[Moderated] Julian Assange: rapist or not? - Page 10

tyr_13 · 17th December 2010, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by gumboot

The only people politicising this case are Assange and his supporters.

Well those very opposed to Assange politicize it too, but in an obvious, 'they need to shoot the bastard' way that easy to dismiss.

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

Nope. You're just trying to offer escapes enabling the gullible to stay in denial. Boring and irrelevant.

Well that's certainly a compelling rebuttal for the criticisms of Wolf's article!

Skeptic Ginger · 17th December 2010, 10:22 PM

I think we've reached the level of repeating ourselves in this thread. I'm confident of my assessment at this point in time. It's time for me to put the thread on hold and wait for new developments. We should definitely revisit people's positions when more evidence emerges.

a_unique_person · 18th December 2010, 01:44 AM

Originally Posted by gumboot

The only people politicising this case are Assange and his supporters.

Geoffrey Robertson is not a fringe type of extremist, but a well respected and experience human rights lawyer. He believes the move to prosecute is politically motivated. If that is the case, then the supporters of Assange are not politicising the case, they are just a jump ahead of you.

George II · 18th December 2010, 05:21 AM

It may take some time before we see any more legal developments in the case. My hope is that swedish prosecutors will get a chance to make an informed decision whether to prosecute or not. That means a continued investigation with Assanges cooperation. If they then decide there is not enough evidence to prosecute, then so be it, at least they will have been able to do a full investigation. And if they prosecute, we will have to wait for a verdict. But the point is that justice has to procede. Anything else is, in my view, unacceptable, and won't really benefit anyone involved, not even Assange. I hope he is honest when he says he wants to clear his name. If so, he should cooperate with swedish justice.

And I note that the so called "evidence" for politicing is still only the apparent hatred towards Wikileaks and Assange comming from certain voices in america. I still haven't seen anyone provide direct evidence that this is somehow linked to the allegations against Assange. Shure, many of Assanges critics are probably taking their chance to use these allegations as ammunition agianst him, but the issue here is whether the swedish legal process has been influenced by the political situation. So far I haven't seen any evidence for that.

Here_to_learn · 18th December 2010, 06:47 AM

The Guardian has an article where the claim to have access to previousely unseen documents.

I can't judge how this matches to the relevant Swedish laws, so I can't really say anything about that part.

Some other interesting things can be found in the article. For example there has been discussion on what information Assange legal team has seen with regards to the charges.

Originally Posted by Guardian

Stephens has repeatedly complained that Assange has not been allowed to see the full allegations against him, but it is understood his Swedish defence team have copies of all the documents seen by the Guardian. He maintains that other potentially exculpatory evidence has not been made available to his team and may not have been seen by the Guardian.

Then regarding the question on the arrest warrant:

Originally Posted by George II

I hope he is honest when he says he wants to clear his name. If so, he should cooperate with swedish justice.

Originally Posted by Guardian

The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.

babycondor · 18th December 2010, 09:41 AM

Originally Posted by George II

...

And I note that the so called "evidence" for politicing is still only the apparent hatred towards Wikileaks and Assange comming from certain voices in america. I still haven't seen anyone provide direct evidence that this is somehow linked to the allegations against Assange. Shure, many of Assanges critics are probably taking their chance to use these allegations as ammunition agianst him, but the issue here is whether the swedish legal process has been influenced by the political situation. So far I haven't seen any evidence for that.

What kind of "direct evidence" would convince you? Taped telephone conversations between US and Swedish officials? Copies of emails or cables exchanged between them?

By their very nature, such influences would be difficult to prove. Therefore, I predict we will have to wait for a well-placed person with security clearance to LEAK the type of evidence you seem to be asking for (if it exists). Until then, what we may reasonably discuss is our different interpretations of the CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence.

Leif Roar · 18th December 2010, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by babycondor

What kind of "direct evidence" would convince you?

Any sign of communication between Swedish politicans and the Swedish prosecution, hints or suggestions of procedural anomalities in the prosecution's handling of the case (but made by someone who have actual knowledge of the Swedish prosecution's procedures and not just well opinionated Names), hints of political quid pro quo (either between USA and Sweden or between the Swedish government and the prosecutor handling the case).

I'd also accept (even though it technically isn't evidence) evidence that similar forms of political pressure has been put on the Swedish prosecution in other cases (thus setting a pattern) or of examples of the USA having convinced other nations to perform cases of political prosecution with similarities to this one.

A good, well-explained motive and cui bono wouldn't be enough in itself (that way lies Conspiracy Country), but it wouldn't hurt and might give more weight to other evidence.

ThunderChunky · 18th December 2010, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by Leif Roar

Any sign of communication between Swedish politicans and the Swedish prosecution,

You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m

PhantomWolf · 18th December 2010, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by ThunderChunky

You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m

Your point?

ThunderChunky · 18th December 2010, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

Your point?

That he should either specify that point further or check it off of his list.

Skeptic Ginger · 18th December 2010, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by George II

....

And I note that the so called "evidence" for politicing is still only the apparent hatred towards Wikileaks and Assange comming from certain voices in america. ....

So the absurd lack of bail initially, chasing Assange to the UK, "most wanted" on the Interpol list, etc etc, given the nature of the charge, is just not recognized by your brain?

Debate of the issues is one thing. Outright blind eye to the facts is quite another.

Leif Roar · 18th December 2010, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by ThunderChunky

You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m

Yes, I'm aware of that. Let me rephrase: Any sign of untoward communication between Swedish politicians and the prosecutor. I must admit I thought that bit was implied.

Leif Roar · 19th December 2010, 12:12 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

So the absurd lack of bail initially,

Denying bail to a foreign citizen with the means to abscond and no local ties is not "absurd". You might agree or disagree with the (initial) decision to deny him bail, but it's silly to claim it was "absurd."

Quote:

chasing Assange to the UK,

They what, now?

Quote:

"most wanted" on the Interpol list,

Oh, so now he was put on the "most wanted" list too, huh?

Give it a few months and he'll have chewed his way out of a secret torture chamber at Drottningholm.

Here_to_learn · 19th December 2010, 01:29 AM

Originally Posted by ThunderChunky

You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m

For the Social Democratic party. You know - the party that lost power in the election in 2006, and didn't manage to reclaim it in this years election. But I'm sure you will give us a good explanation on who/what country uses his influence to do what here.

Here_to_learn · 19th December 2010, 01:36 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

It's time for me to put the thread on hold and wait for new developments. We should definitely revisit people's positions when more evidence emerges.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

So the absurd lack of bail initially, chasing Assange to the UK, "most wanted" on the Interpol list, etc etc, given the nature of the charge, is just not recognized by your brain?

Debate of the issues is one thing. Outright blind eye to the facts is quite another.

Please do share with us the new developments that made you revisit your position and state this.

George II · 19th December 2010, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

So the absurd lack of bail initially, chasing Assange to the UK, "most wanted" on the Interpol list, etc etc, given the nature of the charge, is just not recognized by your brain?

Debate of the issues is one thing. Outright blind eye to the facts is quite another.

The lack of bail isn't really that absurd considering that Assange had been staying away from swedish justice up until then and the fact that he is known to be "constantly on the move", even according to himself. As for the "chase" of Assange to the UK, well he was wanted for questioning and he was in the UK, what were they supposed to do? By the way, an Interpol red notice, which is what Assange was given, doesn't make you the "most wanted" by Interpol, it's just an international request for provisional arrest, and it's issued for people who are wanted either for prosecution or to serve sentences. Thousands of red notices are issued every year. As I have mentioned before, it may just be all the attention given to the case that makes it seem like Assange is being chased in a fasion that is disproportionate to the circumstances. That and the fact that he is regarded as a hero.

I will add though that I do understand why people bring up the risk of political pressure. Given who Julian Assange is, I think it's perfectly understandable why people suspect political motives, I did so myself initially (and just to be clear I am still open to the possibility). What bothers me is that so many people seem to be pretty much certain about the political motives, either behind the accusations, the handling of the case or both. To me, going by what we know so far, that's just jumping to conclusions. Examples of what would constitute evidence for political pressure has already been mentioned by Leif Roar. I think they seem reasonable.

Claes Borgström, the womens lawyer, is indeed the official spokesperson on gender equality issues for the Socialdemocratic party, which has not been in government for many years. He is not, and never has been, a member of the government, unlike what Assanges lawyer Mark Stephens claimed in a recent interview. Just one of many false claims he made. Uninformed or dishonest? I don't know.

little grey rabbit · 19th December 2010, 05:32 PM

Quote:

The lack of bail isn't really that absurd considering that Assange had been staying away from swedish justice up until then and the fact that he is known to be "constantly on the move", even according to himself.

Far from staying away from Swedish justice, Assange applied for residency there. He stayed, answered questions and was not charged (and still is not charged) and then left.

This is normal behaviour for a tourist.

This is not a normal rape complaint

Quote:

According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.

When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.

Incidently according to the chat logs of Bradley Manning, during previous visits to Sweden Assange had been tailed. This might explain why Miss A found out so fast about Miss W.

delle · 19th December 2010, 05:51 PM

Claes Borgström is in Sweden a well known feminist and gender equality advocate and was appointed the official spokesperson on these issues for the Socialdemocratic party in 2008. He became a party member a few months before the appointment. He has not participated in any elections and is not a member of the parliament. He works full time as a lawyer and does not have any political position other than gender equality spokesperson for the Socialdemocratic party.

delle · 19th December 2010, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by little grey rabbit

Incidently according to the chat logs of Bradley Manning, during previous visits to Sweden Assange had been tailed. This might explain why Miss A found out so fast about Miss W.

What do you mean? Miss A found out about Miss W when she got a telephone call from Miss W. Miss W was trying to get hold of Assange and Miss A, being the official spokesperson for Assange during the visit and organizer for the seminary he attended, was a logical choice of person to call.

tyr_13 · 19th December 2010, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by delle

What do you mean? Miss A found out about Miss W when she got a telephone call from Miss W. Miss W was trying to get hold of Assange and Miss A, being the official spokesperson for Assange during the visit and organizer for the seminary he attended, was a logical choice of person to call.

There is an emotional motivation to make conspiracies out to get Assange, because to some he's such a hero acting against villainous forces. Any information that supports this get's grabbed onto and details that go against this are ignored (confirmation bias).

Hell, I'm pretty sure there are conspiracies, possibly villainous, out to discredit or even destroy Assange. But by all appearances, this isn't one of them. He just done goofed.

And it's worth pointing out that none of this involves Wikileaks, it's mission, or the 'goodness' thereof (or lack thereof depending on one's view).

Puppycow · 19th December 2010, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by Here_to_learn

The Guardian has an article where the claim to have access to previousely unseen documents.

Looks pretty bad for those who pooh-poohed the charges.

Quote:

he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again".

Quote:

She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs.

Quote:

"Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent."

Quote:

She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."

Police spoke to Miss W's ex-boyfriend, who told them that in two and a half years they had never had sex without a condom because it was "unthinkable" for her. Miss W told police she went to a chemist to buy a morning-after pill and also went to hospital to be tested for STDs. Police statements record her contacting Assange to ask him to get a test and his refusing on the grounds that he did not have the time.

There's more, but I don't want to run afoul of rule 4.

little grey rabbit · 19th December 2010, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by tyr_13

There is an emotional motivation to make conspiracies out to get Assange, because to some he's such a hero acting against villainous forces. Any information that supports this get's grabbed onto and details that go against this are ignored (confirmation bias).

Hell, I'm pretty sure there are conspiracies, possibly villainous, out to discredit or even destroy Assange. But by all appearances, this isn't one of them. He just done goofed.

And it's worth pointing out that none of this involves Wikileaks, it's mission, or the 'goodness' thereof (or lack thereof depending on one's view).

I personally am by no means convinced that Assange IS a hero against dark forces. He seems to have some rather unusual motivations
http://iq.org/~proff/marutukku.org/c...uguide/t1.html

Quote:

--- The third name is MARUTUKKU, Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates.

The Akkadian Creation Epic

And you wonder where he got this inspiration and what his agenda is.

However, regardless, it is obvious that the Swedish legal system (and by extension the European legal system) is being utterly abused here - and that is of enormous concern even if the underlying purpose is nothing more than to give Julian Assange the burnish of matyrdom.

little grey rabbit · 19th December 2010, 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Looks pretty bad for those who pooh-poohed the charges.

There's more, but I don't want to run afoul of rule 4.

In fact given there is a ban on quoting wikileaked material, arguable there ought to be a ban on quoting this leaked material as well.

But I doubt the moderators will see it that way.

Here_to_learn · 20th December 2010, 12:30 AM

Originally Posted by little grey rabbit

Far from staying away from Swedish justice, Assange applied for residency there. He stayed, answered questions and was not charged (and still is not charged) and then left.

This is normal behaviour for a tourist.

Ok, that's a good timeline up to the stage where he left Sweden. How about continuing the timeline from the stage he left Sweden until now - has he tried to stay away from Sweden since? If you say "no" - how do you know?

Puppycow · 20th December 2010, 01:07 AM

Originally Posted by little grey rabbit

In fact given there is a ban on quoting wikileaked material, arguable there ought to be a ban on quoting this leaked material as well.

But I doubt the moderators will see it that way.

I see your point, but this particular material was not leaked by wikileaks, and so I don't think it has been explicitly prohibited yet.

DC · 20th December 2010, 01:12 AM

Originally Posted by Puppycow

Looks pretty bad for those who pooh-poohed the charges.

There's more, but I don't want to run afoul of rule 4.

and the evidence that the claims made are true is?

dafydd · 20th December 2010, 04:57 AM

Originally Posted by casebro

Isn't the UK appraising the warrant before deciding to extradite? Where is that going?

On the BBC news programme Newsnight, a lawyer said that what he is accused of would not be a crime in Britain. It is a reprisal for Wikileaks.

BenBurch · 20th December 2010, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

On the BBC news programme Newsnight, a lawyer said that what he is accused of would not be a crime in Britain. It is a reprisal for Wikileaks.

And he has that information how?

Leif Roar · 20th December 2010, 05:53 AM

Originally Posted by dafydd

On the BBC news programme Newsnight, a lawyer said that what he is accused of would not be a crime in Britain. It is a reprisal for Wikileaks.

No, it's a difference in law between the UK and Sweden. Swedish law has a wider definition of rape than UK law. I assume you don't want to argue that Sweden back in 2005 anticipated the Wikileaks debacle and changed its rape legislation in preparation of setting up Assange?

(I've still to see a reasonable explanation of why Sweden would want to make reprisals against Wikileaks in the first place. It's not their secret documents that are all over the news.)

tyr_13 · 20th December 2010, 06:13 AM

Originally Posted by DC

and the evidence that the claims made are true is?

That's not the claim by Assange supporters that these leaks address. The claim they address is that there was no good reason for wanting to question Assange or reopen the investigation because the description doesn't sound like rape. There is the description, it sounds like it fits Sweden's legal definition of rape.

JAStewart · 20th December 2010, 06:41 AM

Whatever Assange did or did not do, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. If he's guilty, he'll serve his time, if he's innocent he won't.

Wikileaks will continue to publish the material, and that's a good thing.

dtugg · 20th December 2010, 06:45 AM

Originally Posted by Leif Roar

(I've still to see a reasonable explanation of why Sweden would want to make reprisals against Wikileaks in the first place. It's not their secret documents that are all over the news.)

The US government controls everything.

Cavemonster · 20th December 2010, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Leif Roar

(I've still to see a reasonable explanation of why Sweden would want to make reprisals against Wikileaks in the first place. It's not their secret documents that are all over the news.)

I think the assumption is that the US contacted all their allies in places Assange was likely to travel and said something to the effect of:

Hey, guys! We've got a problem with this wikileaks thing. We'd sure like to put him in jail, but we don't have fantastic grounds to just grab him. Would you be a dear and pop him into your custody for some reason and then we can figure out what charges we want to use and extradite him over here. If you do that we'll do that whole "being a friendly superpower" thing for you, or whatever.

PS Bonus points if you can arrest him on something embarrassing that makes him look like a creep!

Now there's no direct evidence that this happened, though it would be absolutely in character and keeping with the US track record to make such a request. I must admit I don't know enough about Sweden to know if they would find this an appealing call to action.

At this point, I'm basically assuming this is not the case, but if he does end up shipped off to the US, then my position may change.

PhantomWolf · 20th December 2010, 07:10 AM

Originally Posted by JAStewart

If he's guilty, he'll serve his time, if he's innocent he won't.

Not necessarily true. Plenty of rapists get off sex charges because they are so hard to prosecute.

If they don't take it to court, it doesn't have to mean he didn't do it, it might be they just didn't have the evidence to stand up in court.

Likewise if found not-guilty also doesn't mean he didn't actual do it, just that the prosecution couldn't prove it beyond reasonable doubt.

That doesn't mean he is guilty, just that he could be guilty and get off. Less likely is his being innocent and not.

PhantomWolf · 20th December 2010, 07:12 AM

Originally Posted by Cavemonster

it would be absolutely in character and keeping with the US track record to make such a request.

Evidence?

delle · 20th December 2010, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by dafydd

On the BBC news programme Newsnight, a lawyer said that what he is accused of would not be a crime in Britain. It is a reprisal for Wikileaks.

Having non-consensual sex with a sleeping person is probably a crime in all civilized countries. In some of them it wouldn't be called rape, but it would still definitely be a crime.

BenBurch · 20th December 2010, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by delle

Having non-consensual sex with a sleeping person is probably a crime in all civilized countries. In some of them it wouldn't be called rape, but it would still definitely be a crime.

If you CAN have non-consensual sex with a sleeping or otherwise-unconscious person in England, without that being rape or some kind of assault, then England needs a new law.

Childlike Empress · 20th December 2010, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by George II

What bothers me is that so many people seem to be pretty much certain about the political motives, either behind the accusations, the handling of the case or both.

Yeah, those are indeed two different questions. I am certain that the handling of the case was politically motivated, even if the accusations are true. On part of the accusations themselves i'm not so sure, but here is a piece of evidence for "made-up".

As you can read in the Guardian article posted by HTL and quoted by others, the story starts as follows:

Originally Posted by The Guardian

[...] The allegations centre on a 10-day period after Assange flew into Stockholm on Wednesday 11 August. One of the women, named in court as Miss A, told police that she had arranged Assange's trip to Sweden, and let him stay in her flat because she was due to be away. She returned early, on Friday 13 August, after which the pair went for a meal and then returned to her flat.

Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her.

According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing.

When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.

On the following morning, Saturday 14 August, Assange spoke at a seminar organised by Miss A. A second woman, Miss W, had contacted Miss A to ask if she could attend. [...]

I happened to come across a video of that seminar lately, and after watching it, i'm quite sure that Miss A was not harmed by Mr A the night before.

Watch at least the first few minutes. When it starts, Miss W sits in the front row, second to right, in a pink shirt. Miss A enters from the left and sits down on the podium, right from the host and Assange. Three minutes in, you see Miss A in close-up, rather bored.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Christian Klippel · 20th December 2010, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by Cavemonster

I think the assumption is that the US contacted all their allies in places Assange was likely to travel and said something to the effect of:

Hey, guys! We've got a problem with this wikileaks thing. We'd sure like to put him in jail, but we don't have fantastic grounds to just grab him.
[...snip...]

Problem is that they don't really need such help, if they really want to. Just look up the El Masri case, where they just kidnapped that guy, and told the German government to cover up or hinder the legal investigations. Which they happily did. And they kidnapped the wrong person, for that matter. And don't see the need for an excuse and restitution. No, they simple dropped him off somehwere and forgot about him.

I guess such things are why there is so much speculation of political influence of the US going on. It is now known that they will refer to such tactics if they like to, and give a damn about legality or morals.

And frankly, there is no one to blame for such speculations except the US government. If you don't want to be called a bully, just stop bullying others.

Greetings,

Chris

Edit: And before someone yells "evidence?", here it is, leaked in the cables.

delle · 20th December 2010, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress

I happened to come across a video of that seminar lately, and after watching it, i'm quite sure that Miss A was not harmed by Mr A the night before.

Could you please elaborate on how you can be so sure of that?

17th December 2010, 05:34 PM	#361
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by gumboot The only people politicising this case are Assange and his supporters. Well those very opposed to Assange politicize it too, but in an obvious, 'they need to shoot the bastard' way that easy to dismiss. Originally Posted by Childlike Empress Nope. You're just trying to offer escapes enabling the gullible to stay in denial. Boring and irrelevant. Well that's certainly a compelling rebuttal for the criticisms of Wolf's article!
	__________________ 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

17th December 2010, 10:22 PM	#362
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,798	I think we've reached the level of repeating ourselves in this thread. I'm confident of my assessment at this point in time. It's time for me to put the thread on hold and wait for new developments. We should definitely revisit people's positions when more evidence emerges.
	__________________ (*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.)

18th December 2010, 01:44 AM	#363
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,456	Originally Posted by gumboot The only people politicising this case are Assange and his supporters. Geoffrey Robertson is not a fringe type of extremist, but a well respected and experience human rights lawyer. He believes the move to prosecute is politically motivated. If that is the case, then the supporters of Assange are not politicising the case, they are just a jump ahead of you.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

18th December 2010, 11:10 AM	#367
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	Originally Posted by babycondor What kind of "direct evidence" would convince you? Any sign of communication between Swedish politicans and the Swedish prosecution, hints or suggestions of procedural anomalities in the prosecution's handling of the case (but made by someone who have actual knowledge of the Swedish prosecution's procedures and not just well opinionated Names), hints of political quid pro quo (either between USA and Sweden or between the Swedish government and the prosecutor handling the case). I'd also accept (even though it technically isn't evidence) evidence that similar forms of political pressure has been put on the Swedish prosecution in other cases (thus setting a pattern) or of examples of the USA having convinced other nations to perform cases of political prosecution with similarities to this one. A good, well-explained motive and cui bono wouldn't be enough in itself (that way lies Conspiracy Country), but it wouldn't hurt and might give more weight to other evidence.
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	__________________ "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 Last edited by Leif Roar; 18th December 2010 at 11:15 AM.

18th December 2010, 07:21 PM	#368
ThunderChunky Muse Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 988	Originally Posted by Leif Roar Any sign of communication between Swedish politicans and the Swedish prosecution, You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m
ThunderChunky Muse Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 988

18th December 2010, 05:21 AM	#364
George II Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Sweden Posts: 311	It may take some time before we see any more legal developments in the case. My hope is that swedish prosecutors will get a chance to make an informed decision whether to prosecute or not. That means a continued investigation with Assanges cooperation. If they then decide there is not enough evidence to prosecute, then so be it, at least they will have been able to do a full investigation. And if they prosecute, we will have to wait for a verdict. But the point is that justice has to procede. Anything else is, in my view, unacceptable, and won't really benefit anyone involved, not even Assange. I hope he is honest when he says he wants to clear his name. If so, he should cooperate with swedish justice. And I note that the so called "evidence" for politicing is still only the apparent hatred towards Wikileaks and Assange comming from certain voices in america. I still haven't seen anyone provide direct evidence that this is somehow linked to the allegations against Assange. Shure, many of Assanges critics are probably taking their chance to use these allegations as ammunition agianst him, but the issue here is whether the swedish legal process has been influenced by the political situation. So far I haven't seen any evidence for that.

18th December 2010, 06:47 AM	#365
Here_to_learn Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 2,049	The Guardian has an article where the claim to have access to previousely unseen documents. I can't judge how this matches to the relevant Swedish laws, so I can't really say anything about that part. Some other interesting things can be found in the article. For example there has been discussion on what information Assange legal team has seen with regards to the charges. Originally Posted by Guardian Stephens has repeatedly complained that Assange has not been allowed to see the full allegations against him, but it is understood his Swedish defence team have copies of all the documents seen by the Guardian. He maintains that other potentially exculpatory evidence has not been made available to his team and may not have been seen by the Guardian. Then regarding the question on the arrest warrant: Originally Posted by George II I hope he is honest when he says he wants to clear his name. If so, he should cooperate with swedish justice. Originally Posted by Guardian The Guardian understands that the recent Swedish decision to apply for an international arrest warrant followed a decision by Assange to leave Sweden in late September and not return for a scheduled meeting when he was due to be interviewed by the prosecutor. Assange's supporters have denied this, but Assange himself told friends in London that he was supposed to return to Stockholm for a police interview during the week beginning 11 October, and that he had decided to stay away. Prosecution documents seen by the Guardian record that he was due to be interviewed on 14 October.

18th December 2010, 09:41 AM	#366
babycondor Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: California Posts: 417	Originally Posted by George II ... And I note that the so called "evidence" for politicing is still only the apparent hatred towards Wikileaks and Assange comming from certain voices in america. I still haven't seen anyone provide direct evidence that this is somehow linked to the allegations against Assange. Shure, many of Assanges critics are probably taking their chance to use these allegations as ammunition agianst him, but the issue here is whether the swedish legal process has been influenced by the political situation. So far I haven't seen any evidence for that. What kind of "direct evidence" would convince you? Taped telephone conversations between US and Swedish officials? Copies of emails or cables exchanged between them? By their very nature, such influences would be difficult to prove. Therefore, I predict we will have to wait for a well-placed person with security clearance to LEAK the type of evidence you seem to be asking for (if it exists). Until then, what we may reasonably discuss is our different interpretations of the CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence.

18th December 2010, 07:54 PM	#369
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base Posts: 10,004	Originally Posted by ThunderChunky You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m Your point?
	__________________ 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. 1 on 1 Debating Forum for Skeptics and sceptics.

18th December 2010, 08:15 PM	#370
ThunderChunky Muse Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 988	Originally Posted by PhantomWolf Your point? That he should either specify that point further or check it off of his list.
ThunderChunky Muse Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 988

18th December 2010, 09:37 PM	#371
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,798	Originally Posted by George II .... And I note that the so called "evidence" for politicing is still only the apparent hatred towards Wikileaks and Assange comming from certain voices in america. .... So the absurd lack of bail initially, chasing Assange to the UK, "most wanted" on the Interpol list, etc etc, given the nature of the charge, is just not recognized by your brain? Debate of the issues is one thing. Outright blind eye to the facts is quite another.
	__________________ (*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.)

18th December 2010, 11:56 PM	#372
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	Originally Posted by ThunderChunky You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m Yes, I'm aware of that. Let me rephrase: Any sign of untoward communication between Swedish politicians and the prosecutor. I must admit I thought that bit was implied.
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	__________________ "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

19th December 2010, 12:12 AM	#373
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger So the absurd lack of bail initially, Denying bail to a foreign citizen with the means to abscond and no local ties is not "absurd". You might agree or disagree with the (initial) decision to deny him bail, but it's silly to claim it was "absurd." Quote: chasing Assange to the UK, They what, now? Quote: "most wanted" on the Interpol list, Oh, so now he was put on the "most wanted" list too, huh? Give it a few months and he'll have chewed his way out of a secret torture chamber at Drottningholm.
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	__________________ "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

19th December 2010, 01:29 AM	#374
Here_to_learn Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 2,049	Originally Posted by ThunderChunky You are aware that the lawyer for the accusers is also a politician? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claes_Borgstr%C3%B6m For the Social Democratic party. You know - the party that lost power in the election in 2006, and didn't manage to reclaim it in this years election. But I'm sure you will give us a good explanation on who/what country uses his influence to do what here.

19th December 2010, 01:36 AM	#375
Here_to_learn Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 2,049	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger It's time for me to put the thread on hold and wait for new developments. We should definitely revisit people's positions when more evidence emerges. Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger So the absurd lack of bail initially, chasing Assange to the UK, "most wanted" on the Interpol list, etc etc, given the nature of the charge, is just not recognized by your brain? Debate of the issues is one thing. Outright blind eye to the facts is quite another. Please do share with us the new developments that made you revisit your position and state this.

19th December 2010, 09:56 AM	#376
George II Critical Thinker Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Sweden Posts: 311	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger So the absurd lack of bail initially, chasing Assange to the UK, "most wanted" on the Interpol list, etc etc, given the nature of the charge, is just not recognized by your brain? Debate of the issues is one thing. Outright blind eye to the facts is quite another. The lack of bail isn't really that absurd considering that Assange had been staying away from swedish justice up until then and the fact that he is known to be "constantly on the move", even according to himself. As for the "chase" of Assange to the UK, well he was wanted for questioning and he was in the UK, what were they supposed to do? By the way, an Interpol red notice, which is what Assange was given, doesn't make you the "most wanted" by Interpol, it's just an international request for provisional arrest, and it's issued for people who are wanted either for prosecution or to serve sentences. Thousands of red notices are issued every year. As I have mentioned before, it may just be all the attention given to the case that makes it seem like Assange is being chased in a fasion that is disproportionate to the circumstances. That and the fact that he is regarded as a hero. I will add though that I do understand why people bring up the risk of political pressure. Given who Julian Assange is, I think it's perfectly understandable why people suspect political motives, I did so myself initially (and just to be clear I am still open to the possibility). What bothers me is that so many people seem to be pretty much certain about the political motives, either behind the accusations, the handling of the case or both. To me, going by what we know so far, that's just jumping to conclusions. Examples of what would constitute evidence for political pressure has already been mentioned by Leif Roar. I think they seem reasonable. Claes Borgström, the womens lawyer, is indeed the official spokesperson on gender equality issues for the Socialdemocratic party, which has not been in government for many years. He is not, and never has been, a member of the government, unlike what Assanges lawyer Mark Stephens claimed in a recent interview. Just one of many false claims he made. Uninformed or dishonest? I don't know.
	Last edited by George II; 19th December 2010 at 10:11 AM.

19th December 2010, 05:32 PM	#377
little grey rabbit Banned Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 3,167	Quote: The lack of bail isn't really that absurd considering that Assange had been staying away from swedish justice up until then and the fact that he is known to be "constantly on the move", even according to himself. Far from staying away from Swedish justice, Assange applied for residency there. He stayed, answered questions and was not charged (and still is not charged) and then left. This is normal behaviour for a tourist. This is not a normal rape complaint Quote: According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing. When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom. Incidently according to the chat logs of Bradley Manning, during previous visits to Sweden Assange had been tailed. This might explain why Miss A found out so fast about Miss W.

19th December 2010, 05:51 PM	#378
delle New Blood Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 5	Claes Borgström is in Sweden a well known feminist and gender equality advocate and was appointed the official spokesperson on these issues for the Socialdemocratic party in 2008. He became a party member a few months before the appointment. He has not participated in any elections and is not a member of the parliament. He works full time as a lawyer and does not have any political position other than gender equality spokesperson for the Socialdemocratic party.
delle New Blood Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 5

19th December 2010, 06:03 PM	#379
delle New Blood Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 5	Originally Posted by little grey rabbit Incidently according to the chat logs of Bradley Manning, during previous visits to Sweden Assange had been tailed. This might explain why Miss A found out so fast about Miss W. What do you mean? Miss A found out about Miss W when she got a telephone call from Miss W. Miss W was trying to get hold of Assange and Miss A, being the official spokesperson for Assange during the visit and organizer for the seminary he attended, was a logical choice of person to call.
delle New Blood Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 5

19th December 2010, 06:21 PM	#380
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by delle What do you mean? Miss A found out about Miss W when she got a telephone call from Miss W. Miss W was trying to get hold of Assange and Miss A, being the official spokesperson for Assange during the visit and organizer for the seminary he attended, was a logical choice of person to call. There is an emotional motivation to make conspiracies out to get Assange, because to some he's such a hero acting against villainous forces. Any information that supports this get's grabbed onto and details that go against this are ignored (confirmation bias). Hell, I'm pretty sure there are conspiracies, possibly villainous, out to discredit or even destroy Assange. But by all appearances, this isn't one of them. He just done goofed. And it's worth pointing out that none of this involves Wikileaks, it's mission, or the 'goodness' thereof (or lack thereof depending on one's view).
	__________________ 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

19th December 2010, 07:58 PM	#381
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 16,012	Originally Posted by Here_to_learn The Guardian has an article where the claim to have access to previousely unseen documents. Looks pretty bad for those who pooh-poohed the charges. Quote: he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Quote: She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. Quote: "Not only had it been the world's worst screw, it had also been violent." Quote: She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before." Police spoke to Miss W's ex-boyfriend, who told them that in two and a half years they had never had sex without a condom because it was "unthinkable" for her. Miss W told police she went to a chemist to buy a morning-after pill and also went to hospital to be tested for STDs. Police statements record her contacting Assange to ask him to get a test and his refusing on the grounds that he did not have the time. There's more, but I don't want to run afoul of rule 4.
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

19th December 2010, 08:23 PM	#382
little grey rabbit Banned Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 3,167	Originally Posted by tyr_13 There is an emotional motivation to make conspiracies out to get Assange, because to some he's such a hero acting against villainous forces. Any information that supports this get's grabbed onto and details that go against this are ignored (confirmation bias). Hell, I'm pretty sure there are conspiracies, possibly villainous, out to discredit or even destroy Assange. But by all appearances, this isn't one of them. He just done goofed. And it's worth pointing out that none of this involves Wikileaks, it's mission, or the 'goodness' thereof (or lack thereof depending on one's view). I personally am by no means convinced that Assange IS a hero against dark forces. He seems to have some rather unusual motivations http://iq.org/~proff/marutukku.org/c...uguide/t1.html Quote: --- The third name is MARUTUKKU, Master of the arts of protection, chained the Mad God at the Battle. Sealed the Ancient Ones in their Caves, behind the Gates. The Akkadian Creation Epic And you wonder where he got this inspiration and what his agenda is. However, regardless, it is obvious that the Swedish legal system (and by extension the European legal system) is being utterly abused here - and that is of enormous concern even if the underlying purpose is nothing more than to give Julian Assange the burnish of matyrdom.

19th December 2010, 08:24 PM	#383
little grey rabbit Banned Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 3,167	Originally Posted by Puppycow Looks pretty bad for those who pooh-poohed the charges. There's more, but I don't want to run afoul of rule 4. In fact given there is a ban on quoting wikileaked material, arguable there ought to be a ban on quoting this leaked material as well. But I doubt the moderators will see it that way.

20th December 2010, 12:30 AM	#384
Here_to_learn Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Posts: 2,049	Originally Posted by little grey rabbit Far from staying away from Swedish justice, Assange applied for residency there. He stayed, answered questions and was not charged (and still is not charged) and then left. This is normal behaviour for a tourist. Ok, that's a good timeline up to the stage where he left Sweden. How about continuing the timeline from the stage he left Sweden until now - has he tried to stay away from Sweden since? If you say "no" - how do you know?

20th December 2010, 01:07 AM	#385
Puppycow Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 16,012	Originally Posted by little grey rabbit In fact given there is a ban on quoting wikileaked material, arguable there ought to be a ban on quoting this leaked material as well. But I doubt the moderators will see it that way. I see your point, but this particular material was not leaked by wikileaks, and so I don't think it has been explicitly prohibited yet.
	__________________ “Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.” ― Joseph Heller, Catch-22

20th December 2010, 01:12 AM	#386
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,708	Originally Posted by Puppycow Looks pretty bad for those who pooh-poohed the charges. There's more, but I don't want to run afoul of rule 4. and the evidence that the claims made are true is?
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

20th December 2010, 04:57 AM	#387
dafydd Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Belgium (Flatland) Posts: 31,674	Originally Posted by casebro Isn't the UK appraising the warrant before deciding to extradite? Where is that going? On the BBC news programme Newsnight, a lawyer said that what he is accused of would not be a crime in Britain. It is a reprisal for Wikileaks.

20th December 2010, 05:18 AM	#388
BenBurch Gatekeeper of The Left Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: The Universe 35.2 ms ahead of this one. Posts: 32,488	Originally Posted by dafydd On the BBC news programme Newsnight, a lawyer said that what he is accused of would not be a crime in Britain. It is a reprisal for Wikileaks. And he has that information how?
	__________________ Are you IN? Join the IN crowd now!

20th December 2010, 05:53 AM	#389
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	Originally Posted by dafydd On the BBC news programme Newsnight, a lawyer said that what he is accused of would not be a crime in Britain. It is a reprisal for Wikileaks. No, it's a difference in law between the UK and Sweden. Swedish law has a wider definition of rape than UK law. I assume you don't want to argue that Sweden back in 2005 anticipated the Wikileaks debacle and changed its rape legislation in preparation of setting up Assange? (I've still to see a reasonable explanation of why Sweden would want to make reprisals against Wikileaks in the first place. It's not their secret documents that are all over the news.)
Leif Roar Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,800	__________________ "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

20th December 2010, 06:13 AM	#390
tyr_13 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Falconer, NY Posts: 9,774	Originally Posted by DC and the evidence that the claims made are true is? That's not the claim by Assange supporters that these leaks address. The claim they address is that there was no good reason for wanting to question Assange or reopen the investigation because the description doesn't sound like rape. There is the description, it sounds like it fits Sweden's legal definition of rape.
	__________________ 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

20th December 2010, 06:41 AM	#391
JAStewart Graduate Poster Tagger Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Shetland Islands Posts: 1,523	Whatever Assange did or did not do, it doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. If he's guilty, he'll serve his time, if he's innocent he won't. Wikileaks will continue to publish the material, and that's a good thing.
	__________________ Ignorance and google is a horrible combination. - BigAl Argumentum ad YouTubeum - sts60

20th December 2010, 06:45 AM	#392
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by Leif Roar (I've still to see a reasonable explanation of why Sweden would want to make reprisals against Wikileaks in the first place. It's not their secret documents that are all over the news.) The US government controls everything.

20th December 2010, 06:55 AM	#393
Cavemonster Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 3,916	Originally Posted by Leif Roar (I've still to see a reasonable explanation of why Sweden would want to make reprisals against Wikileaks in the first place. It's not their secret documents that are all over the news.) I think the assumption is that the US contacted all their allies in places Assange was likely to travel and said something to the effect of: Hey, guys! We've got a problem with this wikileaks thing. We'd sure like to put him in jail, but we don't have fantastic grounds to just grab him. Would you be a dear and pop him into your custody for some reason and then we can figure out what charges we want to use and extradite him over here. If you do that we'll do that whole "being a friendly superpower" thing for you, or whatever. PS Bonus points if you can arrest him on something embarrassing that makes him look like a creep! Now there's no direct evidence that this happened, though it would be absolutely in character and keeping with the US track record to make such a request. I must admit I don't know enough about Sweden to know if they would find this an appealing call to action. At this point, I'm basically assuming this is not the case, but if he does end up shipped off to the US, then my position may change.
Cavemonster Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 3,916	__________________ The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon. -G.K. CHESTERTON

20th December 2010, 07:10 AM	#394
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base Posts: 10,004	Originally Posted by JAStewart If he's guilty, he'll serve his time, if he's innocent he won't. Not necessarily true. Plenty of rapists get off sex charges because they are so hard to prosecute. If they don't take it to court, it doesn't have to mean he didn't do it, it might be they just didn't have the evidence to stand up in court. Likewise if found not-guilty also doesn't mean he didn't actual do it, just that the prosecution couldn't prove it beyond reasonable doubt. That doesn't mean he is guilty, just that he could be guilty and get off. Less likely is his being innocent and not.
	__________________ 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. 1 on 1 Debating Forum for Skeptics and sceptics.

20th December 2010, 07:12 AM	#395
PhantomWolf Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base Posts: 10,004	Originally Posted by Cavemonster it would be absolutely in character and keeping with the US track record to make such a request. Evidence?
	__________________ 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. 1 on 1 Debating Forum for Skeptics and sceptics.