5 ms·

It's possible to be both unfairly targeted by a superpower and commit sexual assault, one doesn't cancel out the other. I'm not saying he did, I don't know how

It's possible to be both unfairly targeted by a superpower and commit sexual assault, one doesn't cancel out the other. I'm not saying he did, I don't know how any of us could know. You seem quite confident he didn't though, I'm curious what you base that on.

buboard 7y ago
the charges were of 'rape' (not sexual assault), as it is defined in sweden. I m pretty sure these charges don't qualify as rape in most other countries: https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/4/12/18306901/julian-assange-arrest-wikileaks-rape-sweden-embassy https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/4/12/18306901/julian-ass...
- Steer 7y ago
  I understand you feel Swedish law is too harsh on this, but surely that is besides the point since Assange was in Sweden at the time of the alleged crime? It doesn't really matter if his actions qualifies as rape in any other country or not if they do in Sweden (which was for the courts to decide).
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - zaarn 7y ago
    Generally a country will only extradite you if the crime alleged is also a crime in that country. Some countries also stipulate that the punishment must not be severely stronger than in the current country.
    - makomk 7y ago
      Generally that's the case. However, Sweden was trying to extradite him under a European Arrest Warrant which has no such requirement for the offence to be a crime in the country being extradited from and has much weaker safeguards in general. (This has caused some problems over the years.)
  - buboard 7y ago
    indeed. i m only sayint that it wasn't 'sexual assault' charges, but rape
- ChrisSD 7y ago
  Having sex with an unconscious (due to sleep) woman counts as rape in the UK. Only the UK and Sweden's laws matter when extraditing between those countries.
  - buboard 7y ago
    waking up with sex isnt the same as unconscious sex. and its apparent from the description in the article that it was consensual
    - ChrisSD 7y ago
      The allegation is there was no consent. From the arrest warrant: > 4. Rape > On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep was in a helpless state.
      - buboard 7y ago
        sure he s accused of it. not the worst form of rape but still rape accusation. he should under normal circumstances go to court. but obviously the case is a part of a much bigger tangle here
    - sammex 7y ago
      it is absolutely rape.
koheripbal 7y ago
People should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. That isn't just a legal principle - it's a philosophical principle. If you throw that away and want to talk about probabilities - that's ok too - but then you need to add the probability that the global super power put pressure on people to drum up baloney charges.
- sammex 7y ago
  yeah but that might not always work. there are evidence against him but he will never be proven guilty in a court because of unrelated practical reasons. that don't make innocent either.
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  It's interesting that people have raised presumption of innocence until proven guilty to a philosophical principle, because its primary utility is as a legal principle. Presumption of innocence in criminal cases has value because the state has all the power (including the monopoly on violence), so if they are to use their monopoly on violence to deprive anyone of their freedoms, the burden of proof should be extremely high to offset the inherent power imbalance. In other words, even if all other things are equal, we should make the state's job harder because if the state is "cheating" to get a conviction it's a lot likelier they will succeed than the individual. As a larger philosophical principle, assumption of innocence isn't really proven out. Iterated prisoner's dilemma solutions suggest trust followed by tit-for-tat (i.e. presume innocence until someone shows they're willing to screw you over, then assume they're likely to continue screwing you over rather than assuming that was a one-off; this is a policy the law notably excludes, as past unrelated felony convictions aren't admissible evidence in a trial). I'm not saying we should toss presumption of innocence in the bin; merely that I'm skeptical of it as a deep true virtue to build one's values upon.
  - drited 7y ago
    I thought the solution to iterated prisoner's dilemma was what you described except with occasional forgiveness to see if both sides can get over the negative tit for tat spiral?

buboard 7y ago

the charges were of 'rape' (not sexual assault), as it is defined in sweden. I m pretty sure these charges don't qualify as rape in most other countries: https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/4/12/18306901/julian-assange-arrest-wikileaks-rape-sweden-embassy https://www.vox.com/identities/2019/4/12/18306901/julian-ass...

Steer 7y ago
I understand you feel Swedish law is too harsh on this, but surely that is besides the point since Assange was in Sweden at the time of the alleged crime? It doesn't really matter if his actions qualifies as rape in any other country or not if they do in Sweden (which was for the courts to decide).
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- zaarn 7y ago
  Generally a country will only extradite you if the crime alleged is also a crime in that country. Some countries also stipulate that the punishment must not be severely stronger than in the current country.
  - makomk 7y ago
    Generally that's the case. However, Sweden was trying to extradite him under a European Arrest Warrant which has no such requirement for the offence to be a crime in the country being extradited from and has much weaker safeguards in general. (This has caused some problems over the years.)
- buboard 7y ago
  indeed. i m only sayint that it wasn't 'sexual assault' charges, but rape
ChrisSD 7y ago
Having sex with an unconscious (due to sleep) woman counts as rape in the UK. Only the UK and Sweden's laws matter when extraditing between those countries.
- buboard 7y ago
  waking up with sex isnt the same as unconscious sex. and its apparent from the description in the article that it was consensual
  - ChrisSD 7y ago
    The allegation is there was no consent. From the arrest warrant: > 4. Rape > On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep was in a helpless state.
    - buboard 7y ago
      sure he s accused of it. not the worst form of rape but still rape accusation. he should under normal circumstances go to court. but obviously the case is a part of a much bigger tangle here
  - sammex 7y ago
    it is absolutely rape.

koheripbal 7y ago

People should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. That isn't just a legal principle - it's a philosophical principle. If you throw that away and want to talk about probabilities - that's ok too - but then you need to add the probability that the global super power put pressure on people to drum up baloney charges.

sammex 7y ago
yeah but that might not always work. there are evidence against him but he will never be proven guilty in a court because of unrelated practical reasons. that don't make innocent either.
shadowgovt 7y ago
It's interesting that people have raised presumption of innocence until proven guilty to a philosophical principle, because its primary utility is as a legal principle. Presumption of innocence in criminal cases has value because the state has all the power (including the monopoly on violence), so if they are to use their monopoly on violence to deprive anyone of their freedoms, the burden of proof should be extremely high to offset the inherent power imbalance. In other words, even if all other things are equal, we should make the state's job harder because if the state is "cheating" to get a conviction it's a lot likelier they will succeed than the individual. As a larger philosophical principle, assumption of innocence isn't really proven out. Iterated prisoner's dilemma solutions suggest trust followed by tit-for-tat (i.e. presume innocence until someone shows they're willing to screw you over, then assume they're likely to continue screwing you over rather than assuming that was a one-off; this is a policy the law notably excludes, as past unrelated felony convictions aren't admissible evidence in a trial). I'm not saying we should toss presumption of innocence in the bin; merely that I'm skeptical of it as a deep true virtue to build one's values upon.
- drited 7y ago
  I thought the solution to iterated prisoner's dilemma was what you described except with occasional forgiveness to see if both sides can get over the negative tit for tat spiral?