snowden or anyone else; and just let them retire into safe semi-obscurity. It’s all yesterday’s news; Americans have indicated they are comfortable with continual surveillance of themselves for the good of the state; and they sure as hell like droning. No state interests, even those of secret police are ever furthered by motivations of revenge.

162

The Swedish decision changes nothing. If Assange leaves the embassy, he can definitely be arrested on the British bail skipping charge (maximum penalty a year in jail). While that charge is being prosecuted (and he’s presumably in British custody, because who will ever give him bail again), Sweden can reactivate the rape charge

He may also be subject to arrest on foot of a sealed US extradition request :- none of the state actors involved in that have confirmed or denied that such a request has been made, nor will they ever do so. This arrest risk is indefinite, and extends beyond the 2020 expiry of the Swedish rape charges.

Effectively, on Thursday, Assange’s only certain way to avoid arrest was to remain in the Ecuadorian embassy indefinitely. That is also the case today.

163

Just a reminder of what complete bullshit the Swedish charges were from the start.

The Swedish case against Assange

Two women laid complaints of technical rape.

One said she asked Assange to use a condom and he didn’t. He says he did. Nevertheless she continued sleeping with him and hosting him in her flat for a further 6 days. She refused offers to host him elsewhere, acted as his press secretary, and threw a party for him - all AFTER the alleged incident.

The other woman said she asked Assange to use a condom, and he did, but then he deliberately broke the condom. Assange says the condom broke by accident. They went out together for breakfast the next morning, and appeared to be on good terms.

The two women later went to the police, not to lay charges of rape, but to see if Assange could be compelled to take an HIV test. One woman said the police were keen to get them to lay rape charges, and “she felt railroaded by the police and others around her.”

Both women have said that sex was consensual, the only issue was condom use. Neither woman contracted HIV, or anything else, or got pregnant after sleeping with Assange.

Stockholm’s Chief Prosecutor Eva Finne, stated she “made the assessment that the evidence did not disclose any offence of rape”, and that “The conduct alleged … disclosed no crime at all and that file (K246314-10) should be closed.”

However, after political intervention, the case was reopened with a different prosecutor.

Assange then stayed in Sweden for five weeks in order to give his statement - during which time the prosecutor declined to question him on a number of occasions. Assange left Sweden with the consent of the prosecutor.

No charges have ever been laid against him. He was only wanted for ‘questioning’

This case was never anything other than an excuse to hand him over to the USA while avoiding any kind of legal process dealing with freedom of speech, the rights of journalists, and Wikileaks. Note that Sweden has previously cooperated with the US in acts of ‘extraordinary rendition’ (kidnapping and torture).

Sweden had been waiting in the hope that the President of Ecuador, Lenin Moreno, would lose the election there, but he won last month. This appears to be the main reason why they gave up now.

164

…would you care to offer some cites for your extraordinary assertions?

A casual read of the wikion this case doesn’t read like your summary at all.

165

Cites:

From the Observer, a detailed analysis of the 98-page official Swedish report:

Why I am Convinced that Anna Ardin is a Liar

Assange Case Fact-Checker

166

…well thanks for the data dump. Rather than try and pick my way through your obviously very biased citations, perhaps I should have been more specific. Lets start with one example. You claimed “However, after political intervention, the case was reopened with a different prosecutor.”

Can you provide evidence of this political intervention?

167

I’ve given the cites you asked for. If you’re not even prepared to read them, there’s nothing more I can do for you.

You will obviously believe what you choose to believe, regardless of anything. In other words, normal right-wing nut-job behaviour.

168

…I actually looked through your cites: I didn’t see any evidence of political interference. But perhaps I missed it. Would you care to enlighten us?

And implying that I, the Straight Dope Resident Social Justice Warrior, is exhibiting “normal right-wing nut-job behaviour” is absolutely hilarious.

169

<Monty Python Peasant Voice>
Well, I didn’t vote for you.
</Monty Python Peasant Voice>

170

Great. He should have no problem being acquitted.

171

Acquitted???

He was never even charged with anything, and now the whole case has been dropped! :smack:

172

Yeah, so it makes the whole hiding from justice for what - five years - seem like a pretty stupid move if he never committed any crimes.

ETA: by the way, the Outrage Style Manual suggests you use seven question marks in these contexts.

173

Frankly, after doing what he did to the American intelligence community, I would say a high level of paranoia is pretty rational rather than stupid.

174

Seeing as how he surrounds himself with sycophants that make Trump envious, I’m not sure Assange has any rational basis to understand the world outside his own ego.

175

Under the Swedish system, he couldn’t be charged until he was interviewed.

176

Assange then stayed in Sweden for five weeks in order to give his statement - during which time the prosecutor declined to question him on a number of occasions. Assange left Sweden with the consent of the prosecutor.

No charges have ever been laid against him. He was only wanted for ‘questioning’

This case was never anything other than an excuse to hand him over to the USA while avoiding any kind of legal process dealing with freedom of speech, the rights of journalists, and Wikileaks. Note that Sweden has previously cooperated with the US in acts of ‘extraordinary rendition’ (kidnapping and torture).

Sweden had been waiting in the hope that the President of Ecuador, Lenin Moreno, would lose the election there, but he won last month. This appears to be the main reason why they gave up now.
[/QUOTE]

I regularly visit Sweden, and know the country well. It’s an EU democracy, with a strongly established rule of law, and all the above strikes me as conspiratorial, paranoid nonsense.

Can I ask, what do people, especially Assange devotees, see as Assange’s exit plan here ? As I outlined above, he’s potentially subject to arrest when he steps outside the diplomatic bubble no matter what.

Is his life plan to live and die in a room in the Ecuadorian embassy ?

177

In North America there is also a liberal democracy with a long standing rule of law called…Unified Gates,??? errrr Union Rates…??? United States…which has taken to locking people up for decades without charge or trial, sending them to government-sponsored torture centers on three continents.

Assange is not an ordinary dude accused of rape by a couple of women. He is a man who is has managed to piss off some very powerful people, liberal democracy or no liberal democracy he is right to be worried.

178

[QUOTE=GreenWyvern]

This case was never anything other than an excuse to hand him over to the USA while avoiding any kind of legal process dealing with freedom of speech, the rights of journalists, and Wikileaks. Note that Sweden has previously cooperated with the US in acts of ‘extraordinary rendition’ (kidnapping and torture).
[/QUOTE]

Since Assange was in the UK before he fled to the Ecuadorian embassy, why was Assange somehow more afraid that Sweden would extradite him to the U.S. rather than the UK, given that the UK has a much closer relationship to the U.S.? The U.S. has extradition treaties with both Sweden and the UK. It doesn’t really make much sense. Particularly since he is not a British citizen and any charges he could face would not be death penalty eligible offenses, which can one of the main reasons that European countries do not extradite people to the U.S.

179

He faced some initial questions back in 2010 before prosecutors seemed to form an idea of what the charges might be. The Swedish prosecutors finally were able to arrange a second interview with him by traveling to the UK in November 2016.

Missed the edit window for the post above - it looks like Assange could possibly be charged with a death penalty eligible offense, but the U.S. would not realistically seek it in this case.

180

This is a warning for personal insults. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.

[/moderating]