Assange arbitrarily detained

[Hope]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35499942

Is this UN finding a realistic one, or could it encourage others who have potentially broken the law and have an arrest warrant out against them to try the same route?

[L.A.]

Hi Hope,

the UN panel ruling is clearly ludicrous but there is a lot more to this case than meets the eye. The allegations of rape in Sweden are also quite strange, they seem to be a 'second thought' by the 'victim' and only arose at the time that America wanted to lay their hands on Assange. There is a suspicion that it all might just be a plot to get him extradited to America.

[Jack Knave]

Hi Hope,

the UN panel ruling is clearly ludicrous but there is a lot more to this case than meets the eye. The allegations of rape in Sweden are also quite strange, they seem to be a 'second thought' by the 'victim' and only arose at the time that America wanted to lay their hands on Assange. There is a suspicion that it all might just be a plot to get him extradited to America.

I agree.

[Hope]

Hi Hope,

the UN panel ruling is clearly ludicrous but there is a lot more to this case than meets the eye. The allegations of rape in Sweden are also quite strange, they seem to be a 'second thought' by the 'victim' and only arose at the time that America wanted to lay their hands on Assange. There is a suspicion that it all might just be a plot to get him extradited to America.

Hi LA; from what I had read 3 years + ago, the American attempt to get him extradited appeared a year or two after the original accusations - which I believe started out as more sexual harrassment and only then developed into rape.  Therein lies the problem as i see it - the timeline is so uncertain.  Swedish police give one, America another and Assange a third.

[L.A.]

Hi LA; from what I had read 3 years + ago, the American attempt to get him extradited appeared a year or two after the original accusations - which I believe started out as more sexual harrassment and only then developed into rape.  Therein lies the problem as i see it - the timeline is so uncertain.  Swedish police give one, America another and Assange a third.

It's certainly a very strange story. The version I recall hearing is that Assange had consensual sex with the lady, but there was some dispute about whether a condom should have been used or not
After it became clear that the Americans were after him, she decided that this was rape!

I don't claim to know anything about the Swedish legal system, but I would have thought that that would be an impossible to bring such a case to take to court - but they are trying to extradite him.


It's quite reasonable to be paranoid when everyone really is out to get you!

[Hope]

LA - from wikipedia:

In November 2010 Assange was alleged to have committed two counts of sexual molestation and one count of unlawful coercion against two women during a visit to Sweden that August, and was wanted for questioning in Sweden. In August 2015 the two lesser charges were dropped; as of February 2016 he was still wanted for questioning over one allegation of "lesser-degree rape" (mindre grov våldtäkt) against one of the women. Assange denies the allegations.

On 12 August 2015, Swedish prosecutors announced that, as the statute of limitations for two of less serious allegations has run out, and they had not succeeded in interviewing Assange, they would end part of their preliminary investigation. After 18 August 2015, Assange can no longer be charged for all three of the less serious allegations. However, the preliminary investigation into the allegation of rape still continues, as the statute of limitations there will only expire in 2020.

I'd have thought that someone like Assange would want to clear his name rather than leaving the whole thing to hang over him.  Just because the statute of limitations cuts in at some point, it doesn't mean that a person is innocent.

[splashscuba]

LA - from wikipedia:

I'd have thought that someone like Assange would want to clear his name rather than leaving the whole thing to hang over him.  Just because the statute of limitations cuts in at some point, it doesn't mean that a person is innocent.

But if you mean by clearing his name, you think he should go to Sweden, that seems a pretty risky thing to do given the USA's interest in him.

[Enki]

In view of the opinions expressed here, it might be worthwhile reading this 2012 article from the New Statesman.

http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition

[Hope]

But if you mean by clearing his name, you think he should go to Sweden, that seems a pretty risky thing to do given the USA's interest in him.

But why wasn't he willing to go to Sweden before the Americans became interested in him.

[splashscuba]

But why wasn't he willing to go to Sweden before the Americans became interested in him.

I guess because Sweden was less interested in him and he didn't think he had committed a crime

[jeremyp]

But if you mean by clearing his name, you think he should go to Sweden, that seems a pretty risky thing to do given the USA's interest in him.

What interest? The USA has shown no interest in extraditing him.

The facts are clear:

Assange was living in England (which  is more sympathetic to extradition to the USA than Sweden).

Sweden issued a European arrest warrant for sexual assault and rape charges.

Assange availed himself of the full extent of UK law to try to avoid extradition and failed because the warrant was lawful and correct.

As soon as Assange had exhausted all legal avenues, he skipped bail (incurring severe financial losses to some of his friends).

There has never been any indication that the Americans want him. In view of that, the most obvious explanation for Assange's actions is that he thinks he would be found guilty of rape if he ever went to Sweden.