ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Julian Assange , rape charges

Closed Thread
Old 12th December 2010, 07:08 PM   #241
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
I suspect we know roughly as much as each other about the circumstances leading to this case.
Which really is, not a lot. We know the charges, we know the rumors and what his layers have to say. What we don't know is what happened that caused the prosecuters to have those charges placed. What we don't know is the women's side of the story.

We need to wait until the real facts come out, when they do then we'll know. Until then these are serious charges and should be taken seriously.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:11 PM   #242
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
No its not a serious matter.

The girl threw himself at him, gave him oral sex in a cinema and then took him back to her place. Whether or not he wore or condom the next morning is not a serious matter. It is an utterly trivial matter

What is a serious matter is that there is a class of people who think it is okay to deal in this kind of particularly nasty entrapment and another class of people who loudly declare how awful it all is while privately cackling and smirking away between themselves.

Julian Assange is most likely an idiot - but the hypocrisy and abuse of process on display is no laughing matter.
It's not a question of whether or not he wore or condom the next morning.

It's a question of whether or not he had sex with her while she was asleep knowing that as he wasn't wearing a condom she'd have objected. Despite your seemingly lack of understanding, that is a very serious matter, it's called rape in most western countries (if not all) and in Sweeden holds a punishment of up to 6 years in jail. Hardly a laughing matter.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:12 PM   #243
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
No its entrapment to throw yourself at a celebrity so you can then make a complaint of rape for personal gain.
However it is still rape even if you throw yourself at a celebrity, if they have start having sex with you when you're asleep.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:22 PM   #244
ThunderChunky
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,546
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
However it is still rape even if you throw yourself at a celebrity, if they have start having sex with you when you're asleep.
Is the claim that she was penetrated during her sleep?
ThunderChunky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:31 PM   #245
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,166
Originally Posted by ThunderChunky View Post
Is the claim that she was penetrated during her sleep?
Although if she was asleep then how would she know if he wore a condom or not?

The charges are so absurd and implausible, that one can't help wondering if it is all an attempt to deliberately confer matyr status on Assange to give him unimpeachable credibility.

A similar thing happened with David Irving - who as you may know sometimes indulges in weak holocaust denial and then loudly retracts. When asked why he went to Austria when there was an arrest warrent there, he replied a soldier just does what his orders are. He had to spend a year in jail - which can't have been pleasant, but it did certainly put his credentials with the denial movement beyond any doubt. Even though all he ever does is loudly claim "I used to disbelieve X, Y and Z but now my doubts and questions have been answered and I fully believe in gas chambers in Treblinka. I do, however, maintain that all gassings in Auschwitz took place not in Krema II or III but in the bunkers"

You would think if the Swedish chicks (and their string pullers) had really wanted to put Assange away they would have come up with something a little more damning.
little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:36 PM   #246
Simmins
Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 37
Why people are defending this guy whereas they wouldn't for another person in the same situation is actually pretty sad. Condom breaking one time is understandable but if a woman expressly states to wear a condom and you, in nearly every case i am aware of, know it broke then you stop and take care of the situation. But three times is certainly a pattern, he must have broke them himself.

And why wouldnt they want him to come in for an STD test? because most likely that is why they wanted him to wear one in the first place. They have to sit around for weeks waiting for something to show up? No way...if he does not come in willingly then some type of legal action is understandable.
Simmins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:41 PM   #247
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by ThunderChunky View Post
Is the claim that she was penetrated during her sleep?
How about you ask the Prosecutor, you know as much as I do, the charge stems from his allegedly having sex with her when she was asleep.

This story might put a few things in perpective.

People should just read and absorb this one.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:48 PM   #248
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,166
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
How about you ask the Prosecutor, you know as much as I do, the charge stems from his allegedly having sex with her when she was asleep.

This story might put a few things in perpective.

People should just read and absorb this one.
Muhahahahaha.

I read the 2nd one and thought the reference to Roman Polanski was the height of chutzpah. In one case we have a well-connected Jew who drugged and anally raped a thirteen year old and has successfully avoided all prison time and extradition charges.

In the other case we have someone who was pounced upon by two swedish adults - one of whom couldnt even wait to get back to the privacy of a bedroom before pulling his zipper down. Presumably, all so they could make a rape complaint and then reap the rewards through career preferement later.

No one gains from saying that its OK to use rape accusations as a form of payback, and it will only impact on genuine victims who feel they have hard enough time being believed already.
little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:52 PM   #249
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Muhahahahaha.

I read the 2nd one and thought the reference to Roman Polanski was the height of chutzpah. In one case we have a well-connected Jew who drugged and anally raped a thirteen year old and has successfully avoided all prison time and extradition charges.

In the other case we have someone who was pounced upon by two swedish adults - one of whom couldnt even wait to get back to the privacy of a bedroom before pulling his zipper down. Presumably, all so they could make a rape complaint and then reap the rewards through career preferement later.

No one gains from saying that its OK to use rape accusations as a form of payback, and it will only impact on genuine victims who feel they have hard enough time being believed already.
So obviously you were there, since you know exactly what happened, right?
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 07:54 PM   #250
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,166
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
So obviously you were there, since you know exactly what happened, right?
Seriously, is that the best you can come up with? If I was your handler I would be docking your pay cheque

Have you ever shown so much interest in a rape case before?
little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 08:00 PM   #251
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Seriously, is that the best you can come up with? If I was your handler I would be docking your pay cheque

Have you ever shown so much interest in a rape case before?
Several, were you at those too. Because here's your question. Unless you were in the room with them, how can you honestly say you know what happened? Where is your magical source of information that lets you know what no one else other then those three people know? How do you have this great fount of knowledge that allows you to see into people's bedrooms and know exactly what happened?
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 08:12 PM   #252
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,166
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Several, were you at those too. Because here's your question. Unless you were in the room with them, how can you honestly say you know what happened? Where is your magical source of information that lets you know what no one else other then those three people know? How do you have this great fount of knowledge that allows you to see into people's bedrooms and know exactly what happened?
Thats where the internet comes in handy. You can gauge by Illuminati reactions the likely cause behind events.

Here you are, an Australian (albeit with somewhat of an authoritarian security-military industry orientation) seemingly overwhelmingly concerned about if someone you have never met wore a condom or not with some girl who was more than happy to hop into the sack with him. This interest you display is clearly out of proportion to the significance of such an event which, even if every word of the indictment is true, is of mind-bogglingly triviality.

So clearly this is an issue that is of importance to the Illuminati and all their low-level operatives will be taking up positions both in the blogosphere and more importantly in the media to try and push this issue where ever possible.

Given the extreme improbability of such event ever making it past a policeman's desk, let alone seeming to excite people around the globe, then it has almost certainly been an event that was deliberately procured.
little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 08:18 PM   #253
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,522
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Muhahahahaha.

I read the 2nd one and thought the reference to Roman Polanski was the height of chutzpah. In one case we have a well-connected Jew who drugged and anally raped a thirteen year old and has successfully avoided all prison time and extradition charges.
Libby Brooks is clueless about the Polanski case. You yourself are repeating widespread misconceptions about the facts of the case.

Polanski is commonly referred to as having "drugged" Samantha Geimer, which is a construction that implies (without actually stating) that he tricked or forced her to take a substance that incapacitated her. They shared champagne and a quaalude between them. This is not something I'm okay with - you should not give minors alcohol, let alone one third of a quaalude - but at the same time it is misleading at best and dishonest at worst to say Polanski drugged Geimer.

Polanski told police they had consensual vaginal sex but he did not climax. This too is not something I'm okay with, but it's not (to use Whoopi's term) rape-rape. It's unlawful sex with a minor, a different and lesser offence.

Geimer told police Polanski vaginally raped her, then unceremoniously anally raped her until he climaxed. She was very specific and very graphic about this in her statement to police. It's an enormously serious allegation to make, and it's false in this case. When Geimer was examined there was absolutely no sign of trauma to the vaginal or anal regions and no sperm on her person or clothes.

There was phosphatase on her undergarments, a chemical trace that can linger for months after contact with semen and which can be found on the undergarments of most sexually active women. Geimer was already sexually active by her own admission at the time of the alleged offence, so this proves nothing either way.

Why Samantha Geimer lied in her statement to police is anyone's guess. A popular theory at the time is that her parents put her up to it so they could blackmail or sue Polanski, but we'll probably never know.

Polanski undoubtedly deserved the statutory punishments appropriate for an adult who shares alcohol and quaaludes and has consensual sex with a willing thirteen year old. However saying he got away with anal rape is incorrect.

Geimer herself later made significantly different claims to those she made in her initial statement to police:

Quote:
In a documentary for A&E Television Networks entitled Roman Polanski (2000), Samantha Gailey Geimer stated "…he had sex with me. He wasn’t hurting me and he wasn’t forceful or mean or anything like that, and really I just tried to let him get it over with." She also claimed that the event had been blown "all out of proportion".

In a 2003 interview, Samantha Geimer said, "Straight up, what he did to me was wrong. But I wish he would return to America so the whole ordeal can be put to rest for both of us." Furthermore, "I'm sure if he could go back, he wouldn't do it again. He made a terrible mistake but he's paid for it." In 2008, Geimer stated in an interview that she wishes Polanski would be forgiven, "I think he's sorry, I think he knows it was wrong. I don't think he's a danger to society. I don't think he needs to be locked up forever and no one has ever come out ever — besides me — and accused him of anything. It was 30 years ago now. It's an unpleasant memory ... (but) I can live with it.
From here.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 08:32 PM   #254
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,166
Ahh the bizarro world of JREF skeptics.

People are shocked, SHOCKED that there is a possibly Julian Assange didnt wear a condom, but can we really be sure that Roman Polanski's accuser was not lying when she said she was anally raped.

For the record she repeated her testimony on oath before a jury. You can read it here

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/ro...part-2?page=13
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/ro...part-2?page=14
little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 09:24 PM   #255
Kevin_Lowe
Penultimate Amazing
 
Kevin_Lowe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 11,522
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Ahh the bizarro world of JREF skeptics.

People are shocked, SHOCKED that there is a possibly Julian Assange didnt wear a condom, but can we really be sure that Roman Polanski's accuser was not lying when she said she was anally raped.

For the record she repeated her testimony on oath before a jury. You can read it here
Anything's possible. I think the only thing we know for sure at this stage is that the charges are significantly politically motivated. It's possible the charges are true and that the only reason they are being made is political, and it's possible the charges are false and that the only reason they are being made is political. Whether or not Assange is factually guilt Interpol, Sweden and the UK have some serious questions to answer about the processes by which he has been charged.
__________________
Thinking is skilled work....People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists.
-- Alfred Mander
Kevin_Lowe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 10:55 PM   #256
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Here you are, an Australian
Well there goes what paper thin credibility you did have.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.

Last edited by PhantomWolf; 12th December 2010 at 10:58 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th December 2010, 10:58 PM   #257
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
People are shocked, SHOCKED that there is a possibly Julian Assange didnt wear a condom
Not shocked at all, I couldn't care less what he did or did wear. I'm more concerned about whether he had sex with a sleeping woman or not.

What does shock me is the number of people that seem to believe that it's perfectly acceptable to have sex with a sleeping woman if she previously gave you a blow-job or had sex when awake. That shocks me.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 12:12 AM   #258
Aepervius
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,679
Originally Posted by Simmins View Post
Why people are defending this guy whereas they wouldn't for another person in the same situation is actually pretty sad. Condom breaking one time is understandable but if a woman expressly states to wear a condom and you, in nearly every case i am aware of, know it broke then you stop and take care of the situation. But three times is certainly a pattern, he must have broke them himself.

And why wouldnt they want him to come in for an STD test? because most likely that is why they wanted him to wear one in the first place. They have to sit around for weeks waiting for something to show up? No way...if he does not come in willingly then some type of legal action is understandable.
I *HAD* 2 condom breaks. And get a STD test for me and the women I slept with. The story is strange to me because in case of condom breaks, neither my partner nor me remarked immediately it had broke, we saw it only afterward. So maybe you guys have a different experience, by mine is that you don't remark the condom broke in the middle.

Anyway even if she has really be raped, in absence of evidence it turns out to be a she said/he said story. So unless there is more evidence than what's we heard, the story should go nowhere.

ETA: and getting 3 break one after the other don't sound too strange. It really depends on other factors we don't know. My sisters and me are , my parents admitted, the results of contraception not working.

Last edited by Aepervius; 13th December 2010 at 12:15 AM.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 12:24 AM   #259
Simmins
Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 37
I noticed it right away, i also happened to be living with the person and STD's weren't an issue. Which has no bearing here because what happens in another case is beside the point. In circumstances where someone or rather two people are concerned enough to go to authorities then both sides are usually heard where at least they would question the other person.

Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
I *HAD* 2 condom breaks. And get a STD test for me and the women I slept with.
So then you agree that he should do what he did and turn himself in. His own lawyer isnt disputing it so its really a non issue. And i never said this, according to what i know about it anyway, is an automatic rape charge. If he does have an STD and knowingly continued then it can be more serious and that goes for anyone.

Last edited by Simmins; 13th December 2010 at 12:46 AM.
Simmins is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 12:28 AM   #260
Aepervius
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,679
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Ahh the bizarro world of JREF skeptics.

People are shocked, SHOCKED that there is a possibly Julian Assange didnt wear a condom, but can we really be sure that Roman Polanski's accuser was not lying when she said she was anally raped.

For the record she repeated her testimony on oath before a jury. You can read it here

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/ro...part-2?page=13
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/ro...part-2?page=14

We are not a hive mind, you know ? JREFer have a wide range of opinion. Furthermore, people lie on oath grand jury or not. I am not pretending she did, I am just saying that because she said it under oath, does not make it "100% truth , impossible it was otherwise". Now if we are talking on probability, that certainly make it much more probable that he did the deed, rather than not doing it.

With the Polanski story anyway, most JREFer in "that" side of the debatte, were not unhappy with her story (maybe tehre was an exception or two I missed), they were unhappy the way the state department handled it, badly and was 100% guilty of the extradition not going on.

With Assange it is worst becazuse we have even LESS information going on.

But if you ask me, those debatte beats arguying with DOC for page 428 that no, there is no evidence presented, or aguying with 154 with his baiting, or any other of those threads which go for age nowhere.

At least the knox , assange and polanski thread distracted us, while having a finite live and a forseable time by which they end.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 12:31 AM   #261
Aepervius
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,679
Originally Posted by Simmins View Post
I noticed it right away, i also happened to be living with the person and STD's weren't an issue. Which has no bearing here because what happens in another case is beside the point. In circumstances where someone or rather two people are concerned enough to go to authorities then both sides are usually heard where at least they would question the other person.



So then you agree that he should do what he did and turn himself in. His own lawyer isnt disputing it so its really a non issue.
I agree he should test himself, but as far as I know my local law, he is not FORCED to do it. I dunno the swedish law on that point so....

But the rest ? No information to have, at best all we have are opinion formed and prejudiced by everybody's bias. Mine included.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 03:19 AM   #262
chillzero
Domestic Godless
 
chillzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,524
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Although if she was asleep then how would she know if he wore a condom or not?
Oh good grief.

Maybe she woke up?
Maybe she was left .... messy?

If you think that sex without a condom leaves no noticeable trace (or sensation) on a woman, well ... I don't know what to tell you.
chillzero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 06:56 AM   #263
Leif Roar
Master Poster
 
Leif Roar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,795
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
I think the only thing we know for sure at this stage is that the charges are significantly politically motivated.
Really? So what's the political motive that makes Sweden, of all countries, press charges against Assange? I mean, I could accept "political pressure" of the kind "Because of who he is, this case is going to be high profile, so make sure you dot your i's and cross your t's", but I find it hard to believe that any Swedish politican or bueraucrat would take the risk of imploring the police and prosecution to press charges against a person merely to curry favour with the USA.
__________________
"Our feature on cloud seeding (16 Apr, p40) should have started with the words 'Cannons blazed'. No clergy were set on fire in China's rainmaking experiment." -- New Scientist, 7th May 2005
Leif Roar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 07:07 AM   #264
Aepervius
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,679
Originally Posted by chillzero View Post
Oh good grief.

Maybe she woke up?
Maybe she was left .... messy?

If you think that sex without a condom leaves no noticeable trace (or sensation) on a woman, well ... I don't know what to tell you.
You could make pretty picture so that he gets it .
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 07:08 AM   #265
Aepervius
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 9,679
Talking

Originally Posted by Leif Roar View Post
Really? So what's the political motive that makes Sweden, of all countries, press charges against Assange? I mean, I could accept "political pressure" of the kind "Because of who he is, this case is going to be high profile, so make sure you dot your i's and cross your t's", but I find it hard to believe that any Swedish politican or bueraucrat would take the risk of imploring the police and prosecution to press charges against a person merely to curry favour with the USA.
I guess, the same pressure which brought them to suddenly make a 180 on pirate bay, despite, from what I understood, them being 100% fine with the law, since they host nothing.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 07:19 AM   #266
Leif Roar
Master Poster
 
Leif Roar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,795
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
I guess, the same pressure which brought them to suddenly make a 180 on pirate bay, despite, from what I understood, them being 100% fine with the law, since they host nothing.
What, industry interests from the MPAA and political threats of trade sanctions through the WTO for failing to uphold the Berne convention? Somehow I fail to see how that would apply in this case.
__________________
"Our feature on cloud seeding (16 Apr, p40) should have started with the words 'Cannons blazed'. No clergy were set on fire in China's rainmaking experiment." -- New Scientist, 7th May 2005
Leif Roar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 09:37 AM   #267
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,903
One major part of the puzzle is why, after 40 days of investigation for which Assange waited in Sweden, were the charges dropped by the senior prosecutor and then re-issued 4 months later?

It will be interesting to see what changed. The only thing I can see changing is the testimony of the alleged victims. There really isn't any other evidence to change.

Only time will tell.
__________________
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them."

(Mark Twain)
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 11:47 AM   #268
George II
Critical Thinker
 
George II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 313
According to swedish law, the decision to drop criminal charges or end an investigation can be appealed, and this is what the womens lawyer did in this case. As far as I understand you don't neccesarily need to present new evidence. If you do present new evidence, the prosecutor who made the original decion makes an initial re-evaluation of his/her desicion. If the decision is still the same the case can be sent "higher up" in the Swedish Prosecution Authority. But if no new evidence is presented, the case goes straight (as I understand) to the higher authority, which basically means that someone else takes a look at the same evidence as before and may or may not change the decision. It's rare for these appeals to result in any changes, but sometimes they do get changed. At this point we do not know exactly why it was changed, but it seems as it's just a case of another prosecutor making a different assessment of the previously available evidence. I haven't seen anything about any new evidence.

In any case it's not that the prosecutor just suddenly and for no apparent reason decided to re-open the investigation, the formal initiative was actually taken by the womens lawyer, and the prosecutor has to act on the appeal. That doesn't completley rule out political pressure of course, but at least in my mind it makes the prosecutors actions seem less suspicious.
George II is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 02:26 PM   #269
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 12,316
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
One major part of the puzzle is why, after 40 days of investigation for which Assange waited in Sweden, were the charges dropped by the senior prosecutor and then re-issued 4 months later?

It will be interesting to see what changed. The only thing I can see changing is the testimony of the alleged victims. There really isn't any other evidence to change.

Only time will tell.
If you read the first link I posted here you'd know that it was because the women's lawyer got involved and demanded they take another look at the evidence. Here's the important parts.

Quote:
The unusual circumstances surrounding the initial handling of the alleged assault have been used by Assange's online supporters to fan suspicions about the case. Why was an investigation launched by the Swedish prosecutors before being dropped and then revived? Why did the women, who had not previously known each other, go together to the police to report the assaults? Why was an extradition required when Assange had earlier been allowed to leave Sweden?

.....

But he gave a concise summary of the key allegations. "These two women were molested by Mr Julian Assange at two different times, independently of each other," he said.

.....

"When they spoke to each other they realised they had been through something very similar so they went to the police. That's not odd," he said.

"They decided to go to the police, to inform the police of what happened, to ask for advice; also they were interested in whether there was a risk that they could have got HIV. They were not sure whether they should make a police complaint, they wanted to have some advice. But when they told the police officer, she realised that what they were telling her was a crime and she reported that to the public prosecutor, who decided to arrest Assange."

Two days later a second prosecutor, who conducted a preliminary investigation, came to a different conclusion, judging that the evidence did not meet the criterion of a rape or sexual molestation charge. "She made another judgment, saying: 'No it's not. It's very close, but not quite,'" he claimed. "So she cancelled the arrest order and he was still suspected of molestation without sexual motives.

"When I read that decision, my own conclusion was and still is that it was a rape, so I asked for a reopening of the case, and then the investigation was reopened." There was nothing suspicious about this closing and reopening of the case, he said. "The law is not an exact science. You can always make different judgments. Different courts and different prosecutors make different decisions. I think that the prosecutor who cancelled the arrest warrant did not study the case well enough."

Assange was at that time free to leave the country, Borgström said. "He didn't have to ask anyone if he could." It was only later when it appeared that Assange was unwilling to return voluntarily for questioning that the extradition process was launched, he said.

"It turned out it was impossible to get him here for an interrogation, he wanted to be interrogated in the embassy, or wherever. Then the prosecutor decided to arrest him," he said.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 03:15 PM   #270
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 24,667
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
it seems like it's just going to be one person's word against another.

That pretty much sums up about 90% of rape cases. Physical evidence of rape is exceedingly rare.
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 03:29 PM   #271
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 24,667
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
I guess, the same pressure which brought them to suddenly make a 180 on pirate bay, despite, from what I understood, them being 100% fine with the law, since they host nothing.

I think you'll find that what changed was not Sweden's attitude to The Pirate Bay, but the laws regarding copyright. In 2004 the EU passed a directive which ensured the way member states enforced copyright was the same, and part of that enforcement was for assisting or enabling the passing of copyright information (which is what the Pirate Bay owners were charged with).

The MPAA didn't put "pressure" on Sweden, they merely filed the complaint which led to the raid (any party with copyright interests is permitted to file claims that their copyright is being breached).
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 03:55 PM   #272
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 10,102
Originally Posted by Kevin_Lowe View Post
I think the only thing we know for sure at this stage is that the charges are significantly politically motivated.
Originally Posted by Leif Roar View Post
Really? So what's the political motive that makes Sweden, of all countries, press charges against Assange? I mean, I could accept "political pressure" of the kind "Because of who he is, this case is going to be high profile, so make sure you dot your i's and cross your t's", but I find it hard to believe that any Swedish politican or bueraucrat would take the risk of imploring the police and prosecution to press charges against a person merely to curry favour with the USA.

Really. We know for sure that it's politically motivated. Why do that? Ask the Swedes.

Naomi Wolf rests the case today:

Originally Posted by Huffington Post
J'Accuse: Sweden, Britain, and Interpol Insult Rape Victims Worldwide

How do I know that Interpol, Britain and Sweden's treatment of Julian Assange is a form of theater? Because I know what happens in rape accusations against men that don't involve the embarrassing of powerful governments.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is in solitary confinement in Wandsworth prison in advance of questioning on state charges of sexual molestation. Lots of people have opinions about the charges. But I increasingly believe that only those of us who have spent years working with rape and sexual assault survivors worldwide, and know the standard legal response to sex crime accusations, fully understand what a travesty this situation is against those who have to live through how sex crime charges are ordinarily handled -- and what a deep, even nauseating insult this situation is to survivors of rape and sexual assault worldwide.

Here is what I mean: men are pretty much never treated the way Assange is being treated in the face of sex crime charges.

I started working as a counselor in a UK center for victims of sexual assault in my mid-twenties. I also worked as a counselor in a battered women's shelter in the US, where sexual violence was often part of the pattern of abuse. I have since spent two decades traveling the world reporting on and interviewing survivors of sexual assault, and their advocates, in countries as diverse as Sierra Leone and Morocco, Norway and Holland, Israel and Jordan and the Occupied Territories, Bosnia and Croatia, Britain, Ireland and the united States.

I tell you this as a recorder of firsthand accounts. Tens of thousand of teenage girls were kidnapped at gunpoint and held as sex slaves in Sierra Leone during that country's civil war. They were tied to trees and to stakes in the ground and raped by dozens of soldiers at a time. Many of them were as young as twelve or thirteen. Their rapists are free. [...]

In other words: Never in twenty-three years of reporting on and supporting victims of sexual assault around the world have I ever heard of a case of a man sought by two nations, and held in solitary confinement without bail in advance of being questioned -- for any alleged rape, even the most brutal or easily proven. In terms of a case involving the kinds of ambiguities and complexities of the alleged victims' complaints -- sex that began consensually that allegedly became non-consensual when dispute arose around a condom -- please find me, anywhere in the world, another man in prison today without bail on charges of anything comparable.
__________________
We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality - judiciously, as you will - we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do. - Karl Rove

Last edited by Childlike Empress; 13th December 2010 at 03:56 PM.
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 04:00 PM   #273
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 12,421
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Really. We know for sure that it's politically motivated. Why do that? Ask the Swedes.

Naomi Wolf rests the case today:
Miss Wolf misrepresents the case, and thus I presume the comparisons she makes are as faulty as the faulty presumptions.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 04:05 PM   #274
Leif Roar
Master Poster
 
Leif Roar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,795
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Really. We know for sure that it's politically motivated. Why do that? Ask the Swedes.

Naomi Wolf rests the case today:
So, basically, a lack of prosection for rapes in Sierra Leone shows that Sweden's prosecution of Assange is a sham? Somehow, her argument fails to impress me.
__________________
"Our feature on cloud seeding (16 Apr, p40) should have started with the words 'Cannons blazed'. No clergy were set on fire in China's rainmaking experiment." -- New Scientist, 7th May 2005
Leif Roar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 04:34 PM   #275
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 44,969
There seems to be a preponderance of the default position two women who felt they were assaulted went to the cops.

That is not what the initial case was. Two women who had consensual casual sex with Assange found out about each other and their initial reaction was to ask Assange to have an STD test. Apparently his reaction was not what they wanted. So they went to the cops to see if they could force Assange to have an STD test. The prosecutor told them there was no evidence of a crime.

SEVERAL MONTHS later and AFTER Assange became the focus of the Wikileaks international scandal, unrelated to the sex with these women, the head of the department which covers these kinds of crimes twisted the story into one of forced/coerced sex to which at least one of the women has objected to the characterization of.

I'd like to know why those in the thread who are going on and on about date rape and whether or not one can start intercourse without waking someone up are assuming the premise these are actually what the women's initial complaints were and are not the rewording of the complaints by a prosecutor with more political motive for bringing these charges than actual interest in the crime on its face?

Why was the story changed from, we want the guy to get an STD test, to, we were coerced/forced? Why were the formal charges only made after Assange became the focus of the latest Wikileaks leaks?

And have you all never been in a court room? Each side, defense and prosecution, present the case with a slanted view. That's their job!
__________________
(*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, Pubbie Party, Repubs "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 04:42 PM   #276
dirtywick
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,766
Guess we'll find out soon. I'm sure the truth is somewhere in the middle of Illuminati conspiracy assassination and anarcho-blackmailer serial rapist.
dirtywick is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 05:14 PM   #277
George II
Critical Thinker
 
George II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 313
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Naomi Wolf rests the case
That was one stupid article.

So until we arrest all those rapist who comited worse or more obvious types of rape, Assange should be left alone? And investigating the allegations against him (which is all it really is for now) is a slap in the face of other rape victims?

It's ironic how she complains about how other rape victims have trouble getting their cases taken seriously and then goes on explaining why this case should not be taken serioulsy.

Last edited by George II; 13th December 2010 at 05:15 PM.
George II is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 05:14 PM   #278
ftl
Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by Leif Roar View Post
So, basically, a lack of prosection for rapes in Sierra Leone shows that Sweden's prosecution of Assange is a sham? Somehow, her argument fails to impress me.
The Sierra Leone was just one example; the article says
Quote:
I have since spent two decades traveling the world reporting on and interviewing survivors of sexual assault, and their advocates, in countries as diverse as Sierra Leone and Morocco, Norway and Holland, Israel and Jordan and the Occupied Territories, Bosnia and Croatia, Britain, Ireland and the united States.
That list includes both 3rd and 1st world countries. Did you read the article? It includes statements about US and Swedish cases.

Her claim is that, all around, rape is never treated this seriously. That's unfortunate, but true.

A lack of prosecution for rape cases in all sorts of places shows that Sweden's prosecution of Assange is a sham. It indicates that if Assange HADN'T pissed off the governments of the world, his case would have probably been treated as lightly as all the other accusations of rape are.


Written out step-by-step, the logic goes as follows:

1) Rape cases are almost always dealt with far more leniently than in Assange's case.
2) Follow-up question - what's different about the Assange case than all the other rape cases? Why is he being prosecuted where lots of other men wouldn't be?
3) It's not the circumstances of the rape - it's not an especially brutal case, it's not an especially easy-to-prove case, the victims aren't unusually famous. Assange isn't a member of a persecuted minority, so that's not it.
4) Conclusion: the only remaining reason why Assange is being treated far more harshly than most people who are accused of rape is because of HIS infamy with regards to WikiLeaks.

Of course, there's always the possibility that there's some other reasons we don't know. But there's no evidence for them. The government of the US (or any other government harmed by WikiLeaks) certainly has the motive to lock up Assange; they certainly have the means to put pressure on Sweden (there's some pretty big governments harmed by WikiLeaks, this isn't Monaco having objections) and, when these two women went to the police, they got the opportunity.
ftl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 05:22 PM   #279
ftl
Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by George II View Post
That was one stupid article.

So until we arrest all those rapist who comited worse or more obvious types of rape, Assange should be left alone?
No. However, his prosecution should be just one of many similar ones - a part of a broader movement to prosecute a crime that all too many people get away with.

But that's not the case. There's not a broad overhaul of the justice system for more justice.

There's just this one case, where Assange is being prosecuted where lots of other men wouldn't be.

Quote:
And investigating the allegations against him (which is all it really is for now) is a slap in the face of other rape victims?
It is a slap in the face of other rape victims because it looks like the rape is being used as a pretext to hold Assange whereas the "real" reason he's being locked up is his WikiLeaks activity. Basically, this case DOESN'T send the message that "you shouldn't commit rape because you'll get prosecuted". It sends the message that "if you piss off enough governments, they'll prosecute you for something that they would have never prosecuted you for otherwise".

Quote:
It's ironic how she complains about how women have trouble getting their cases taken seriously and then goes on explaining why this case should not be taken serioulsy.
That's true, it is in fact ironic
ftl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 13th December 2010, 05:40 PM   #280
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
 
BenBurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one.
Posts: 35,325
Until you know what happened, and these women speak for themselves in a court of law, it is bordering on cruel to try to make them out to be liars.
__________________
For what doth it profit a man, to fix one bug, but crash the system?
BenBurch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.