[Jason Raize '75 - '04]

Huge interest in the subject but I don't think many aware of the specifics of the allegations and why they are raising suspicions and doubts. The following is presented as an agreed statements of facts and issues by both sides, according to ABC Four Corners "Sex, Lies and Julian Assange" documentary. Mods later choose to merge this with the other thread, but I felt this was relevant enough to warrant a separate thread to garner attention to these specifics.

• On August 11th 2011, Assange arrived to attend a conference organised by the Swedish Brotherhood. He was offered Anna Ardin’s apartment whilst she was away, but Ardin returned a day early on the 13th and invited Assange to stay over the night where they would have sex. She would later tell police Assange had violently pinned her down and ignored her requests to use a condom. Assange denies this.
  
  
• On August 14th, the following day, Assange addresses the conference with Ardin at his side. Later that afternoon, Arden organises a crayfish party [barbecue] and posts a Twitter message writing: "Julian wants to go to a crayfish party. Does anyone have a couple of seats tonight or tomorrow?”
  
  
• The crayfish party was held that night and went on till the early hours of the morning. Ardin posts a twitter message: “Hanging out with the coolest and smartest people in the world at 2am. Its amazing”.
  
  
• A guest at the party would later tell police the event was a “very hearty evening”. When he offered to host Assange for the night in his apartment, Ardin replied: “He can stay with me”.
  
  
• The next day, Assange attends a dinner party organised by Pirate Party founder, Rick Falkvinge. Anna Ardin had arrived with Assange, and according to Falkvinge, the mood at the dinner was “professional”. Here is a photograph of that evening. Anna Ardin is on the left. Assange would yet again spend the night with her.
  
  
  
  
  
• The following day, August 16th, Assange had sex with Sofia Wilen at her apartment. According to police reports, Ardin was aware that he had slept with Sofia. A witness tells police that he had contacted Anna Ardin looking for Assange, to which she texted back: “He’s not here. He plans to have sex with the cashmere girl every evening”. That same day, the witness asked Ardin: “Is it cool he’s living there? Do you want me to fix something else?”. She replied back: “He has a problem with his hygiene, but its okay, he lives with me. It’s no problem”. {Note: The tweets would later be deleted}
  
  
• Three days later, Sofia, accompanied by Ardin, went to the police to seek advice on whether Assange could be forced to take an STD test. Ardin had gone along primarily to support Sofia but at some point during the questioning, the police had announced that Assange was to be arrested and questioned about possible rape and molestation. [Note: it wasn’t the police themselves who pressed for this but a duty prosecutor who was contacted by the police]. Sofia became so distract by the idea that she refused to give any more testimony, and refused to sign what had already been taken down. Assange was “arrested in his absence”. Assange wasn’t questioned by the police.
  
  
• Within hours, not only was this development leaked to the tabloids, but in addition to that were the statements made by the two women. It became international news.
  
  
• Less than 24 hours, a more senior prosecutor dismissed the rape allegations leaving only the lesser allegation of molestation.
  
  
• On the 30th of August, Assange of his own accord went to the police and expressed his fears of anything he said in questioning would end up in the tabloids. The interviewing officer responded: “I’m not going to leak anything”. The interview was then leaked.

[Computer]

I predict a well-documented and civil debate.

[Yo Gotti]

Blah, who cares.

[JCX]

I don't know if this will go far in changing most people's views of the legitimacy of these rape charges.

[Darklord]

Blah, who cares.

Umm, plenty?

[Izick]

I don't know why, but that read like a Sherlock Holmes book to me. Very matter o' factly.

Anyway, this is really though. On one hand, rape is one of those crimes that can be really hard to pin down, in that the victim may not come forward as soon as it happens, and there may be know clear evidence. There could have been sex, but it could be seen as consensual by others, when in reality, it may likely had not been. It's hard to decide, even with the black and white facts right in front of your face.

Personally, I think that there likely was sex, but it was consensual. I think this is all a smear campaign against Assange, and a way to try and obtain him without drawing as much attention if they were to detain him for the whole WikiLeaks incident(s). I hope I'm right, because if he did truly rape this woman, he is a heinous man that thought he'd get away with it due to his clout. I don't know though. The facts are there, but there is no smoking gun in either direction.

[Stephen Colbert]

No one can know for sure what actually happened.

But if I was on a jury and was presented these facts about anyone, not just Assange, I would vote not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

[Forever]

They should just say they want to get him for espionage, something he's actually guilty of. I would have no problem with that. This little circus is just embarrassing for all involved.

[Izick]

No one can know for sure what actually happened. But if I was on a jury and was presented these facts about anyone, not just Assange, I would vote not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Yeah, if these are truly the main points and facts, then it really seems to be an extremely weak case against him.

[Omi]

They should just say they want to get him for espionage, something he's actually guilty of. I would have no problem with that. This little circus is just embarrassing for all involved.

That sure is one big claim indeed.

[Messypandas]

he should be locked up for that shirt

[Osietra]

The US commanders have a seriously huge erection for this guy.

[Kong Fisso]

They should just say they want to get him for espionage, something he's actually guilty of. I would have no problem with that. This little circus is just embarrassing for all involved.

The circus was especially embarrasing for those who had their dirty laundry thrown out in the open.

[Half and half]

Julian Assange's sex life == yuck.

[raining]

They should just say they want to get him for espionage, something he's actually guilty of. I would have no problem with that. This little circus is just embarrassing for all involved.

That would be a rather lofty charge with potentially scary implications for journalism and its ability to keep the government honest.

[Salvor.Hardin]

Is Assange wearing a trash bag in that picture?

[godelsmetric]

The real mystery here is why someone would sleep with Julian Assange

[lopaz]

It's a fit up

The real mystery here is why someone would sleep with Julian Assange

Get real. You'd fuck that blond Australian bombshell in a heartbeat

[John Dunbar]

the Swedish Brotherhood

is that like a nordic version of the muslim brotherhood?

[1-UP]

is that like a nordic version of the muslim brotherhood?

No, the Swedish Association of Christian Social Democrats (founded in 1929). It is an associate member of the International League of Religious Socialists.

[Rivyn]

I can not be the only one who thinks that this just smells like one huge setup from everyone Assange used to piss off, right?

[Forever]

That would be a rather lofty charge with potentially scary implications for journalism and its ability to keep the government honest.

I think he crossed a line by releasing the unredacted documents. That certainly wasn't consistent with journalistic ethics.

But apparently we are not allowed to state things as they actually are, and so we must pretend that this is about sexual misconduct.

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

[*]On the 30th of August, Assange of his own accord went to the police and expressed his fears of anything he said in questioning would end up in the tabloids. The interviewing officer responded: “I’m not going to leak anything”. The interview was then leaked.[/LIST]

Assange, you moron.

[Prost]

do we really need like 4 of these threads?

[Toto Alex]

Why is Assange convinced that he is more likely to be extradited to the US if he goes on trial in Sweden for molestation charges? Never figured that one out.

[ChiTownBuffalo]

Why is it OK that people border on victim blaming when it comes to Assange?

[Osietra]

Why is it OK that people border on victim blaming when it comes to Assange?

I guess he wishes he could redact those semen trails he left across a sheet or pillow case like a sleazy blonde smug.

[Pimpwerx]

I'd share my opinion on this, but I'm wary of the ticky-tack bans that get doled out in these sort of threads. Questioning motives and provided facts gets too easily labeled as victim blaming, so it's not even worth chiming in. I'm just making this post as a bit of a warning to others. Tread carefully. PEACE.

[Ryujin]

Why is it OK that people border on victim blaming when it comes to Assange?

But nobody is blaming Assange.

[ghst]

you just know that shirt carries a heavy aroma of coconut butter and scrotum.

[Woorloog]

Why is Assange convinced that he is more likely to be extradited to the US if he goes on trial in Sweden for molestation charges? Never figured that one out.

As i understood it, Sweden and the US have extradition agreement. Assange fears the US will request his extradition for spying or some such, due to WikiLeaks leaking various documents, and that Sweden would give him up to the US. Where he might, face even death penalty, should he be convicted for spying.

[KHarvey16]

Less than 24 hours, a more senior prosecutor dismissed the rape allegations leaving only the lesser allegation of molestation.

And this was appealed by the women's attorney, after which the investigation began again. He is now accused of four offenses: two counts of sexual molestation, deliberate molestation and rape.

As i understood it, Sweden and the US have extradition agreement. Assange fears the US will request his extradition for spying or some such, due to WikiLeaks leaking various documents, and that Sweden would give him up to the US. Where he might, face even death penalty, should he be convicted for spying.

Legally Sweden cannot extradite someone who may face a death penalty. Also, the UK and the US have what most consider a much more lax extradition arrangement.

[YourMaster]

Why is Assange convinced that he is more likely to be extradited to the US if he goes on trial in Sweden for molestation charges? Never figured that one out.

Let's say he's innocent, because if not this could all be simply to stay out of jail in Sweden.

If he's innocent, he knows he's innocent and he knows he's being set up somehow. This would be a fair assumption on his part, because he has made some powerful enemies.
He then has two strong reasons not to go to Sweden:

1. People who want him in jail for wikileaks but have no legal reason/method to do so could provide forged proof of his guilt in this rape case, punishing him by ruining his reputation and sending him to jail outside the US as a consolation prize.
2. If somebody powerful and evil enough to come up with a master plan like this, fake charges, fake evidence, leaks to the media, etc. wants to hurt you, you better not go along with his plan. And if this plan involves getting you in Swedish jail, you'd better try your best to stay out of Swedish jail. Endgame might be incarceration, torture and/or death in the US.

[Woorloog]

Legally Sweden cannot extradite someone who may face a death penalty. Also, the UK and the US have what most consider a much more lax extradition arrangement.

Ah. I assume he was in the UK long enough he could have been arrested and sent to the US had the US requested extradition from the UK?

[KHarvey16]

Ah. I assume he was in the UK long enough he could have been arrested and sent to the US had the US requested extradition from the UK?

He's been there since December 7th, 2010. He was basically under house arrest until he entered the Ecuadorian embassy on June 19th this year.

[News Bot]

Everyone involved in this case is a dick hole. The whole thing is embarrassing from top to bottom and it's clear what the impetus behind it is.

[Woorloog]

He's been there since December 7th, 2010. He was basically under house arrest until he entered the Ecuadorian embassy on June 19th this year.

So, any fears he'll be extradited to the US from Sweden have no real basis?

And so it seems he is just running from the trial. Hmm.

[ElectricBlue187]

Everyone involved in this case is a dick hole. The whole thing is embarrassing from top to bottom and it's clear what the impetus behind it is.

what?

[KHarvey16]

So, any fears he'll be extradited to the US from Sweden have no real basis? And so it seems he is just running from the trial. Hmm.

I wouldn't go so far as to say extradition is impossible at any stage, but the idea that the US is waiting until he gets to Sweden to spring their trap seems strange. If they were simply looking to drag him to the US to face charges, why go through the complication of framing him in Sweden, waiting for them and the UK to work out extradition and then requesting extradition themselves from Sweden instead of just extraditing him to the US from the UK in the first place.

[Partial Gamification]

I wouldn't go so far as to say extradition is impossible at any stage, but the idea that the US is waiting until he gets to Sweden to spring their trap seems strange. If they were simply looking to drag him to the US to face charges, why go through the complication of framing him in Sweden, waiting for them and the UK to work out extradition and then requesting extradition themselves from Sweden instead of just extraditing him to the US from the UK in the first place.

Reasons within the UK to not to be the ones to hand him over to US custody. I could be wrong but uproar from the Brittish public might be harder to deal with than from Sweden. ...and to follow the line of thought he is being set-up, a rapist or a molester (framed or not) will undoubtedly lack support than if he had just been pick-up from the UK. Who knows, maybe he will be.

[Simplet]

I wouldn't go so far as to say extradition is impossible at any stage, but the idea that the US is waiting until he gets to Sweden to spring their trap seems strange. If they were simply looking to drag him to the US to face charges, why go through the complication of framing him in Sweden, waiting for them and the UK to work out extradition and then requesting extradition themselves from Sweden instead of just extraditing him to the US from the UK in the first place.

It's really not that hard to imagine why. I imagine they have a fairly weak case at the moment to get him extradited for espionnage, so in any case it's probably better for them to at least ruin his reputation completely, hopefully get him convicted of something or other, and maybe when everyone has completely turned their back on the guy it'll be easier to get Sweden to ship him to the US. It also gives the US a lot of time to build a case against him, maybe interrogate him a lot and you might get something to stick this way.

Hopefully I don't have to defend this post for five pages, this is just my opinion.

[KHarvey16]

Reasons within the UK to not to be the ones to hand him over to US custody. I could be wrong but uproar from the Brittish public might be harder to deal with than from Sweden. ...and to follow the line of thought he is being set-up, a rapist or a molester (framed or not) will undoubtedly lack support than if he had just been pick-up from the UK. Who knows, maybe he will be.

But even if that were the case, they've had almost 2 years of him sitting in some guys house in England under police supervision. The rape accusation was out there already, so if that's all they were interested in they could have just extradited him then. Fitting this into some conspiracy narrative is an extreme stretch. The only plausible conspiracy-like scenario would be the US simply taking advantage of the accusations, but that still doesn't explain why they don't grab him from England. I don't buy the concerns over public outcry because if they're willing to do all this they obviously don't care about that.

[KHarvey16]

It's really not that hard to imagine why. I imagine they have a fairly weak case at the moment to get him extradited for espionnage, so in any case it's probably better for them to at least ruin his reputation completely, hopefully get him convicted of something or other, and maybe when everyone has completely turned their back on the guy it'll be easier to get Sweden to ship him to the US. It also gives the US a lot of time to build a case against him, maybe interrogate him a lot and you might get something to stick this way. Hopefully I don't have to defend this post for five pages, this is just my opinion.

But the whole conspiracy concerning trumped up or even wholly fabricated rape accusations in Sweden has both countries, the UK and Sweden, complicit in all this. If they can get Sweden to extradite him and the UK to approve it, why couldn't the US do the same with England? The conspiracy theorists all like to allege that the evidence he committed those sexual crimes is slim to none, so why is the strength of the case suddenly important if the US wants to extradite him from a country participating in the ruse?

[Dead Man]

No one can know for sure what actually happened. But if I was on a jury and was presented these facts about anyone, not just Assange, I would vote not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Yup.

[Partial Gamification]

But even if that were the case, they've had almost 2 years of him sitting in some guys house in England under police supervision. The rape accusation was out there already, so if that's all they were interested in they could have just extradited him then. Fitting this into some conspiracy narrative is an extreme stretch. The only plausible conspiracy-like scenario would be the US simply taking advantage of the accusations, but that still doesn't explain why they don't grab him from England. I don't buy the concerns over public outcry because if they're willing to do all this they obviously don't care about that.

Until what seems very recently, it was an ongoing investigation. It is isn't just Assange, it is wikileaks; the money, the servers, the people. Imagine if they had taken him during the height of the Anonymous popularity. Consider this plan having a psychogical operation component. The fight is on the image-front, namely making the target become as paranoid and discredited as possible. It isn't just the public outcry, it is about grey hats going black because of the way that it is done. This is one way I see it and the only thing that I am sure of is that there is more to this story than I know.

[Jason Raize '75 - '04]

I wouldn't go so far as to say extradition is impossible at any stage, but the idea that the US is waiting until he gets to Sweden to spring their trap seems strange. If they were simply looking to drag him to the US to face charges, why go through the complication of framing him in Sweden, waiting for them and the UK to work out extradition and then requesting extradition themselves from Sweden instead of just extraditing him to the US from the UK in the first place.

It's possible the US has yet to find strong enough legal grounding to indict him. This can be supported by the fact that they have admitted to an ongoing investigation into Assange but have yet to declare any findings. In the mean time, arguably to their favour, both Assange and Wikileaks' credibility and image have been damaged by these allegations, often replacing talk of the content of the cables and war logs.

[Pizarro]

I don't think the US wants him. Imagine the uproar and implications if they charged him with espionage.

[Router]

Arrest him for wearing what looks like a leather shirt.

[Pizarro]

Where's the fashion police though??

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Arrest him for wearing what looks like a leather shirt.

It's Sweden.