JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags Julian Assange , rape charges

Closed Thread
Old 4th December 2010, 07:41 AM   #41
Kaylee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,162
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
The document shows neither of the women considered it rape, until they found out about eachother. That fact disqualifies it as rape.


The women were both in their 20s, so legal age is not an issue.

For the communicable disease no evidence has been brought out
From my read of the newspaper article, neither one of them considered it rape --ever. It was the Swedish police that decided, very briefly (for less than a day), to charge Assange with rape.

I think Sweden needs a new felony on their books for the crime of refusing to take an STD test when the request is justified.

The women were justified in wanting an STD test, but apparently in Sweden its very difficult to force someone to provide one. The whole thing seems like an attempt to get the women what they needed by hardball negotiations -- not a serious rape charge.

From the article linked in the OP:
Quote:
The issue of unprotected sex left a fear of disease. It is believed that they both asked him to take a test for STDs and he refused.

Woman B was especially anxious about the possibility of HIV and pregnancy.

And it was in this febrile state that the women, who barely knew each other, walked into a police station and began to tell their stories.

[ed. bold]Woman A said afterwards that she had not wanted to press charges but had gone to support the younger woman, who wanted police advice on how to get Assange to take a medical test.


Originally Posted by egslim View Post
I think a lot of people who don't support his publications will still be appalled if he gets locked up for it indefinately without legal justification.
I think this whole thing is going to backfire and Assange will end up being considered a martyr by many people. And a bad date. LOL! Apparently, during much of the time he was with Woman B, he was on his computer twittering. Hint: If your date is on the computer and not with you -- it's time to leave!


ETA: The Swedish legal problems occurred back in August and Interpol didn't request request a Red Notice for his arrest until November 30th. That does make it seem more likely that his current legal problems are due more to the wikileaks than his refusal to provide the results of an STD test.
__________________
When everyone think alike, no one thinks very much. -- Walter Lippman

Last edited by Kaylee; 4th December 2010 at 07:52 AM.
Kaylee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 07:45 AM   #42
9/11-investigator
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Amsterdam/Netherlands
Posts: 4,033
Originally Posted by Thunder View Post
what you think, is irrelevent. all that matters is what the facts say to the jury.
Surely will result in a 'plea bargain'?
Nobody takes American 'justice' serious anymore.

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/090310_injustice.htm
http://www.vdare.com/roberts/081216_usa.htm

http://www.vdare.com/roberts/all_columns.htm

From the material presented in the first post it is obvious that the guy is innocent. Most female golddiggers on this planet know that nothing pays off more than accusing a celebrity of rape. Think of the Kachelman drama in Germany.
9/11-investigator is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:45 AM   #43
Region Rat
Stinky Cheese Eater
 
Region Rat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sprung from Da Calumet Region
Posts: 2,827
Originally Posted by BobHaulk View Post
What has he done exactly? Exposing the hypocrisy of some representatives of the american government maybe, making them look like the liars they are. Maybe you think it's good that they say one thing in public and another in private but i don't. It's time for these people to stand up and be counted, explain themselves instead of blaming the messenger. Especially when british soldiers are being killed and some desk jockey is slagging off the troops. We british should get out of there and leave it to the super duper american soldiers. It's seems they don't even have respect for the men and women who are laying there lives down for some spurious war started by the americans and thanks to wikileaks we now know.
Re: bolding. I've got to ask, what do you think the basic qualification of being a diplomat is?
__________________
The Optimist sees the glass as half full. The Pessimist sees the glass as half empty. The Engineer sees the glass as twice as big as it needs to be.
Region Rat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 09:29 AM   #44
Bikewer
Penultimate Amazing
 
Bikewer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: St. Louis, Mo.
Posts: 10,538
I admit I have ambivalent feelings about the "leaks". The rape thing appears to be entirely designed to discredit/embarrass Mr. Assange...
We are presented with what goes on in international diplomacy, warts and all. We are used to the bland public face of diplomacy, and aware that more must be going on behind the scenes.
Like cooking, some might say it's something one doesn't want to watch up close....

I think it's arguable that this information is in the public interest. It's also arguable that it remain secret, at least to some degree.
They pointed out on Diane Rehm yesterday that this material had been in the hands of various media outlets since August. The NYT has been working with the State Department regarding publication of some sections. As noted, not much of this is "secret" in the sense of nuclear bomb secrets or military attack plans.
It's essentially just candid behind-the-scenes diplomatic communication.
Bikewer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 10:19 AM   #45
egslim
Graduate Poster
 
egslim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by Kaylee View Post
From my read of the newspaper article, neither one of them considered it rape --ever. It was the Swedish police that decided, very briefly (for less than a day), to charge Assange with rape.

I think Sweden needs a new felony on their books for the crime of refusing to take an STD test when the request is justified.

The women were justified in wanting an STD test, but apparently in Sweden its very difficult to force someone to provide one. The whole thing seems like an attempt to get the women what they needed by hardball negotiations -- not a serious rape charge.
Meanwhile the headlines are full with allegations that mr Assange is wanted for rape.

But I disagree that the request for an STD test is justified. If the women are worried about the possibility of having obtained an STD, they should take a test themselves. After all, even if mr Assange tests positive the women still don't know if they have it or not.

Maybe the idea is that if mr Assange tests positive for something they can make a sexual assault charge for having unprotected sex. I don't know if Swedish law requires proof mr Assange was aware of having an STD to make that charge stick.
Quote:
ETA: The Swedish legal problems occurred back in August and Interpol didn't request request a Red Notice for his arrest until November 30th. That does make it seem more likely that his current legal problems are due more to the wikileaks than his refusal to provide the results of an STD test.
Interesting: "INTERPOL will only issue notices "if it is satisfied that all the conditions for processing the information have been fulfilled. For example, a notice will not be published if it violates Article 3 of the Constitution, which forbids the Organization from undertaking any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."
This warrant appears to be poltically motivated.
egslim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 01:26 PM   #46
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
From the article it seems that the women weren't out to have him charged, it was the police and prosecutor that decided that there had been a voliation of the law, the women just wanted to force him to be tested.

Still hasn't changed my opinion of the guy though, he's a prick. You don't screw around on people and if you do have unprotected sex and your partner wants testing, then you do it to alay their fears however irrational they might be. The guy needs to learn to keep it in his pants.
One has to wonder how the prosecutors got the information in the first place. I wonder if they were reading the exchanges between the two women?
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 01:36 PM   #47
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
I posted this in the Wikileaks thread:

Julian AssangeWP

Re the Swedish charges:
Quote:
On 20 August 2010, an investigation was opened against Assange in Sweden in connection with an allegation that he had raped a woman in Enköping on the weekend of 14 August after a seminar, and two days later had sexually harassed a second woman he had been staying with in Stockholm.[95][96] Shortly after the investigation opened, however, chief prosecutor Eva Finné overruled the prosecutor on call the night the report was filed, withdrawing the warrant to arrest Assange and saying "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape." He was still being investigated for harassment, which covers reckless conduct or inappropriate physical contact.[97] The second woman was a member of the Swedish Association of Christian Social Democrats, a Christian affiliate of the Swedish Social Democratic Party, who organized a seminar and news conference in Sweden for Assange. She was acting as Assange's spokeswoman and hosting him as a guest in her home during his stay in Sweden.[98] ...

...on 1 September a senior Swedish prosecutor re-opened the investigation saying new information had come in. The women's lawyer, Claes Borgström, a Swedish politician, had earlier appealed against the decision not to proceed.[101] Assange has said that the accusation against him is a "set-up" arranged by the enemies of WikiLeaks.[102]
So right there the evidence of "rape" was lacking and was withdrawn from the charges. Then added back in by a prosecutor with political ambition of some kind.

The Sydney Morning Herald was the source of some of the Wiki entry and looks worth reading: Timing of sex case sparks claims of political influence
Quote:
...it is alleged the women - members of a Christian political group that had hosted a speech by Assange ...
...Yesterday another lawyer who acted for Assange, the Melbourne barrister James Catlin, wrote in Crikey that the women ''collaborated'' and ''irrevocably tainted each other's evidence'' before going to police.

''Their SMS texts to each other show a plan to contact … Expressen beforehand in order to maximise the damage to Assange.''
One can only wonder what this is all about, two spurned lovers? Christians having sex for some ulterior Jesus motive? Women influenced by some outside source out to get Assange? There's been no evidence presented that molestation or coercion really was involved unless telling a woman you love her to get in her pants or something like that was involved. Who knows, except we do know this case is more likely politically motivated than not.


But the idea one or both of the women wanted Assange to get an STD test makes a little sense. But, do we really think this fell into the prosecutor's lap? I wonder if we will ever know.
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 02:05 PM   #48
Kaylee
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,162
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
But I disagree that the request for an STD test is justified. If the women are worried about the possibility of having obtained an STD, they should take a test themselves.
But it can take up to 6 months for the symptoms to appear. That's a very long time to wait! We're going to have to disagree on the justification of this one.

Quote:
Maybe the idea is that if mr Assange tests positive for something they can make a sexual assault charge for having unprotected sex. I don't know if Swedish law requires proof mr Assange was aware of having an STD to make that charge stick.

Interesting: "INTERPOL will only issue notices "if it is satisfied that all the conditions for processing the information have been fulfilled. For example, a notice will not be published if it violates Article 3 of the Constitution, which forbids the Organization from undertaking any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."
This warrant appears to be poltically motivated.
I agree.
__________________
When everyone think alike, no one thinks very much. -- Walter Lippman
Kaylee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 02:13 PM   #49
McHrozni
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,807
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
The document shows neither of the women considered it rape, until they found out about eachother. That fact disqualifies it as rape.
I don't know how Swedish law qualifies rape. Probably.

Quote:
But I disagree that the request for an STD test is justified. If the women are worried about the possibility of having obtained an STD, they should take a test themselves.
Em, no. Treatment of many diseases (taking HIV/AIDS, which is a prime example) can be quite successful if done quickly enough with prophylactics. It's an expensinve and grueling regimen, which can cut down infection risk by up to 80%.

The catch is that it takes 6 months to diagnose an HIV infection, but prohpylactics are only effective within the first three days after exposure - and they're most effective within the first day. I'm not sure if they caught this deadline in this case, but given his lifestyle, an HIV infection isn't exactly implausible.

There are also a number of other venerable diseases which might not manifest or be diagnosable until later, and both women and any sex partners they might have could be at needless risk.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 02:14 PM   #50
egslim
Graduate Poster
 
egslim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
But, do we really think this fell into the prosecutor's lap? I wonder if we will ever know.
I thought about that.

I don't believe it was a pre-planned setup, because then I would expect the women to go to the police as soon as possible after the event. The fact they did not, and instead continued as usual for several days, is the weakest point of their case.

I think it's a combination of two spurned lovers, at least one of whom is very vindictive, and a guy who a lot of politically powerful people would very much like to see destroyed.
egslim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 02:16 PM   #51
whatthebutlersaw
Dessert Arsonist
 
whatthebutlersaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: East of the Sun
Posts: 4,036
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I posted this in the Wikileaks thread:

Julian AssangeWP

Re the Swedish charges:So right there the evidence of "rape" was lacking and was withdrawn from the charges. Then added back in by a prosecutor with political ambition of some kind.

The Sydney Morning Herald was the source of some of the Wiki entry and looks worth reading: Timing of sex case sparks claims of political influenceOne can only wonder what this is all about, two spurned lovers? Christians having sex for some ulterior Jesus motive? Women influenced by some outside source out to get Assange? There's been no evidence presented that molestation or coercion really was involved unless telling a woman you love her to get in her pants or something like that was involved. Who knows, except we do know this case is more likely politically motivated than not.


But the idea one or both of the women wanted Assange to get an STD test makes a little sense. But, do we really think this fell into the prosecutor's lap? I wonder if we will ever know.
You have got it all, to the degree it was reported in Sweden correct. It is very likely, though, that the women actually went to the police to try to force a test. That is the level of naïvite we are dealing with. The first decision of a warrant was taken by an on call prosecutor in the middle of the night and was voided by the regular prosecutor in the morning.

Assange offered to be heard voluntarily and increased his stay in Sweden by 40 days to be available for questioning, but the police decided they didn't want to hear him.

The second warrant was issued after Assange had left the country, something that was okd by the police and as you have guessed, the prosecutor who issued it is indeed politically ambitious. Prosecutors often make their careers on single cases in Sweden.*

There is of course no knowing, but my guess is that someone somewhere decided that an interpol warrant would make more of a splash internationally than a voluntary hearing without press-presence.


* See Krister van der Kwast who made his career on getting mentally ill fantacist Thomas Quick to confess to almost all high profile unsolved murders and missing persons that occurred in Sweden during a 20 year period. Van der Kwast, with the help of a seriously deluded psychotherapist convinced himself as well as Quick and the Swedish legal system that Quick suffered from a Hollywood version of Split Personality Disorder that caused him to go out on murderous rampages under the persona of "Ellington" . The highest profile serial killer case in the history of Sweden, it made Van der Kwast and left Thomas Quick with a life sentence. Until an investigation showed that Quick had been fed information about crime scenes before he was taken to them for re-enacting the crimes, and that allowed him to know things that ought only be known by the police and the killer.
__________________
Ask the Gatorade Brigade about electrolytes. Just don't ask them to water your plants on your holiday.

Permense! Gaudere meum - scis qui es.

Last edited by whatthebutlersaw; 4th December 2010 at 02:18 PM.
whatthebutlersaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 02:30 PM   #52
egslim
Graduate Poster
 
egslim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,857
My bad, I'm not the most well-informed about STDs.

Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
The catch is that it takes 6 months to diagnose an HIV infection, but prohpylactics are only effective within the first three days after exposure - and they're most effective within the first day. I'm not sure if they caught this deadline in this case, but given his lifestyle, an HIV infection isn't exactly implausible.
I tried to check the timeline from the information in the article.

For the first woman the three day deadline had definately already expired. The condom split friday evening. I don't know when they visited the police, but it must have been after tuesday morning.

The other woman had consensual sex without a condom.
egslim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 02:41 PM   #53
McHrozni
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,807
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
For the first woman the three day deadline had definately already expired. The condom split friday evening. I don't know when they visited the police, but it must have been after tuesday morning.
Okay. Treatment for other diseases can be more effective if the exposure is discovered very early.

Quote:
The other woman had consensual sex without a condom.
But was unaware of his lifestyle. I would expect he swapped many sexual partners worldwide in the past months or years, and he is much more likely to be infected by an STD than most people. A request to determine if he is a threat to his sexual partners is quite reasonable.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 02:52 PM   #54
egslim
Graduate Poster
 
egslim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
But was unaware of his lifestyle.
I find that a weak argument. She knew he has a nomadic lifestyle, that he was open to unsafe sex, and that he and her had sex only a few days after they first met.

Based on that information it would be very naive of her not to assume he had a promiscuous lifestyle.

But far more important, this whole affair dates from august. It's now three months later, and the case has suddenly been re-opened. What good does it do the women to have him tested now?
egslim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 03:11 PM   #55
McHrozni
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,807
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
I find that a weak argument. She knew he has a nomadic lifestyle, that he was open to unsafe sex, and that he and her had sex only a few days after they first met.

Based on that information it would be very naive of her not to assume he had a promiscuous lifestyle.
I don't know what she knew and didn't know about him. I find it entirely plausible that she was rather ill-informed about just how open to unsafe sex he is.

Quote:
But far more important, this whole affair dates from august. It's now three months later, and the case has suddenly been re-opened. What good does it do the women to have him tested now?
They know wheather or not it's possible they've been infected - if nothing else for the sake of any other sexual partners they might have.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 03:15 PM   #56
quixotecoyote
Howling to glory I go
 
quixotecoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 9,957
Originally Posted by Rika View Post
You know, I think it cute how releasing confidental information is cheered when it's not yours

Sent from my Droid
My government, my information.
__________________
If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.
quixotecoyote is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 03:16 PM   #57
Mr. Purple
Some Other Guy on Some Other Job
 
Mr. Purple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,540
If I didn't know better, I would think that some of you are jealous of the action he is getting.

I don't see rape. I see vengeful, pissed off governments. In fact, I would go so far as to say that this is an insult to true victims of rape/abuse.

Further, I don't even see him as a "prick". What? He hooked up with two girls in as many days? GASP! The Horror. I guess I am a prick many times over...

Condoms break - it happens. I don't even know what to think about a lady requesting a condom to be used and then not noticing that he hadn't put one on? How does that work? Usually, putting a condom on is not a ninja-like activity. It is pretty easy to notice if someone has put one on or not....

Besides, if you are going to have sex w/ someone sans raincoat, then you investigate their STD status before you have sex....not after. Is this really hard to grasp?

I will call Mr. Assange an idiot for not wanting to wear condoms on his own accord. That is just stupid....

Disclaimer: Maybe I missed something, I haven't read every link posted.

Last edited by Mr. Purple; 4th December 2010 at 03:19 PM. Reason: nevermind...clear enough as is...
Mr. Purple is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 03:36 PM   #58
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,385
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
I don't know what she knew and didn't know about him. I find it entirely plausible that she was rather ill-informed about just how open to unsafe sex he is.
That's a very weak argument. It shouldn't make a difference. If you aren't in a monogamous relationship, you should protect yourself. It used to be that health care workers wanted to know which patients had AIDS so they could protect themselves but that is poor logic. The best thing to do is assume everybody has it and use the same protection ALL THE TIME.

Quote:
They know wheather or not it's possible they've been infected - if nothing else for the sake of any other sexual partners they might have.
Has anyone asked him if he has been tested or if he is willing to be tested? Why does it require a rape charge to protect women who didn't take responsibility for themselves? This whole thing is an insult to women who would never play the swooning, "poor helpless me" card. I guess, in Sweden, women are seen as being weak and in need of manly protection.

ETA: And why is he responsible for their future sexual partners? All they need to do is use proper protection and they will be safe regardless. Knowing doesn't do anything except stigmatize people. Assume every gun is loaded sexual partner has an STD.
__________________
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them."

(Mark Twain)

Last edited by qayak; 4th December 2010 at 03:42 PM.
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 03:39 PM   #59
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10,385
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
I find that a weak argument. She knew he has a nomadic lifestyle, that he was open to unsafe sex, and that he and her had sex only a few days after they first met.

Based on that information it would be very naive of her not to assume he had a promiscuous lifestyle.
Yeah, but then again, based on that she would have to admit that she was promiscuous. Can't have that, can we?
__________________
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them."

(Mark Twain)
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:10 PM   #60
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Falconer, NY
Posts: 12,114
Originally Posted by FSM76 View Post
If I didn't know better, I would think that some of you are jealous of the action he is getting.

I don't see rape. I see vengeful, pissed off governments. In fact, I would go so far as to say that this is an insult to true victims of rape/abuse.

Further, I don't even see him as a "prick". What? He hooked up with two girls in as many days? GASP! The Horror. I guess I am a prick many times over...

Condoms break - it happens. I don't even know what to think about a lady requesting a condom to be used and then not noticing that he hadn't put one on? How does that work? Usually, putting a condom on is not a ninja-like activity. It is pretty easy to notice if someone has put one on or not....

Besides, if you are going to have sex w/ someone sans raincoat, then you investigate their STD status before you have sex....not after. Is this really hard to grasp?

I will call Mr. Assange an idiot for not wanting to wear condoms on his own accord. That is just stupid....

Disclaimer: Maybe I missed something, I haven't read every link posted.
I think you've missed everything because I don't think anyone here is saying it was rape based on the information we have. No one appears jealous of his 'action'.

Unless you think calling him a prick must be based of jealousy of his actions, and not because his actions make him obviously a bastard.
__________________
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
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:34 PM   #61
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
I don't know how Swedish law qualifies rape. Probably.



Em, no. Treatment of many diseases (taking HIV/AIDS, which is a prime example) can be quite successful if done quickly enough with prophylactics. It's an expensinve and grueling regimen, which can cut down infection risk by up to 80%.

The catch is that it takes 6 months to diagnose an HIV infection, but prohpylactics are only effective within the first three days after exposure - and they're most effective within the first day. I'm not sure if they caught this deadline in this case, but given his lifestyle, an HIV infection isn't exactly implausible.

There are also a number of other venerable diseases which might not manifest or be diagnosable until later, and both women and any sex partners they might have could be at needless risk.

McHrozni
If you don't give/take HIV post exposure prophylaxis by the third day, it is not given. HBIG for hep B needs to be given within 7 days. The incubation for herpes is less than 10 days and a condom won't protect from herpes very well if the women were relying on a condom anyway. Pubic lice, Syphilis, Gonorrhea and Chlamydia can be treated after they develop or one can offer the patient a course of antibiotics prophylactically without worrying about the partner's status. And the incubation periods are relatively short.

There is no prophy for hep C but it is extremely unlikely one would get it from a single sexual encounter. Generally it takes multiple exposures.

When did these women make these charges? Was it the morning after? "My boyfriend's condom broke last night and he won't get an STD test." That would have been conceivably reasonable. But that isn't what happened, is it?

Most people will have HIV antibodies by 10 weeks or less after exposure and there are newer tests like a P24 antigen which can be done as early as a week or two after exposure.

So this argument is full of holes.
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:37 PM   #62
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
I thought about that.

I don't believe it was a pre-planned setup, because then I would expect the women to go to the police as soon as possible after the event. The fact they did not, and instead continued as usual for several days, is the weakest point of their case.

I think it's a combination of two spurned lovers, at least one of whom is very vindictive, and a guy who a lot of politically powerful people would very much like to see destroyed.
I thought more about this and it dawned on me that maybe the group of volunteers included a spy. Certainly one can imagine the US would have been interested in infiltrating this group long ago.

An infiltrator may have been aware Assange was porking the staff, and might even have stirred up some anger among the ladies.

Plausible, anyway.
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:41 PM   #63
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Okay. Treatment for other diseases can be more effective if the exposure is discovered very early.
But you can accomplish this by testing the women. I see people for blood exposures all the time and we don't always have a source to test. There's a protocol for when you don't know what a person may have been exposed to.
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:43 PM   #64
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
I find that a weak argument. She knew he has a nomadic lifestyle, that he was open to unsafe sex, and that he and her had sex only a few days after they first met....
I find it very sexist that the man would be seen as primarily responsible for a mutually consenting decision.
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:48 PM   #65
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Given Assange is a bit of a celebrity, he's good looking, I wouldn't be surprised if these two ladies both thought he was in love with them and he thought it was casual sex. That's a recipe for the fury of a woman scorned.

Granted this is the stereotype view, not an evidence based view.
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 08:56 PM   #66
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: A floating island above the clouds
Posts: 24,289
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Anyone have any evidence Sweden has prosecuted anyone else for consensual sex without a condom? And this is an extraditable charge?

How can anyone take this charge seriously?
I can see pretending to have on a condom, or deliberately breaking one could be some kind of crime. Ignoring attempts at passing a disease (which could range all the way up through murder) deliberately risking a pregnancy or trying to cause one might be some kind of crime, maybe.

But rape it sure isn't. Claiming so demeans the violence and violation of real rape, it would seem to me.
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 11:54 PM   #67
McHrozni
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,807
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
When did these women make these charges? Was it the morning after? "My boyfriend's condom broke last night and he won't get an STD test." That would have been conceivably reasonable. But that isn't what happened, is it?
Three days later or so, maybe four. Too late for HIV, but in time for the others.

Quote:
Most people will have HIV antibodies by 10 weeks or less after exposure and there are newer tests like a P24 antigen which can be done as early as a week or two after exposure.

So this argument is full of holes.
Not really. It still made sense to test the potential carrier.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 4th December 2010, 11:58 PM   #68
McHrozni
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,807
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
That's a very weak argument. It shouldn't make a difference. If you aren't in a monogamous relationship, you should protect yourself. It used to be that health care workers wanted to know which patients had AIDS so they could protect themselves but that is poor logic. The best thing to do is assume everybody has it and use the same protection ALL THE TIME.
Unfortunately this isn't always feasible. In this particular case you will notice both women attempted to do that, one protection failed and the other had intercourse without a condom for one reason or another (intoxication?).

The fact is that they made a mistake, realized it was a mistake, and attempted to remedy it the best they could. He refused to cooperate. That they (along with Asenage) made a mistake in the first place doesn't mean their attempts are somehow unjustified.

Quote:
Has anyone asked him if he has been tested or if he is willing to be tested?
Yes. He refused, according to the article cited.

Quote:
Why does it require a rape charge to protect women who didn't take responsibility for themselves?
I strongly suspect the rape charge has much more to do with Wikileaks than his bedding left and right. That said, he's still an irresponsible [bad word here].

McHrozni

Last edited by McHrozni; 5th December 2010 at 01:07 AM.
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 08:15 AM   #69
Mr. Purple
Some Other Guy on Some Other Job
 
Mr. Purple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,540
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
I think you've missed everything because I don't think anyone here is saying it was rape based on the information we have. No one appears jealous of his 'action'.

Unless you think calling him a prick must be based of jealousy of his actions, and not because his actions make him obviously a bastard.
So just to clarify (question open to everyone):

1) He is a "prick"/ "bastard" because he leaked sensitive info.
or
2) He is a "prick" / "bastard" for his sexual exploits.


Which is it?
#1 is debated in other threads, this thread is about the question of rape.

If #2, is it because
a) You feel he raped (assaulted, etc.) these women.
b) Don't like his sexual behavior (multiple partners, etc.).

I do not see rape (disclaimers for redacted portions, etc.). According to the quote above, I am not alone.

The very nature of rape makes investigating the facts difficult (at best). Accusations cannot be taken lightly in these matters.

Obviously rapist should be brought to justice. But false allegations (or even, over reaching accusations) are life changing for the one accused, even if not guilty of any crime.

Granted, the implications for Mr. Assange are different than they would be for Joe Q. Public. Personally, I will find it disgusting if this is just a means to addressing the leak issues.
Mr. Purple is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 10:26 AM   #70
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 35,541
Originally Posted by egslim View Post
But you can't extradite someone to the US for an alleged crime in Sweden.


Publication of information is not terrorism.

If fuelair wants mr Assange locked up indefinately without legal justification, I want him to state that explicitely.

Unlike most suspects of terrorism, mr Assange is a high-profile target. I think a lot of people who don't support his publications will still be appalled if he gets locked up for it indefinately without legal justification.
Sorry, either that or dead. Unable to engage in any further acts of terrorism/espionage (you can pick which - both are illegal and harmful). I assume, by the by, that you don't keep up with my writings here on terrorists - I want all of them dead. Don't care whether they are mafias, Shining Path, street gangs, religious fundies, Basque Seperatists, old IRA, etc.

Assuming you don't follow why I put this slime in with terrorists, the released material gives evidence that Saudi's and others support Iran being attacked, bluntly. That gives Iran further support they might not have had from other terror groups and therefore endangers US citizens as well as citizens of other countries working with Saudi Arabia, etc. Giving out the info about the little slime ball Kharzai makes it more likely the AlQuaeda things will feel more empowered. Knowledge is power - you do not give that knowledge to the bad guys. Assange has done that, I have no use for him.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 12:46 PM   #71
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 6,993
Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
Sorry, either that or dead. Unable to engage in any further acts of terrorism/espionage [...]

You are dangerously disconnected from reality. Assange is not Wikileaks. Killing him won't kill Wikileaks. Hell, Wikileaks isn't even leaking this information.

Also, and this might be better off in the other thread, Wikileaks has consulted with 5 top news outlets around the world, including the New York Times, regarding the most recent leaks. These organizations also plan on publishing some of the leaked information. Should the people involved be killed, too? Where does it end?

Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; 5th December 2010 at 12:50 PM.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 01:04 PM   #72
Toontown
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,609
Assange looks and behaves like a rat. Scurrying about, crouching in various hidey-holes, grabbing a chunk of cheese or bread here and there, defecating on and infecting the entire diplomatic process, breeding like a rat at every opportunity. Rat nose, buck teeth, dark beady eyes...

Has some mad molecular biologist genetically engineered a human/rat hybrid?

You'd all better hope not. His spawn would breed like rats and consume like humans. We must all hope Assange is just an average anarchist - defecating upon all that which he does not rend asunder.

Last edited by Toontown; 5th December 2010 at 01:11 PM.
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 01:13 PM   #73
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
Posts: 6,993
Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
Assange looks and behaves like a rat. Scurrying about, crouching in various hidey-holes, grabbing a chunk of cheese or bread here and there [...]

A rather bizarre analogy for someone that gives frequent interviews and can generally be considered a celebrity of sorts.

And for someone who does not want to get involved with the whole Wikileaks discussion, because you think it's nonsense, you sure do put yourself into the middle of it. Politics makes people crazy; some more than others, it seems.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 03:10 PM   #74
Toontown
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 4,609
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
A rather bizarre analogy for someone that gives frequent interviews and can generally be considered a celebrity of sorts..
I don't give frequent interviews.

Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
And for someone who does not want to get involved with the whole Wikileaks discussion, because you think it's nonsense, you sure do put yourself into the middle of it.
A few sentences isn't that much.

Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
Politics makes people crazy; some more than others, it seems.
Make fun of a rat-man, get called crazy. All in a day's work.
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 05:35 PM   #75
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base
Posts: 11,537
Originally Posted by FSM76 View Post
So just to clarify (question open to everyone):

1) He is a "prick"/ "bastard" because he leaked sensitive info.
or
2) He is a "prick" / "bastard" for his sexual exploits.
3) He is a "prick" / "bastard" for his behaviour towards and treatment of women.

Originally Posted by FSM76 View Post
Which is it?
#1 is debated in other threads, this thread is about the question of rape.

If #2, is it because
a) You feel he raped (assaulted, etc.) these women.
b) Don't like his sexual behavior (multiple partners, etc.).
c) Because you don't live and sleep with one woman and go and sleep with another one at the same time, and you don't refuse to prove that you haven't endangered their health when they find out that you're a cheating prick.
__________________

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.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 08:41 PM   #76
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Tuolumne City, CA
Posts: 20,346
Would there be a public backlash in Sweden if this all just trumped up?


For the record I am the one person who is jealous of his "action."
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 08:50 PM   #77
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,167
Given that its difficult to see anyone being convicted on the basis of this you wonder what the point of all this melodrama is.

Having Mr Assange to be acquitted of a ludicrous sex molestation charge is only going to burnish his cult of personality even further. Probably won't hurt his chances of getting laid either.
little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 09:07 PM   #78
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Three days later or so, maybe four. Too late for HIV, but in time for the others.



Not really. It still made sense to test the potential carrier.

McHrozni
In time for what others?

Hep B - anyone sexually active should be vaccinated ahead of time.

In this country you cannot demand an STD test of your sexual partner whether the condom broke or not. AFTER a person is convicted of a sex crime, STD tests can be ordered. If a person has reason to believe they have been criminally exposed there may be some means of ordering a subpoena for specific STD test. Some prison staff are allowed to order STD tests if it affects where they are going to house prisoners. And if you expose someone to your blood during an assault, after you are convicted, the victim can ask for a court ordered test of blood infections.

If you are exposed doing your job, you can get a court ordered blood pathogens test on the source. It wouldn't include STDs not spread via blood. The laws vary by state.

So I'd be surprised if Sweden has a law that says, have sex and you can demand an STD test of your partner.

People have very much TV or movie perceptions of these issues. Reality differs.
__________________
(*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.)

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 5th December 2010 at 09:09 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 09:15 PM   #79
Skeptic Ginger
formerly skeptigirl
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shifting through paradigms
Posts: 44,784
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
3) He is a "prick" / "bastard" for his behaviour towards and treatment of women.



c) Because you don't live and sleep with one woman and go and sleep with another one at the same time, and you don't refuse to prove that you haven't endangered their health when they find out that you're a cheating prick.
If the one sided story we are hearing is true. But there are other scenarios where these women may have been vindictive because they were not 'loved' when they wanted to be 'loved'. It is possible they imagined he was coming on to just them, while Assange was clear he just wanted sex.

I'm not saying that makes him a good guy. He wouldn't be my type of good guy. But what's with all the blame falling on one side here as if only women are victims in sexual relationships?
__________________
(*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.)
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 5th December 2010, 09:54 PM   #80
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,167
Of course Anna Ardin is the press officer for the Swedish "Brotherhood Movement"

little grey rabbit is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:31 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.