British politicians are pressuring the Foreign Secretary, Sajid Javid, to prioritise sending Julian Assange to Sweden, amid concerns that US charges will overshadow the allegations of rape.
The Assange rape and sexual assault is an interesting case which centres around the use, or not, of condoms.
Before he disappeared into the Ecuadorean Embassy, the story proceeded that in 2010 two Swedish women made a statement to Police that they had been sexually assaulted by the Wikileaks creator.
The case was first dismissed by Stockholm's chief prosecutor who said that there was no reason to suspect that Assange had committed rape and the warrant withdrawn but then the Director of public prosecution, a more senior position in the Swedish legal system, then reopened the case citing new information.
The first accuser suggested Assange stay in her flat the evening before a speaking engagement in Sweden. Both agree that they slept together on the night before the event, during which the condom split.
The following day, the second accuser met Assange at the event and afterwards the pair went to the cinema, where she told police she had performed oral sex on him.
What happened next is where the Swedish court case will concentrate.
The first woman told police that the condom had ripped but he continued to have sex with her so while she had consented to have sex with a condom, she had not consented to sex without one.
The second woman said he did not wear a condom during oral sex in the cinema so the unprotected sex act had been without her consent.
They were reportedly advised by the police officer that these allegations amounted to rape against the first woman and sexual molestation against the second.
The issue for many is that once the British pack him off to Sweden, America will be his next port of call where at the time of his legging it to the Embassy, politicians including one time Presidential candidate Mick Huckabee said 'anything less than execution is too kind a penalty' and one time Vice President Sarah Palin called for him to be treated as if he was 'an Al Quaeda or Taliban leader'.
We have seen with Chelsea Manning what America does with it's whislteblowers so a fair trial in America for Assange is unlikely so Sweden is likely to only be a stepping stone on his way to a solitary confinement cell in the land of the free which is not so free if you show the World what brutality they are up to.
6 comments:
First, what someone "thinks" a penalty should be is irrelevant. The law dictates penalty.
It is manipulative and weak that there are 310 million Americans, and you use quotes that are about 10 years old from Mike Huckabee (to make it have impact you add "presidential candidate") and Sarah Palin. Both lost their elections (actually Huckabee didn't even get selected by his party so he didn't get to an election), and both have since lost all of their political influence.
I find it deceptive that you failed to mention that Obama and Hillary were the ones really going after Assange...
It is also deceptive how you refer to the death penalty. The law determines the punishment. But first, it takes a unanimous jury verdict and several appeals, that typically take 20+ years, before someone is actually be put to death (very rare in America these days and typically a murder in a heinous crime).
Manning was legally convicted, but then Obama commuted the sentence. His crime (revealing military secrets) could have received a death penalty.
From what we know, Assange simply shared the data Manning released via wikileaks. However, the fact that he didn't steal the secrets does not make it legal to reveal the secrets. He took a calculated risk and it hasn't gone well.
In America, "whistle blower" has a very legal definition. A trial will determine if he is a "whistle blower" or a criminal.
Oh yeah, we "The People" paid for Manning's sex transition while he was "serving" his sentence... America is so bad... bad America, bad...
The quotes were to show the strength of feeling at the time and it is safe to assume the feeling Hasn't changed.
so, you think the views of two minor politicians, that were not elected, that have not been active in about 10 years, is substantial?
ha ha
yeah, sure it is a safe assumption...
ha ha haaaaaaaaaa
wait, wait, are you joking? since you generally speaking are not funny it is hard to tell?
We will see if he ever turns up there and see what is said then.
Oh, there are plenty that want some of Assange's skin. but few that have any influence over it... The opinion of a former elected official doesn't matter. ask billy and hilly...
Post a Comment