×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Julian Assange Served With Extradition Notice By British Police

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the pack-your-bags dept.

United Kingdom 612

An anonymous reader writes "London's Metropolitan Police have delivered an 'Extradition Notice' to Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder, who sought refuge and political asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London last week. Scotland Yard have said in a brief statement that 'the notice requires Julian Assange to attend a police station of our choosing at a set time.' SY also said, 'This is standard procedure in extradition cases and is the first step in the removal process. He remains in breach of his bail conditions and failure to surrender would be a further breach of those conditions and he is liable to arrest.' However, under international diplomatic arrangements, the British Metropolitan Police cannot actually go into the Ecuadorian embassy to arrest Mr Assange. Assange would have to leave the embassy to be lawfully arrested. This raises the following question of course: Is this the 'endgame' for Julian Assange as far as extradition is concerned? If the Ecuadorians fail to grant Assange political asylum, which is a possibility, will he be arrested by Metropolitan Police, and sent to Sweden to stand trial for two alleged counts of 'rape?' Will Sweden then hand Assange over to the United States, where many well known and quite senior politicians have publicly stated that they think 'Assange should be punished severely' for publishing confidential U.S. diplomatic cables on Wikileaks?"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

612 comments

Hopefully... (3, Insightful)

Darkness404 (1287218) | about 2 years ago | (#40488133)

Hopefully Assange gets protection in Ecuador soon and can continue his work rather than having to face baseless and hilariously named smears by the Swedish "legal" system.

Re:Hopefully... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488213)

Hopefully Assange finally goes to trial so we can stop reading about every last thing he does to escape the Swedish legal* system.

* Note the lack of quotes.

Re:Hopefully... (3, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | about 2 years ago | (#40488303)

Seeking protection in Ecuador against the Swedish legal system!!! That's a laugh. Ecuador president Correa is the main competitor to his best friends Chavez and Castro in maintaining his power by constantly bashing the USA and blaming the West for all his country's problems, intimidating and imprisoning journalists who oppose him and implementing idiotic populist socialist policies. I suppose a natural ally for Assange.

Re:Hopefully... (0, Flamebait)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#40488761)

The joke is that telling a girl she's pretty to get her in bed is rape in Sweden.

That's the basis of the "rape" charge. He told a common falsehood to help "seal the deal" and is being saught for rape charges on it. What he's accused of doing is legal everywhere else on the planet, so far as I can tell. "You are the only one for me" gets man sent to prison. That's the joke.

Re:Hopefully... (5, Insightful)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | about 2 years ago | (#40488897)

"There are four charges: that on 14 August 2010 he committed "unlawful coercion" when he held complainant 1 down with his body weight in a sexual manner; that he "sexually molested" complainant 1 when he had condom-less sex with her after she insisted that he use one; that he had condom-less sex with complainant 2 on the morning of 17 August while she was asleep; and that he "deliberately molested" complainant 1 on 18 August 2010 by pressing his erect penis against her body."

Where did you get the strange idea that he was charged because he told a girl she was pretty?

Re:Hopefully... (1)

k(wi)r(kipedia) (2648849) | about 2 years ago | (#40488823)

Natural ally only in so far as the two parties (Assange and Ecuador) have the same "enemy". As for Castro, the Castro [wikipedia.org] now sitting in power in Cuba appears to be more conciliatory to the US.

Re:Hopefully... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488409)

What protection? You think he couldn't be easily kidnapped while in Ecuador? You're not that naive are you?

Re:Hopefully... (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#40488793)

He just wants out of the UK legally, in Australia, they wouldn't extradite him, so he can go there. But if he violates a large number of laws to run, then he'd have to always be on the run, as anywhere would extradite a notorious criminal.

Re:Hopefully... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488847)

In Australia they wouldn't extradite him? I think that's an underestimation of the power of US politics.

Australia bends over backwards for US, as they saved us from Japan in WWII, and we're hoping they will save us from China in WWIII.

Re:Hopefully... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488927)

Dude, we ARE china. You been to Box Hill in Melbourne recently?!? How about Town Hall in Sydney. I'm all for cultural diversity and all that, but when you have 99 out of 100 people as chinese, that's not diversity, it's China.

Re:Hopefully... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488443)

Even if you don't agree with the laws of a nation, you should follow them. If you are not prepared to do so, then you should not visit the nation. The only exception to this is when you disobey the law in civil protest.

He stands accused of "rape", but the term itself varies from country to country and across translations. In this case, afaik, two women consented to protected sex with him under specific conditions. Those conditions changed and consent was withdrawn, yet he continued. Think about it for a minute. If the woman says "stop" and you don't, then it most certainly is a form of rape. Perhaps you have no respect for women and thus consider it ok to continue after that point, but most jurisdictions in the West do not. The labelling of the crime may differ, but this is generally not allowed so there is no reason to denigrate the Swedish legal system on account of this.

Assange's work with Wikileaks, despite sometimes being apparently motivated by his egomania, is overall for the greater good. Governments argue that airing their dirty laundry for all to see places people in danger and threatens the national interest. They need to be taught that they are responsible for perpetrating such actions in the first place. For that reason, I hope that Assange will not be extradited to the US where he will face an increasingly unfair political process.

Despite that, his work does note give him a carte blanche to do whatever he wants. The fact that you would dismiss all accusations against him without even hearing the evidence shows that you think some people should be above the law. That attitude threatens society as a whole. Double standards for people based on how much you like them personally is not acceptable in a legal context.

Maybe there is a conspiracy to get him extradited to the US through Sweden. Maybe there isn't. Maybe he just doesn't want to pay for what he did to those girls because he doesn't think it's a big deal and, like you, doesn't respect the laws of sovereign host nations. We'll probably never know because there are so many other factors involved. I understand that modern media have taught most of us to view things in black and white, but please try to understand that this situation is much more nuanced than that. Maybe it makes your brain hurt to consider all of the different aspects, but the least you can do is try before making ignorant posts with simplistic opinions.

Re:Hopefully... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488567)

It's rape, not "rape".

Re:Hopefully... (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#40488707)

Thank you. Even the OP, having already qualified it with "alleged", then put quotes around it, inexplicably.

And all that is more about legally covering one's ass than some misguided attempt to play "neutral reporter".

There's just one real question here as far as the US is concerned: Did he pay someone to leak the info?

If so, he has a problem. If not, he has nothing to worry about.

Re:Hopefully... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488621)

"Even if you don't agree with the laws of a nation, you should follow them. "

Obviously you are profoundly ignorant of what is really going in the Assange situation.

The demand for Assange's return lacks credibility when you know the back story. Of course
knowing that would require you to actually do more than 20 seconds of reading, and we
wouldn't want you to strain yourself, since you probably need to save your energy for
being able to walk up the stairs when your mommy calls you to dinner.

Re:Hopefully... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488635)

Assange isn't accused of anything we'd call rape. Furthermore, in Sweden accusations of rape (even the real kind that we'd call rape too) usually aren't investigated because Swedish society doesn't care. Compared to cases that the police routinely drop because apparently drinking coffee is more important, Assange didn't do anything much. But the US put political pressure on the Swedish government, because they think the Sweden-US extradition treaty will make it possible to grab Assange and try him for things that he weren't illegal where he did them.

Re:Hopefully... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488657)

Nice false flag there, way to go.

Re:Hopefully... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488733)

Come on. This has been talked about everywhere. You can't possibly be unaware by now that what you describe ("consent was withdrawn, yet he continued") is not even alleged by the prosecutors.

And come on again. You can't possibly not know that this entire affair is because of the conspiracy to extradite from Sweden. The "crime" he committed isn't even a prison offense. It's not that he "doesn't want to pay for what he did to those girls" as you put it - girls which by the way, praised him in a party following the "rape", and by the way, were even unaware they've been "raped" until the nice prosecutor told them so.

I'm not sure what your angle is, but you are woefully misinformed and misinforming to be accidental.

Re:Hopefully... (2)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#40488833)

My understanding is that they did not object after the conditions changed, but that he agreed to the conditions but didn't satisfy them. They didn't say "stop" They said "go" and he did. They later claimed that had they known he was sleeping with other women, they wouldn't have consented, which is the same as if they had not consented and he forced himself on them.

He lied. They consented. He didn't force himself on anyone. After everything was done, they revoked their consent, and the previous act then became "rape".

Re:Hopefully... (1, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40488537)

Personally I think this is nuts. If I were accused of this crime, I would just fly over to Sweden and go to trial. Mainly because there's no way for them to prove their case, which means I would be found "not guilty" and free to resume my travels around the world w/ a cleared name.

To keep fighting like this is just nuts & makes Julian look guilty. But if you crack-open some conspiracy theory about U.S. police wandering around Sweden looking for this man, my response will be "Alex Jones: Is that you? Take some prozac."

   

Re:Hopefully... (5, Informative)

seb42 (920797) | about 2 years ago | (#40488669)

Seem like he stayed there until they said it was ok to go. "Assange has made himself available to the Swedish prosecution from the beginning: he stayed in Sweden for 5 weeks waiting to be interrogated, and left Sweden after asking permission to do so from the Swedish Prosecutor Marianne Ny (which she granted)." http://justice4assange.com/Investigation.html [justice4assange.com]

Re:Hopefully... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488775)

Personally I think this is nuts. If I were accused of this crime, I would just fly over to Sweden and go to trial. Mainly because there's no way for them to prove their case, which means I would be found "not guilty" and free to resume my travels around the world w/ a cleared name.

You can bet an extradition request is already ready and waiting in the US Embassy in Sweden. The moment you land, it will be delivered to Sweden Police and by the time you clear yourself you're no longer free to leave country until is finalized (same process as in UK, stay under house arrest til it's done).

How does this work? (2)

Hentes (2461350) | about 2 years ago | (#40488143)

Can you be extradited twice? Shouldn't it be Sweden what seeks extradition from Ecuador?

Re:How does this work? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 2 years ago | (#40488193)

If hes refused and asked to leave he is suddenly on British soil. Unless he can teleport to another friendly embassy, hes a goner the second he leaves the grounds.

Re:How does this work? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488403)

He can ride in an ecuadoran-flagged vehicle to the airport and board an ecuadoran-flagged aircraft and fly anywhere in the world he wishes without setting foot on British soil.

Any diplomatic conveyance flying the flag of its home country is considered sovereign soil under international diplomacy law.

Scare quotes? (3, Insightful)

Chuckstar (799005) | about 2 years ago | (#40488169)

Why are we using scare quotes for the word "rape"? Whether you believe the accusations, or whether you believe those accusations should count as rape, he would actually go on trial for two counts of rape... not for two counts of 'rape'.

Re:Scare quotes? (5, Informative)

ClintJCL (264898) | about 2 years ago | (#40488229)

Because it's not rape by any english language definition. There was no non-consensual or forced sex. It was sex with a broken condom. If she doesn't know it's broken, it's "Rape", just like the Arab who went to jail for consensual sex with an Israeli went to jail for "rape" because he didn't tell her she was an arab, and no jew would have sex with an arab. Quotes are appropriate. Not to mention the background of the woman who actually made the accusation -- after which she deleted her tweets about enjoying herself, and her blogpost on how to get revenge on a man you find cheating on you (which, IIRC, involved filing false rape claims).

Scare quotes are absolutely appropriate.

Re:Scare quotes? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488481)

Wasn't there something about him having sex with her while she was asleep? That isn't exactly consensual.

Re:Scare quotes? (5, Insightful)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488503)

Because it's not rape by any english language definition.

It's rape by the legal definition of the country charging him, which as far as I'm aware, is all that's necessary.

And what's this "english language definition" jingoistic crap? What does that have to do with anything? Are non-english speakers somehow incapable of deciding what the definition of rape is in their legal system?

Quotes are appropriate.

Bullshit.

The scare quotes are propaganda, designed to make people question the veracity of the accuser's claims.

Stop giving cover to that kind of nonsense.

Re:Scare quotes? (4, Insightful)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about 2 years ago | (#40488591)

It's rape by the legal definition of the country charging him, which as far as I'm aware, is all that's necessary.

And what's this "english language definition" jingoistic crap? What does that have to do with anything? Are non-english speakers somehow incapable of deciding what the definition of rape is in their legal system?

Even then, it needs to be under quotes. It denotes that this is the Swedish legal version of rape and not the regular definition of rape.

Re:Scare quotes? (1, Flamebait)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488709)

Even then, it needs to be under quotes.

More bullshit, the quotes provide no context or explanation for their presence.

If any of you ACTUALLY CARED about clearing up the confusion about definitions, you'd be avoiding those quotes like the plague and, instead, explaining the law in Sweden.

The quotes do nothing to clarify anything.

Re:Scare quotes? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488747)

Why do you think the accusations don't qualify as actual rape?

The claim in Sweden is that Assange had sex with women after they withdrew their consent.

Having sex without consent is rape.

QED

Re:Scare quotes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488599)

Rape is not just rape. There are different types of rape. And while I agree that it (if true) WAS rape, it isn't the same kind of rape as someone who beats a girl half to death and/or threatens her with a knife. If I recall correctly, he is accused of having sex with one of the women while she was asleep, and using a broken condom. That isn't right, but it isn't monstrous either. And the type of rape he is accused of is (if I recall correctly) not the kind of rape by which he can get several years in prison in Sweden, but a much smaller penalty.

Re:Scare quotes? (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#40488861)

The scare quotes are propaganda, designed to make people question the veracity of the accuser's claims.

As opposed to the facts surrounding the case causing people to doubt the verasity of the claims. You know, like the fact that the first prosecutor who handled the case dropped all charges for (and again, quotes are appropriate here), "lack of evidence." Like the fact that the "victims" were proud to have slept with Mr. Assange, with one attending a party in his honor after supposedly being raped by him. Nor the fact that both women consented and were able to give consent, and only decided after the fact, and after meeting with each other, to file charges.

None of that matters; it's the use of quotation marks around the word "rape" that will cause of us to doubt his guilt.

Re:Scare quotes? (-1, Troll)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488913)

None of that matters; it's the use of quotation marks around the word "rape" that will cause of us to doubt his guilt

No, it's your use of the scare quotes around rape that minimizes a rape, regardless of whether you agree with the definition.

But you keep banging on me about the fact that I dislike the idea of playing semantic games with rape accusations.

And by the way, I think the whole thing is bullshit too. You seem to think that because I won't allow you and people like you to do shady underhanded shit with scare quotes that I want Assange in jail.

You're minimizing a rape allegation.

That makes you scum. Period.

Re:Scare quotes? (0)

Ironhandx (1762146) | about 2 years ago | (#40488939)

Wow. I looked at your posts briefly and 3 new astro turfing posts appeared like magic. Most of them even make a sort of twisted sense.

I hope you're being paid well for this.

Re:Scare quotes? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#40488907)

It's rape by the legal definition of the country charging him, which as far as I'm aware, is all that's necessary.

No, it's not. The Swedish laws are not written in English, so they never once use the word "rape".

The scare quotes are propaganda, designed to make people question the veracity of the accuser's claims

Would you prefer the quotes be replaced with "alleged" before the word? It has the same effect.

Re:Scare quotes? (2)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40488593)

You make it sound like Sweden is some kind of bassbackwards country. But they (and most of the EU) probably look at us and laugh just as loudly: "Rape charges because a 19 year old had sex with a 17 year old? Child pornography arrests because a 15 year old girl photographed herself nude with her phone??? Those Americans are such puritans afraid of their own bodies."

Re:Scare quotes? (2)

ClintJCL (264898) | about 2 years ago | (#40488681)

The tone sounds like your disagreeing with me, but the message doesn't. I will confusedly agree with you and feel neutral about it.

Re:Scare quotes? (3, Informative)

lga (172042) | about 2 years ago | (#40488633)

Um, it wasn't a broken condom, it was no condom and in her sleep, and yes it was rape. The British Magistrate's court and High Court said so. Assange: would the rape allegation also be rape under English law? [jackofkent.com]

Re:Scare quotes? (2)

ClintJCL (264898) | about 2 years ago | (#40488713)

That's funny, because the women went to police not to seek prosecution but to make him take an AIDS test. So it seems they didn't want to press any charges. Funny that.

Re:Scare quotes? (-1, Troll)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488811)

That's funny, because the women went to police not to seek prosecution but to make him take an AIDS test. So it seems they didn't want to press any charges. Funny that.

So, now that you've been shown you were wrong in your claim that " it's not rape by any english language definition. " you're moving on to...what?

Some nonsensical assertion that, what, police don't have police powers? That only a victim can insist charges be pursued?

What's your point? I bet it's that you think the US government insisted he be prosecuted, isn't it? But you're too cowardly to say it, so you insinuate it.

Which suddenly makes your desire to defend the scare quotes make a lot of sense.

Re:Scare quotes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488959)

IIRC, in criminal law only the State has the ability to bring the case. So, the accuser could never bring rape charges herself because (a) rape is a criminal offense, and (b) the accuser is not the State. So, the accuser has no ability to decide one way or another whether charges will be brought.

Obviously, the state might be dis-inclined to bring the case if the accuser was unwilling to testify. But that would be the only way the accuser could influence the decision. And in this case, maybe the state already feels it has enough evidence to bring the extradition request. I don't know, because I have already paid more attention to this case than it's worth to me by writing this post.

Pardon me for attempting to bring some sanity to this discussion by engaging in a diregression from the argument about the utility and/or appropriateness of "scare quotes".

Re:Scare quotes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488693)

As soon as a woman says "no" or "stop" it is rape if you continue. Consent can be withdrawn and that's not just in Sweden. Wikipedia also confirms this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape#Consent [wikipedia.org]

You can also rape by deception in some places. While I personally side with the arab male in the case you refer to from remembering the story, what if a man pretends to be a woman's husband and tricks her in to having sex with her. She has not given consent to that man. If you lie to a woman about something to get her to have sex with you, she's technically giving consent to the character you have created in her mind, not you. This is probably why feminazis believe so strongly that all men are rapists, because who hasn't told a woman some lie in a bar to get in their pants?

Re:Scare quotes? (3, Insightful)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#40488799)

Sorry, sex with a broken condom that she thinks is intact and he knows isn't isn't rape . It may be reckless endangerment of a sort for both pregnancy and disease.

But it isn't rape, and calling it such does a disservice to actual rape victims.

Re:Scare quotes? (1, Interesting)

Darkness404 (1287218) | about 2 years ago | (#40488241)

Because what he is being tried for doesn't count as rape pretty much anywhere but Sweden. It would be a bit like if Canada decided to count assault as murder and reporting to a primarily Brazilian audience that someone was being tried in Canada for murder when it bears no resemblance to the crime of murder in Brazil.

Re:Scare quotes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488387)

Rape is not just rape. There are different types of rape, some more horrible than others. The laws for rape are very strict in Sweden, and the kind of rape he is accused for is not violently forcing himself upon others. If I recall correctly, he is accused of having sex with one of the women while she was asleep (after they had mutually consenting sex together), and using a broken condom. That is still very wrong and serious, but it doesn't exactly make him a monster, like the label rapist is usually given the meaning of. I mean, he had breakfast with the woman in question after the incidents, and the women first reported him after they found out he had slept with both of them. Assuming the charges are true, he's not so much a rapist as he is weird and really uncaring, disrespectful and inconsiderate. He deserves to be punished if guilty, but IMO he doesn't deserve to sit in jail for years. And if I recall correctly, the kind of rape/accusations they are seeking to get him judged for can not result in years of prison either.

But this is just what I recall from reading pages of pages about this messy story. If someone can correct me, I would be thankful.

Re:Scare quotes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488769)

If I invite you to my house, it doesn't mean you can come around any time you want.

If I want you to take your shoes off at the door, you damn well will. If you don't I can invoke trespass.

If your cock goes inside a woman, you are the guest. If she is asleep, she can't give consent. If she's passed out drunk, she can't give consent. If the condom breaks and she want's you to stop, you damn well should. If you don't you're a rapist.

Having said that, making claims of rape because of infidelity is not exactly fair. You shouldn't be able to be "raped" because you find out a partner is sleeping with someone else.

Re:Scare quotes? (3, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#40488401)

Why are we using scare quotes for the word "rape"?

Because the Swedish definition of rape is "if I wake up the next day and regret it, then it's rape", not the "he forced me to have sex" that everyone else uses.

Re:Scare quotes? (-1, Troll)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488631)

And the scare quotes help clear up that inconsistency how?

They don't. Because they weren't meant to.

Re:Scare quotes? (1)

Ironhandx (1762146) | about 2 years ago | (#40488853)

The scare quotes are warranted. They identify that there IS a very serious inconsistency.

Since this is slashdot and most slashdot readers will already know the swedish rape charges are mostly horse shit theres no need to clarify it again and again, now stop astro turfing in an attempt to get people to stop treating the rape charges as what they are: a fucking joke.

Re:Scare quotes? (-1, Troll)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488865)

They identify that there IS a very serious inconsistency.

Except there isn't.

Re:Scare quotes? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#40488945)

Except there is, both in terms of what he is charged with (which does not fit any reasonable definition of the word "rape") and in how he has been charged, since the charges were already dropped by the prosecutor originally assigned to the case. Dropped, by the way, for lack of evidence -- even under Swedens expansive definition of "rape," there was not enough evidence to charge Mr. Assange...until some other prosecutor came in and reopened the case.

Re:Scare quotes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488881)

Those aren't scare quotes, those are quote denoting that the term is being used other than the normal way. You can't declare sex to be rape after the fact, either you consented at the time or you didn't. Finding out that he was having sex with somebody else doesn't make it rape in the conventional sense.

Also, how does the straw man of "scare quotes" actually clarify anything other than allowing you to slip in some commentary.

Re:Scare quotes? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 2 years ago | (#40488879)

Because "rape" in English (American legal definitions) requires "force" or "lack of consent."

I don't know all the facts, but my current understanding is that Julian had sex with women while they consented. They later retroactively withdrew consent. He then committed rape of the non-consenting women who, at the time, did consent. And the charge isn't "rape" it's a sweedish word with no direct legal translation that is more like "sexual misconduct". But Rape sells more newspapers (or fits the US conspiracy better), so rape is used to describe his possibly illegal sexual adventures.

Common criminal (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488183)

Nothing more, nothing less.

Strange move by Assange (4, Interesting)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 2 years ago | (#40488191)

First, everyone who helped paying for his bail won't see their money back, because Assange is not at his bail address, thus violating bail conditions. And political asylum in Ecuador? Seriously? That would actually mean that eventually he would have to move to Ecuador, and to stay there. I'd rather spend a bit of time in Sweden than a lifetime in Ecuador. I don't think Ecuador is too much fun when your money runs out.

Re:Strange move by Assange (2)

barv (1382797) | about 2 years ago | (#40488253)

I do not know how he could get to Ecuador. Can he be carried in a political bag? I doubt the UK would accept him as political personnel. Whether ensconced in the Ecuador Embassy or in jail in the US he is an object lesson to those who would follow in his footsteps.

Re:Strange move by Assange (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 2 years ago | (#40488679)

I believe any vehicle a diplomat is in is considered the territory of their respective nation. Basically, he hops in a limo with said diplomat to their private jet and fly home.

Re:Strange move by Assange (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about 2 years ago | (#40488277)

At best it's a stalling tactic. He can't go yo Ecuador because HR would have to pass through UK jusisdiction to get there.

Re:Strange move by Assange (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488317)

I'd rather spend a bit of time in Sweden than a lifetime in Ecuador. I don't think Ecuador is too much fun when your money runs out.

Gnasher... are you trying to be modded "flamebait"?

Assange is wanted for questioning in Sweden. The prosecution has it made abundantly clear that they are not interested in actually questioning Assange, they want him on Swedish soil so they can take him into custody. As soon as he is in custody, the US will -based on the extradition agreement that exists between Sweden and the US- ask for immediate "temporary surrender" to US custody. So within weeks Assange might find himself facing charges in the US.

Are you following the case of Richard O'Dwyer [guardian.co.uk]? Another one of those cases. Get a non-US citizen to stand trial for crimes-under-US-law-but-not-necessarily-local-laws and committed outside of the US.

"Team America: World Police" is now reality.

Re:Strange move by Assange (1)

HarrySquatter (1698416) | about 2 years ago | (#40488471)

Or he'll just be kidnapped while in Ecuador and with it being a pretty common crime there especially with foreigners no one within the country will think twice about it. It's not like Ecuador has any power to stop it from happening anyway.

Re:Strange move by Assange (2)

NormalVisual (565491) | about 2 years ago | (#40488821)

I'd rather spend a bit of time in Sweden than a lifetime in Ecuador. I don't think Ecuador is too much fun when your money runs out.

Probably not, but I'll bet it's still more fun than any U.S. federal prison, which is where he's likely to end up if he goes to Sweden.

The US Über Alles. (1)

barv (1382797) | about 2 years ago | (#40488201)

Here in Australia our wimpy Labour government is kowtowing to the US political powers and refusing to provide aid. New Zealanissas no better in the face of the Dotcom matter. I am quite surprised that the US was unable to obtain extradition from the UK but suspect that the political cost there might be too high.

Whatever, Julian, it was nice hearing from you. But you must be made an example of, to show that no one can get away with treading on the tail of a tiger. Specially not an upstart Aussie!

he's screwed (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#40488205)

He has been screwed from day one, and nobody's going to help him because the United States is the thug nobody will stand up to. The message we've been sending post-9/11 has been consistently "We'll do whatever the hell we want, and if you get in our way, we'll squish you like a bug." We've created an entire extrajudicial system to punish anyone who disagrees with the current regime, setup internment camps for political prisoners, and we torture and kill civilians and foreign nationals after judging them in secret in the President's own Star Chamber.

Everything else is really pretext. The 'rape' charges, the media spin and control, the reveal that our government has an entire task force dedicated to psyops to discredit anyone who disagrees with our foreign or domestic policies... the government is out of control. We've become the terrorists we sought to destroy... and frankly... until someone punches America in the face so hard they flinch, nothing's going to change.

Although that said, our huge military investments while our infrastructure rots away and our middle class disintegrates is creating the exact same socioeconomic conditions that led to the sudden coup de etat and dissolution of the USSR. I would not be surprised if there is a civil uprising here in the next 10 years and the United States breaks up into several smaller countries. This may in fact have been the long-term strategy of Iran, Iraq, North Korea, etc. -- we have such a big ego and need for total dominance that we'll literally spend ourselves into a hole we can't get out of trying to maintain that, rather than acknowledging that we lost a fight and you know, that's okay sometimes (like every other country has had to). If all it took to bring down the largest military and economic power on the planet was a few airplanes flown into the side of buildings and some sabre rattling from some country built out of dirt claiming they're going to make nuclear weapons... It'll be the most effective force multiplication ever seen in warfare. Ever.

Re:he's screwed (1, Interesting)

Teresita (982888) | about 2 years ago | (#40488331)

If all it took to bring down the largest military and economic power on the planet was a few airplanes flown into the side of buildings...

Yeah, 9-11 really brought the US "down". About two months later the Taliban were out of power in Afghanistan. Now OBL is shark bait, and Al Qaeda management positions are the least popular career move in the Muslim world.

Re:he's screwed (5, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#40488457)

Yeah, 9-11 really brought the US "down". About two months later the Taliban were out of power in Afghanistan. Now OBL is shark bait, and Al Qaeda management positions are the least popular career move in the Muslim world.

And we've been in a recession pretty much every day since, the middle class is rapidly deteriorating into the working poor, the national debt is ballooning, and all those trillions that got sucked out of the economy to fund the war effort means our national infrastructure is going to pieces -- bridges are falling into rivers, half of New Orleans was wiped off the face of the planet and there's no money to repair it, there are mass water shortages across most of the southern part of the country, and the list goes on.

A real pyrric victory we got here. Woo. Go us.. number one... number one... number one in debt.

Re:he's screwed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488487)

I wish I had some remaining mod points to give both your posts +1 insightful, my friend.

Right on all counts.

Re:he's screwed (1, Troll)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488673)

And we've been in a recession pretty much every day since, the middle class is rapidly deteriorating into the working poor, the national debt is ballooning, and all those trillions that got sucked out of the economy to fund the war effort means our national infrastructure is going to pieces -- bridges are falling into rivers, half of New Orleans was wiped off the face of the planet and there's no money to repair it, there are mass water shortages across most of the southern part of the country, and the list goes on.

Half that list is exaggeration or outright fabrication and the rest is a list of things that were occurring without Al Qaeda.

Next you'll be blaming childhood obesity and the Cold War on OBL and Al Qaeda.

Re:he's screwed (-1, Troll)

Ironhandx (1762146) | about 2 years ago | (#40488905)

I'm amazed theres a sleeper astro turfer with such an old UID. Must only come out for the important Fed astro turfing.

Re:he's screwed (1)

ifwm (687373) | about 2 years ago | (#40488943)

I'm amazed theres a sleeper astro turfer with such an old UID.

Awesome, name calling. First you support minimizing rape allegations, then you resort to name calling.

You're all class.

Re:he's screwed (2)

trout007 (975317) | about 2 years ago | (#40488539)

The whole point of islamic terrorism is to get the US out of their countries. This strategy will work because eventually we will not be able to pay the bills and the troops will have to come home. Like Rome, Britain, Spain, France, and Russia. All empires end the same way the people can't afford to keep paying troops deployed abroad.

Re:he's screwed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488339)

Your logic is exactly what the (general) US Army / DHS is scared of. They know that if a terror attack happens (the punch to the face) they're all screwed and jobless. Hence the insanely huge budget for antiterrorism. Also, hence the phrase "fuck da police."

-AC because of previous three words in quotes.

Re:he's screwed (0)

Johann Lau (1040920) | about 2 years ago | (#40488661)

Wow, this post went from "+4 Insightful" to "0 Troll" in the time it took me to get a glass of milk -- WTFLOL?!

Being unable to argue against it, but modding it down anyways kinda proves the point (of that very poetic and yet concise post I might add).... so that means your post is now at +8. Who knows, it might even reach +9 :P

Re:he's screwed (5, Informative)

ozmanjusri (601766) | about 2 years ago | (#40488805)

Wow, this post went from "+4 Insightful" to "0 Troll" in the time it took me to get a glass of milk -- WTFLOL?!

"Army of fake social media friends to promote propaganda

It's recently been revealed that the U.S. government contracted HBGary Federal for the development of software which could create multiple fake social media profiles to manipulate and sway public opinion on controversial issues by promoting propaganda. It could also be used as surveillance to find public opinions with points of view the powers-that-be didn't like. It could then potentially have their "fake" people run smear campaigns against those "real" people."

http://blogs.computerworld.com/17852/army_of_fake_social_media_friends_to_promote_propaganda [computerworld.com]

He should try Russian embassy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488209)

I think he should seek an asylum in Russia. I think they'd grant him one.

This is two different questions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488211)

And it's not clear that there's any relationship between them.

Whatever you think about the Swedish charges, they are at least a legal thing. There's a prosecutor, there are courts, there's a named crime and judges and warrants and all that shit, there's an actual process. That's what the Swedes and Brits are engaged in.

But somehow everyone talks like extradition to Sweden were only a prelude to extradition to the US, where there's none of these things - the man has committed no crimes either in or against the USA under any known laws. There's no charges, no prosecutor, no judges, no case to answer, no warrant. The only way Assange would end up in the USA would be by some process that amounts to kidnapping by the US gov't.

That's not impossible, but it seems like it's a long way from inevitable.

Re:This is two different questions (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488915)

... - the man has committed no crimes either in or against the USA under any known laws. There's no charges, no prosecutor, no judges, no case to answer, no warrant. The only way Assange would end up in the USA would be by some process that amounts to kidnapping by the US gov't.

That's not impossible, but it seems like it's a long way from inevitable.

You reckon? What about a grand jury sealed indictment [crikey.com.au], would they let everyone know about it?

Thinks a bit too much of himself (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488279)

There's no way the US would sentence Assange to anything meaningful without making a total martyr of him. He should try to realise this and go for the rape charges. As it is he's just wasting money now.

Slashdot summaries (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488281)

Will Slashdot summaries continue to be full of mindless scare speculation (scareculation?)

Yes, unfortunately they will.

Is this the 'endgame'? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 2 years ago | (#40488333)

for Julian Assange as far as extradition is concerned? If the Ecuadorians fail to grant Assange political asylum, which is a possibility, will he be arrested by Metropolitan Police, and sent to Sweden to stand trial for two alleged counts of 'rape?' Will Sweden then hand Assange over to the United States, where many well known and quite senior politicians have publicly stated that they think 'Assange should be punished severely' for publishing confidential U.S. diplomatic cables on Wikileaks?"

Tune in next week.. On 'As the Wiki Turns'...

Assange should shut up and go to Sweden (4, Informative)

lga (172042) | about 2 years ago | (#40488357)

Statements made by his own lawyer about what Assange did talk about actions that are legally rape, both in Sweden and in the UK. That's not my opinion, but has been said by other lawyers.

He described Assange as penetrating one woman while she slept without a condom, in defiance of her previously expressed wishes, before arguing that because she subsequently “consented to continuation” of the act of intercourse, the incident as a whole must be taken as consensual.

In the other incident, in which Assange is alleged to have held a woman down against her will during a sexual encounter, Emmerson offered this summary: “[The complainant] was lying on her back and Assange was on top of her [she] felt that Assange wanted to insert his penis into her vagina directly, which she did not want since he was not wearing a condom she therefore tried to turn her hips and squeeze her legs together in order to avoid a penetration [she] tried several times to reach for a condom, which Assange had stopped her from doing by holding her arms and bending her legs open and trying to penetrate her with his penis without using a condom. [She] says that she felt about to cry since she was held down and could not reach a condom and felt this could end badly.”

I don't agree that he should be extradited just for questioning, I think there should be charges first, but the courts have upheld the extradition so Assange should just go and answer the questions. Of course, based on the above quotes, he is guilty and does not want to go and face justice.

In any case, if Assange wants to avoid extradition to the US, Sweden is a hell of a lot safer for him than the UK! The UK government hands over anyone and everyone if the US shows as much as a passing interest in prosecuting. Our government doesn't even ask for evidence! On the other hand, Sweden will not extradite anyone for political crimes or where the death penalty may be applied. In addition to extradition from Sweden being far less likely than from the UK, if he were in Sweden then both the UK and Swedish governments would have to agree for further extradition to the US to take place. Picking Ecuador as a place to flee to just proves that Assange is a hypocrite. Ecuador has a rubbish record on freedom of speech.

I support Wikileaks. I stand for freedom of speech. That doesn't change what Assange did.

Assange is not a hero anymore, he's just trying to avoid justice.

Correction.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488381)

" and sent to Sweden to stand trial "

Incorrect, He is being sent to Sweden for questioning.

Learn to write (3, Insightful)

bennyp (809286) | about 2 years ago | (#40488395)

The charges aren't alleged, but real and confirmed. Assange is charged with rape, not 'rape', and the allegations against him will be proven or discredited along with the charges in court, should it come to that.

He fears due process (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488691)

He fears 'due process.' If I had pissed off all the powerful people he's pissed off, I'd fear it, too.

Well first... (3, Insightful)

Skrotus (2566443) | about 2 years ago | (#40488425)

Well first he would have to be charged with something, he's still only wanted for questioning.

Re:Well first... (3, Informative)

Dwonis (52652) | about 2 years ago | (#40488645)

In Sweden, you can't be charged until you've been questioned. So he's not really wanted for questioning, he's wanted for "questioning".

pontification gets u no where (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488433)

This guy is brilliant; he had b@lls to stand up to tyranny of US govt, which is more than i can say for 99.9999% of the wuss's who post on this board.

So, if one were so inclined, how would one get him moved to a safe place...not that I am suggesting to do that.

U guys supposed to be smart (but r wuss's) - use brain for good; here's u're chance....

Re:pontification gets u no where (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 2 years ago | (#40488725)

I've learned you can't blame the American people. We get absolute corporate-knob-slobbering propaganda for news. Ask anyone for details on any story besides the bumper sticker slogan and i guarantee you'll get the implied falsehoods we were supposed to absorb. Without getting partisan, there were two major stories that broke here in the States this week and the reality is so far from the reporting when you take the time to dig into the details.

Well, *I* Certainly Feel Good Knowing... (-1)

BlueStrat (756137) | about 2 years ago | (#40488695)

I certainly feel good knowing that the same US government that is going to such lengths for nothing more than retribution and to "make an example out of" Assange, all this effort and political intrigue and US foreign relations capital expended, against a *single individual*, who dared expose data he had no hand in originally obtaining and had no legal obligation to not publish...

-Is the *same* US government that is now in charge of my healthcare, and also in charge of the healthcare of all those politically opposed to the incumbent party, no matter which party is in power. This should give pause no matter what side of the political spectrum you're on. Your team won't always be in power, and what happens when "those other *evil* guys" get in office?

Strat

More at risk in Sweden than in UK? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40488795)

Just out of curiosity, why would Assange think he's more at risk of being extradited from Sweden than from the UK? Apparently, the founder of surfchannel.com Richard O'Dwyer [guardian.co.uk] is facing extradition to the US for the "crime" of running a website offering links to copyrighted TV and video content.

IMHO, Assange would be better off in Sweden no matter what... Even though Sweden has a tradition of being US lapdog, the swedish justice system is relatively transparent and the procedure would have to go through several instances in addition of being under constant public scrutiny.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...