Going after Assange again! The insanity of rape-politics

Going after Assange again! The insanity of rape-politics | september 1, 2010

Believe it or not, they are actually charging Julian Assange with rape and other sexcrimes again!

Will we see an even bigger media cirkus now? Assange is charged with rape again. Something clearly is wrong with the swedish justice system. From ”guilty with a warrant for arrest” – to ”no wait, innocent”, – to ”no wait, we changed our mind, guilty again!” How many chances do the swedish prosecutors need to get it right? Now regardless of what happens serious errors have been made.

Read in Daily Mail what is supposed to have really happened between Assange. and the two women Anna Ardin and the younger female photographer SW.

What he did not tell her was that the party was being hosted by the woman he had slept with two nights before and whose bed he would probably be sleeping in that night.

This seems to be what the case really is about. However no existing law in Sweden, or anywhere I know in the western world, force men to tell women what other women they sleep with and certainly no law in existence makes it illegal for a woman to sleep with two men at the same time while not telling them.

Assange himself refers to cultural reasons not talking about personal life or criticizing the women involved.

SvD is reporting Marianne Ny, prosecutor with focus on violence in close relations, is the newest person to enter the cast of assange-gate. Thats weird cause neither of the two women had any relation whatsoever with mr assange. It was just sex. What will our international visitors think of this? Well CNN are already reporting and now BBC have also awakened.

Mårten Schultz comments on the latest events.

Stuff.co.nz

Read the entire story in English, analysis by Aktivarum.

Regarding the cultural issues, this is a sequence from a swedish comedy show about the svenska tjej ”swedish girl”

However whether this makes things clearer or more confusing is anyones guess. The comedian Henrik Schyffert makes fun of some swedish girls tendency to express wishes for one thing but choosing something completely else creating a weird political enviroment.

Also we need to remember one of the highest ranked radical feminist ideologists was a fraud of highest degree.

Read the story about Göran Lindberg, Police chief and expert speaker on womens issues and ethics. Andrew Anthony tells the story in the Guardian.

”In particular Lindberg was a staunch enemy of sexism in the police force. He argued with colleagues, made speeches and built up a reputation as a tireless proponent of women’s rights.”

”In January this year, following a six-month investigation, Lindberg was arrested. At the time of his apprehension he was allegedly on his way to meet a 14-year-old girl in a hotel encounter that was also due to feature a number of other men. It was said that in his car was a bag containing leather whips, handcuffs and a blindfold.”

Regarding political correctness in Sweden, Andrew Anthony paints a very unpleasant picture that really hits the mark.

”Many Swedes I spoke to suggested that Lindberg embodied a widespread cultural disconnection between official rhetoric and individual behaviour. As one well-placed observer of the Stockholm scene put it to me: ”Some of the most outspoken male politicians on gender equality are also renowned as the most active pursuers of women.”

”The theory behind the PC view of the world is that if you change the language, you change what the language describes, because perception alters reality: non-sexist expressions, for example, help to foster non-sexist thoughts. But what if the prescribed opinion is a false consensus?”

Publicerat i Assange-fallet
Tags: assange ardin, assange borgstrom, assange charged, assange charged again, assange marianne ny, assange rape, assange sofia, marianne ny

40 kommentarer »

So I guess you believe some people have carte blanche when it comes to rape charges? Strange…

Kommentar av Bo — september 1, 2010 @ 11:26 f m
Bo:

What the heck are you talking about? I have real rape victims among my own relatives. What do you think they feel about this crazy case taking priority over people being forced to suck…. and having to go down and….. under threat of knife and being beaten?

Compare the two and tell me what to tell them about this being the important of the two as they know one woman violated Assanges privacy after promising he could live in her flat and the other woman stalking him since watching him on TV.

I cant explain it, but DO TELL what I am to say to real rape victims when this case is being called a rape and given much more priority then theirs ever got – although they actuallt were forced – with violence and threats – to have sex.

Tell me, I can call them instantly and tell what you tell me. What makes this a rape compared to what happened to them?

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 11:32 f m
Interesting to note CNN is smearing not Assange as much as WikiLeaks by the phrasing ”WikiLeaks Rape Case”. Could be ‘Assange’ is not as well known, yet, the smear on WikiLeaks is maximized.

Hopefully this will bring attention the lack of rights for men not only in Sweden but more and more globally.

Could Assange make a statement with the police about how he had had a drink or so and possibly it was HE who was the victim of rape, according to the swedish definition ”sex while drunk”. Did she encapsulate his exterior genital while in fact he was having second toughts at least during some part of the act? But not being in a sober enough state to let her know this? That is rape on Assange according to Swedish Law.

I think men really need to start positioning themselves in the victim roles, for money and so that even women will want stop the state intrusion into sex life and the sentencing of innocent women and men.

Kommentar av Jack — september 1, 2010 @ 11:35 f m
By the way, anyone wanting to know who SW is need only to check for the girl in pink sweater here at 1210-1310 being more interested in taking pictures of Assange than listening what he is saying.

”What unfolded could be described as akin to the meeting of a groupie and a rockstar. The woman loitered outside the building before approaching a member of his entourage, who invited her to join a lunch at a modest local eatery called Bistro Boheme.”

Switch to a man doing this to a female-celeb and the man would be accused of being a stalker.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 11:50 f m
What a rude blond. I bet she chose an analog camera just to get noticed when taking pictures.
Click click, swosh noices constantly.

Kommentar av Andreas — september 1, 2010 @ 12:10 e m
Most people do not spend 1 minute taking pictures during a seminar, they take a couple of quick pictures and then are normal listeners again.

Sofia W clearly doesnt listen to Assange.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 12:26 e m
I can’t believe that this case hasn’t been closed yet. I am Swedish and I honestly don’t understand what is going on. Our legal system has weaknesses and now the world is seeing those problematic weaknesses. Incompetence and private agendas on the parts of prosecutors.

Kommentar av Saga — september 1, 2010 @ 12:48 e m
Sofia W

Vem ar det? Ar det den unga kvinnan som hade sex med Assange? Hur vet man att hon heter Sofia?

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 1, 2010 @ 12:51 e m
Lol must have had a sound bug in my brain. Because I kept hearing a analog camera noise. Now I don’t anymore and I see it is in fact an digital camera. Disregard my earlier comment. No idea what my brain did to me then.

Kommentar av Andreas — september 1, 2010 @ 12:54 e m
Yes, here we go again… Note that NONE of the Swedish newspapers allow comments or blog links on these articles (AB, Expressen, DN, SvD).

Kommentar av Matte Matik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:03 e m
Torstensson:

Sofia W är den andra yngre (27 år) kvinnan som anklagar Assange för våldtäkt-intevåldtäkt-kanske-vetinte-nu var det visst våldtäkt igen. Hon beskrivs i artikeln i Daily Mail (rosa tröja längst fram) och från den informationen kunde andra källor snabbt ta reda på hennes riktiga namn.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:05 e m
For our international guests. Sofia W, 27 is the younger woman accusing Assange, description in Daily Mail pink sweater, seated at first row (as well as pixled photo) made it easy to find out her name.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:06 e m
Since several english blogs now link this post I suggest we try use english when discussing the case. That was after all the reason the last long post was in english, the world is involved now. Lets make the most of it.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:08 e m
Director of Public Prosecution Ms Marianne Ny has decided on the request for review in the Assange matter.

The investigation concerning rape will be reopened.

– There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. Considering information available at present, my judgement is that the classification of the crime is rape. The basis for further considerations is not sufficient at the moment. More investigations are neccessary before a final decision can be made.

The investigation concerning molestation will be extended to include all allegations in the original police report.

– There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. Based on the information available, the crimes in question come under the heading of sexual coercion and sexual molestation, respectively.

Director of Public Prosecution Marianne Ny will be leading the further investigations. She will be assisted by Deputy Chief Prosecutor Ms Erika Lejnefors.

– Due to the investigation and the persons involved in the matter, I cannot give more information concerning details in the investigation.

http://www.aklagare.se/In-English/

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:09 e m
Probably neither you nor your ”guru” Daily Mail was actually there to withness what really happened, were you?

So, until justice is revealed: wait with your remarks.

It looks really suspicious that people defend Mr Assange no-matter-what. This phenomenon on the contrary points in the direction of Mr Assange’s guilt.

Swedish rape legislation changed 2005 to give a broader range to the concept of ”rape”.

If not all Swedish prosecutors – or attorneys (Silbersky) – are updated on this change of the law, it is by no means anything to get upset about.

Silbersky is well-known in Sweden for defending our most heavy criminals. What he says should not be taken for ”facts”. Rather the other way around.

Kommentar av Sven Nyström — september 1, 2010 @ 5:57 e m
Interview in Expressen TV today:
http://tv.expressen.se/nyheter/inrikes/1.2118706/exklusivt-expressen-traffar-julian-assange

Kommentar av Matte Matik — september 1, 2010 @ 6:16 e m
So Mr S. Nyström…, innocence is guilt (by association)? What Silbersky says should be interpreted completely opposite?

It seems you are fluent in Newspeak (see Orwell, G. ”1984”). But perhaps it is doubleplusgood to incarcerate a person unheard, just in case he does to much crimethink…To even consider any thought not in line with the principles of Gendersoc is a crime. Doubting any of the principles of Gendersoc is a crime. All crimes begin with a thought. So, if you control thought, you can control crime.

Kommentar av Gurra — september 1, 2010 @ 6:34 e m
Sven Nyström:

”Probably neither you nor your ”guru” Daily Mail was actually there to withness what really happened, were you?”

Do you really think thats a real argument? No I wasnt there. But then I also was not at Pearl Harbor during the japanese bombing and that didnt stop my teacher from demanding I would know what happened. Thus you would criticize not this event, but the basis for the western system of knowledge. And would your system be better? Even if I were there, I could lie about what happened.

”So, until justice is revealed: wait with your remarks.”

Thats funny, you forget the assumption of innocence untill (if) proven guilty. Is Assange proven guilty? No! Thus we are in our full right to assume he is innocent. And if the victims were male, you would probably not even be here. Thus we see perfect example of what Warren Farrell et.al Calls ”Chivalry justice”

”It looks really suspicious that people defend Mr Assange no-matter-what.”

It doesnt matter what it ”looks like” this is not a fashion contest.

”This phenomenon on the contrary points in the direction of Mr Assange’s guilt.”

No, it doesnt. In fact it is no proven corrolation whatsoever between people defending you and guilt. Sometimes people defended this way are guilty, sometime they are innocent but this in itself tells you exactly… nothing!

”Swedish rape legislation changed 2005 to give a broader range to the concept of ”rape”.”

That would be an argument if IF you could show those changes having anything at all to do with this case. But since those changes specifically were about two things, low age (under 15 as in the Goran Lindberg case) and girls being helpless because of alcohol and narcotics (as in the kumla gangrape case)

All you really can do is hope I wouldnt know this. Clearly The 2005 changes have no impact on this case whatsoeveer.

”If not all Swedish prosecutors – or attorneys (Silbersky) – are updated on this change of the law, it is by no means anything to get upset about.”

Actually it would seem you are the one not updated on the changes. In fact you give no indication to even know what the actual changes 2005 were. Do you even know the reason for those changes were the Kumla rape case with ”horny syrians” and a woman drunk who had used narcotics as well?

”Silbersky is well-known in Sweden for defending our most heavy criminals. What he says should not be taken for ”facts”. Rather the other way around.”

Now you are just ridicolous. Lawyers of course defend the guilty AND the innocent. The idea Silbersky only defend the guilty appeared in pop culture due to statements by standup comedian Magnus Betner. If Magnus Betner is your idea of source on legal cases then your idea of justice probably is not too far from Mike Nifong´s if you are even aware who he is.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 6:35 e m
You can not witness about what you have not seen.
No legislative process inte the world relies on second hand opinions.

Pearl Harbor: your knowledge about what happened there probably stems from eye witnesses reports.

You can never critizise an event. If it occured, it did. If not, it didn’t.

Well, you are free to put out any remarks you choose, of course. I just mean that it might hurt Mr Assange’s case.

The situation is, that Mr Assange is accused for approximately 3 crimes. But that does not mean that he is convicted. Mr Assange still has the right to defend himself.

If you do not trust Mr Assange to be able to do so, you could not express yourself any clearer than you already have done.

Why would Mr Assange need you to defend him if he was not guilty? Why would you defend him if you were not an eye witness? Do you believe in Santa, too?

2005 rape law changes: what you are referring to are supposedly two actual cases of when the law came to use, not the actual law itself. The law after 2005 also concerns other sex crimes of a lower degree than rape. If they may apply in this case – well, we do not know yet, do we?

Silbersky: Your assumptions about my ways of getting my information about Silbersky is very narrowing. Why would I have the same sources of information that you do? You see to have a very small perspective, where everything happening in the world is only those things that happen in YOUR world.

Please, don’t defend Mr Assange – if you do not want him to be convicted.

Kommentar av Sven Nyström — september 1, 2010 @ 7:11 e m
Sven Nyström,

You, my dear sir, scare me.

”don’t defend Mr Assange – if you do not want him to be convicted.”

According to The European Convention on Human Rights:

”Article 6
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.”

”Article 16

Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any … person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction on any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation…”

Mr Nyström, you are coming close to breaching Article 16.

Kommentar av Jack — september 1, 2010 @ 7:52 e m
Correction: 16 -> 17

Kommentar av Jack — september 1, 2010 @ 7:55 e m
Sven Nyström:

”You can not witness about what you have not seen.”

As the Tito Beltran rape-case showed, clearly you CAN witness what you have not seen since several of the celeb-witnesses had seen nothing themselves. But maybe your point is second-hand witness only applies to testimony supporting the prosecution?

”No legislative process inte the world relies on second hand opinions.”

That would be the reason Tito Beltran was convicted of a rape nobody had seen? Again your claims are not supported by facts.

”Pearl Harbor: your knowledge about what happened there probably stems from eye witnesses reports.”

No, they are a mix of eye witnesses reports AND empirical/logical analysis (deduction and induction) since the idea of science is you cant really trust eye witness reports. You must check to see if what they claim logically supports what happened in that time frame.

This of course is what we have done with the Assange rape-case.

”You can never critizise an event. If it occured, it did. If not, it didn’t.”

Actually you can critizise events and people like ”Mythbusters” do so on regular basis.

”Well, you are free to put out any remarks you choose, of course. I just mean that it might hurt Mr Assange’s case.”

Thats kinda funny since the prosecution have no legal right to convict him on such a basis. Thus if they did, it would clearly be in violation of the law.

”The situation is, that Mr Assange is accused for approximately 3 crimes. But that does not mean that he is convicted. Mr Assange still has the right to defend himself.”

Mr Assange has nothing to defend himself from since no evidence whatsoever have been presented. Clearly this case will be about two witnesses who had plenty of time to coordinate before even going to the police.

”If you do not trust Mr Assange to be able to do so, you could not express yourself any clearer than you already have done.”

Its the system I do not trust. Too many Hilda-supporters with no wish for objectivity.

”Why would Mr Assange need you to defend him if he was not guilty?”

Because in case you have missed this ”small” detail, Mr Assange do not understand swedish.

”Why would you defend him if you were not an eye witness? Do you believe in Santa, too?”

Its called OSKULDSPRESUMTION, innocent utntil proven guilty in a court of law. Did you miss that part in school or something?

”2005 rape law changes: what you are referring to are supposedly two actual cases of when the law came to use, not the actual law itself.”

Actually, the Tumba case 2004 was the reason the law was changed. However the demands for the law to include ”särskilt utsatt tillstånd” was ”avvisade” vilket fick Madeleine Leijonhuvfud going bananas in SvD.

”The law after 2005 also concerns other sex crimes of a lower degree than rape. If they may apply in this case – well, we do not know yet, do we?”

After the law changes 2005, the number of reported rapes went skyhigh and the number of reported sexuallt tvång m.m. went down.

Had the law not been changed sexuellt tvång are estimated to be at 782% and rape at 562% The real numbers today after the change is sexuellt tvång at 224% and rapes at 1064%

”Silbersky: Your assumptions about my ways of getting my information about Silbersky is very narrowing.”

That doesnt mean what I said wasnt true. Before Betner made that joke, nobody made that claim, now everyone makes that claim. You are hardly original, people at Flabban talked the same way two days ago.

-Owwwww, why would Assange choose Silbersky, we thought he was innocent haha!

”Why would I have the same sources of information that you do?”

The same reason the people at Flashback said the same thing, the exact same thing as you do.

”You see to have a very small perspective, where everything happening in the world is only those things that happen in YOUR world.”

This is not a fashion show. What things seem like or look like are not important.

”Please, don’t defend Mr Assange – if you do not want him to be convicted.”

There are no LEGAL basis for such a claim. But then, the law never stopped Mike Nifong, maybe you hold the same opinion as he did?

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 9:47 e m
Thanks Erik for following up this case.
I thought i could leave all this behind me thouogh i was very engaged in these matters a couple of years ago.
My feeling was that it was like screaming in vacuum, no one hears och cares among those whose got the power to change things that is wrong in rapecases.
Now I see so obvious all the cracks I saw before in many cases and It is hard not to care, though I know it is useless.

Good luck Erik, You are doing a very good job!

Kommentar av JD — september 2, 2010 @ 8:42 f m
That guy Sven Nyström is definately scary…

To all international readers: He does by all means n o t represent the public view of how the justice system shoudl work. He is either a left wing politician or a media represantative (that is synonmous with ”extreme left wing”).

The regular Swede does sometimes of course fall prey to the lynchmob mentality but normally, he or she is rather calm and analytical…

…well again that’s providing he or she is not left wing of course…

Kommentar av Lövet — september 2, 2010 @ 9:22 f m
Sven Nyström

You really have missed the point completely!

No one is defeinding Assange in articular as far as I can see. Everyone is defending the legal security.
Not only for Assanges but for everyones concern, including you Mr Nyström.

Next one called in as a suspect for rape could be you mr Sven Nyström and I am absolutely sure that in that case you will be very concerned about your own legal rights.

Kommentar av JD — september 2, 2010 @ 9:49 f m
You really have missed the point completely!

No one is defeinding Assange in particular as far as I can see. Everyone is defending the legal security.
Not only for Assanges but for everyones concern, including you Mr Nyström.

Next one called in as a suspect for rape could be you mr Sven Nyström and I am absolutely sure that in that case you will be very concerned about your own legal rights.

Kommentar av JD — september 2, 2010 @ 9:51 f m
JD:

”Next one called in as a suspect for rape could be you mr Sven Nyström and I am absolutely sure that in that case you will be very concerned about your own legal rights.”

LMAO!

For some weird reason I think JD is spot on. We need guys like Sven Nyström themselves suspect of rape for this craziness in Sweden to end. How about sending him (and his family) purple envelopes Beatrice Ask way?

Kommentar av Erik — september 2, 2010 @ 10:57 f m
@JD Word,

…but all-in-all the failure of left wing extremists is their patological lach of empathy…

Kommentar av Lövet — september 3, 2010 @ 7:20 f m
The root cause of this pathology I think is to think about people only as collective entities, forgetting about the individual.

Kommentar av Musse Pig — september 3, 2010 @ 8:29 f m
When police is using rape-kit to ensure proof in these cases…
Could it not be fair to handle a sucide-kit for the Men that is suspected for these crimes?
It would for sure shorten the pain for those men that is innocent and also strengthen the proof that a crime has been committed when the suspect is out of game and won´t be able to tell his annoying, stupid story of innocense.

Kommentar av JD — september 3, 2010 @ 2:28 e m
I know it´s a blow under the belt but…Julian Assange is not ugly. He is not poor. He is VERU famous.

Despite this he wanted to sleep with Mrs Anna Ardin? I really dont get this, was he drunk.

Did they rape him?

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 6, 2010 @ 6:17 e m
31.I know it´s a blow under the belt but…Julian Assange is not ugly. He is not poor. He is VERY famous.

Despite this he wanted to sleep with Mrs Anna Ardin? I really dont get this, was he drunk.

Did they rape him?

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 6, 2010 @ 6:20 e m
Någonstans i texten skriver du Amelia A. Menar du inte Anna A.?

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 11, 2010 @ 12:53 e m
Torstensson:

Nej, jag ”menar” Sofia W men texten är kronologisk och vid den tidpunkten trodde folk på Flashback den andra kvinnan var Amelia A. Men när piratpartiets Amelia.A via Twitter gjorde ett clintonskämt-svar ”i did not have sex with that man” så trodde folk inte längre det var hon. Eftersom Amelia.A är offentlig person så var ryktet att hon var en av de bägge kvinnorna tillräckligt för att rapportera om det – allt enligt massmedias behandling av Assange.

Kommentar av Erik — september 11, 2010 @ 1:44 e m
Läs och begrunda och sprid vidare..

http://oskyldig.wordpress.com/

Kommentar av Oskyldig — september 13, 2010 @ 7:00 f m
Här är ett annat fiasko för rättsväsendet.

http://oskyldig.wordpress.com/

Kommentar av godtyckligt — september 13, 2010 @ 10:11 f m
[…] […]

Pingback av Wikileaks Does it Again! — december 5, 2010 @ 5:31 e m
thats true if women say my husband raped me ,
they send to jail the man, that s a law in scandanevian, 47 years old women saying 20 man raped me. and she will got more many from the goverment realy

Kommentar av ark — december 5, 2010 @ 10:20 e m
[…] […]

Pingback av WikiLeaks cables expose Afghan and US contempt for British military — december 5, 2010 @ 11:28 e m
[…] Tyvärr har han bara sett början än! Han har ännu inte insett att Sverige är ett paradis för falskanmälare. Att i Sverige så hjälper samhället de som falskanklagar att slänga oskyldiga i fängelset. Att i Sverige så är rättssäkerhet inte så viktigt, speciellt inte i sexmål. […]

Pingback av Ett rättssystem som uppmuntrar lögner och politiskt manipulation | Medborgarperspektiv — september 21, 2011 @ 9:37 f m

Lämna en kommentar

So I guess you believe some people have carte blanche when it comes to rape charges? Strange…

Kommentar av Bo — september 1, 2010 @ 11:26 f m

Bo:

What the heck are you talking about? I have real rape victims among my own relatives. What do you think they feel about this crazy case taking priority over people being forced to suck…. and having to go down and….. under threat of knife and being beaten?

Compare the two and tell me what to tell them about this being the important of the two as they know one woman violated Assanges privacy after promising he could live in her flat and the other woman stalking him since watching him on TV.

I cant explain it, but DO TELL what I am to say to real rape victims when this case is being called a rape and given much more priority then theirs ever got – although they actuallt were forced – with violence and threats – to have sex.

Tell me, I can call them instantly and tell what you tell me. What makes this a rape compared to what happened to them?

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 11:32 f m

Interesting to note CNN is smearing not Assange as much as WikiLeaks by the phrasing ”WikiLeaks Rape Case”. Could be ‘Assange’ is not as well known, yet, the smear on WikiLeaks is maximized.

Hopefully this will bring attention the lack of rights for men not only in Sweden but more and more globally.

Could Assange make a statement with the police about how he had had a drink or so and possibly it was HE who was the victim of rape, according to the swedish definition ”sex while drunk”. Did she encapsulate his exterior genital while in fact he was having second toughts at least during some part of the act? But not being in a sober enough state to let her know this? That is rape on Assange according to Swedish Law.

I think men really need to start positioning themselves in the victim roles, for money and so that even women will want stop the state intrusion into sex life and the sentencing of innocent women and men.

Kommentar av Jack — september 1, 2010 @ 11:35 f m

By the way, anyone wanting to know who SW is need only to check for the girl in pink sweater here at 1210-1310 being more interested in taking pictures of Assange than listening what he is saying.

”What unfolded could be described as akin to the meeting of a groupie and a rockstar. The woman loitered outside the building before approaching a member of his entourage, who invited her to join a lunch at a modest local eatery called Bistro Boheme.”

Switch to a man doing this to a female-celeb and the man would be accused of being a stalker.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 11:50 f m

What a rude blond. I bet she chose an analog camera just to get noticed when taking pictures.
Click click, swosh noices constantly.

Kommentar av Andreas — september 1, 2010 @ 12:10 e m

Most people do not spend 1 minute taking pictures during a seminar, they take a couple of quick pictures and then are normal listeners again.

Sofia W clearly doesnt listen to Assange.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 12:26 e m

I can’t believe that this case hasn’t been closed yet. I am Swedish and I honestly don’t understand what is going on. Our legal system has weaknesses and now the world is seeing those problematic weaknesses. Incompetence and private agendas on the parts of prosecutors.

Kommentar av Saga — september 1, 2010 @ 12:48 e m

Sofia W

Vem ar det? Ar det den unga kvinnan som hade sex med Assange? Hur vet man att hon heter Sofia?

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 1, 2010 @ 12:51 e m

Lol must have had a sound bug in my brain. Because I kept hearing a analog camera noise. Now I don’t anymore and I see it is in fact an digital camera. Disregard my earlier comment. No idea what my brain did to me then.

Kommentar av Andreas — september 1, 2010 @ 12:54 e m

Yes, here we go again… Note that NONE of the Swedish newspapers allow comments or blog links on these articles (AB, Expressen, DN, SvD).

Kommentar av Matte Matik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:03 e m

Torstensson:

Sofia W är den andra yngre (27 år) kvinnan som anklagar Assange för våldtäkt-intevåldtäkt-kanske-vetinte-nu var det visst våldtäkt igen. Hon beskrivs i artikeln i Daily Mail (rosa tröja längst fram) och från den informationen kunde andra källor snabbt ta reda på hennes riktiga namn.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:05 e m

For our international guests. Sofia W, 27 is the younger woman accusing Assange, description in Daily Mail pink sweater, seated at first row (as well as pixled photo) made it easy to find out her name.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:06 e m

Since several english blogs now link this post I suggest we try use english when discussing the case. That was after all the reason the last long post was in english, the world is involved now. Lets make the most of it.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:08 e m

Director of Public Prosecution Ms Marianne Ny has decided on the request for review in the Assange matter.

The investigation concerning rape will be reopened.

– There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. Considering information available at present, my judgement is that the classification of the crime is rape. The basis for further considerations is not sufficient at the moment. More investigations are neccessary before a final decision can be made.

The investigation concerning molestation will be extended to include all allegations in the original police report.

– There is reason to believe that a crime has been committed. Based on the information available, the crimes in question come under the heading of sexual coercion and sexual molestation, respectively.

Director of Public Prosecution Marianne Ny will be leading the further investigations. She will be assisted by Deputy Chief Prosecutor Ms Erika Lejnefors.

– Due to the investigation and the persons involved in the matter, I cannot give more information concerning details in the investigation.

http://www.aklagare.se/In-English/

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 1:09 e m

Probably neither you nor your ”guru” Daily Mail was actually there to withness what really happened, were you?

So, until justice is revealed: wait with your remarks.

It looks really suspicious that people defend Mr Assange no-matter-what. This phenomenon on the contrary points in the direction of Mr Assange’s guilt.

Swedish rape legislation changed 2005 to give a broader range to the concept of ”rape”.

If not all Swedish prosecutors – or attorneys (Silbersky) – are updated on this change of the law, it is by no means anything to get upset about.

Silbersky is well-known in Sweden for defending our most heavy criminals. What he says should not be taken for ”facts”. Rather the other way around.

Kommentar av Sven Nyström — september 1, 2010 @ 5:57 e m

Interview in Expressen TV today:
http://tv.expressen.se/nyheter/inrikes/1.2118706/exklusivt-expressen-traffar-julian-assange

Kommentar av Matte Matik — september 1, 2010 @ 6:16 e m

So Mr S. Nyström…, innocence is guilt (by association)? What Silbersky says should be interpreted completely opposite?

It seems you are fluent in Newspeak (see Orwell, G. ”1984”). But perhaps it is doubleplusgood to incarcerate a person unheard, just in case he does to much crimethink…To even consider any thought not in line with the principles of Gendersoc is a crime. Doubting any of the principles of Gendersoc is a crime. All crimes begin with a thought. So, if you control thought, you can control crime.

Kommentar av Gurra — september 1, 2010 @ 6:34 e m

Sven Nyström:

”Probably neither you nor your ”guru” Daily Mail was actually there to withness what really happened, were you?”

Do you really think thats a real argument? No I wasnt there. But then I also was not at Pearl Harbor during the japanese bombing and that didnt stop my teacher from demanding I would know what happened. Thus you would criticize not this event, but the basis for the western system of knowledge. And would your system be better? Even if I were there, I could lie about what happened.

”So, until justice is revealed: wait with your remarks.”

Thats funny, you forget the assumption of innocence untill (if) proven guilty. Is Assange proven guilty? No! Thus we are in our full right to assume he is innocent. And if the victims were male, you would probably not even be here. Thus we see perfect example of what Warren Farrell et.al Calls ”Chivalry justice”

”It looks really suspicious that people defend Mr Assange no-matter-what.”

It doesnt matter what it ”looks like” this is not a fashion contest.

”This phenomenon on the contrary points in the direction of Mr Assange’s guilt.”

No, it doesnt. In fact it is no proven corrolation whatsoever between people defending you and guilt. Sometimes people defended this way are guilty, sometime they are innocent but this in itself tells you exactly… nothing!

”Swedish rape legislation changed 2005 to give a broader range to the concept of ”rape”.”

That would be an argument if IF you could show those changes having anything at all to do with this case. But since those changes specifically were about two things, low age (under 15 as in the Goran Lindberg case) and girls being helpless because of alcohol and narcotics (as in the kumla gangrape case)

All you really can do is hope I wouldnt know this. Clearly The 2005 changes have no impact on this case whatsoeveer.

”If not all Swedish prosecutors – or attorneys (Silbersky) – are updated on this change of the law, it is by no means anything to get upset about.”

Actually it would seem you are the one not updated on the changes. In fact you give no indication to even know what the actual changes 2005 were. Do you even know the reason for those changes were the Kumla rape case with ”horny syrians” and a woman drunk who had used narcotics as well?

”Silbersky is well-known in Sweden for defending our most heavy criminals. What he says should not be taken for ”facts”. Rather the other way around.”

Now you are just ridicolous. Lawyers of course defend the guilty AND the innocent. The idea Silbersky only defend the guilty appeared in pop culture due to statements by standup comedian Magnus Betner. If Magnus Betner is your idea of source on legal cases then your idea of justice probably is not too far from Mike Nifong´s if you are even aware who he is.

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 6:35 e m

You can not witness about what you have not seen.
No legislative process inte the world relies on second hand opinions.

Pearl Harbor: your knowledge about what happened there probably stems from eye witnesses reports.

You can never critizise an event. If it occured, it did. If not, it didn’t.

Well, you are free to put out any remarks you choose, of course. I just mean that it might hurt Mr Assange’s case.

The situation is, that Mr Assange is accused for approximately 3 crimes. But that does not mean that he is convicted. Mr Assange still has the right to defend himself.

If you do not trust Mr Assange to be able to do so, you could not express yourself any clearer than you already have done.

Why would Mr Assange need you to defend him if he was not guilty? Why would you defend him if you were not an eye witness? Do you believe in Santa, too?

2005 rape law changes: what you are referring to are supposedly two actual cases of when the law came to use, not the actual law itself. The law after 2005 also concerns other sex crimes of a lower degree than rape. If they may apply in this case – well, we do not know yet, do we?

Silbersky: Your assumptions about my ways of getting my information about Silbersky is very narrowing. Why would I have the same sources of information that you do? You see to have a very small perspective, where everything happening in the world is only those things that happen in YOUR world.

Please, don’t defend Mr Assange – if you do not want him to be convicted.

Kommentar av Sven Nyström — september 1, 2010 @ 7:11 e m

Sven Nyström,

You, my dear sir, scare me.

”don’t defend Mr Assange – if you do not want him to be convicted.”

According to The European Convention on Human Rights:

”Article 6
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.”

”Article 16

Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any … person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction on any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation…”

Mr Nyström, you are coming close to breaching Article 16.

Kommentar av Jack — september 1, 2010 @ 7:52 e m

Correction: 16 -> 17

Kommentar av Jack — september 1, 2010 @ 7:55 e m

”You can not witness about what you have not seen.”

As the Tito Beltran rape-case showed, clearly you CAN witness what you have not seen since several of the celeb-witnesses had seen nothing themselves. But maybe your point is second-hand witness only applies to testimony supporting the prosecution?

”No legislative process inte the world relies on second hand opinions.”

That would be the reason Tito Beltran was convicted of a rape nobody had seen? Again your claims are not supported by facts.

”Pearl Harbor: your knowledge about what happened there probably stems from eye witnesses reports.”

No, they are a mix of eye witnesses reports AND empirical/logical analysis (deduction and induction) since the idea of science is you cant really trust eye witness reports. You must check to see if what they claim logically supports what happened in that time frame.

This of course is what we have done with the Assange rape-case.

”You can never critizise an event. If it occured, it did. If not, it didn’t.”

Actually you can critizise events and people like ”Mythbusters” do so on regular basis.

”Well, you are free to put out any remarks you choose, of course. I just mean that it might hurt Mr Assange’s case.”

Thats kinda funny since the prosecution have no legal right to convict him on such a basis. Thus if they did, it would clearly be in violation of the law.

”The situation is, that Mr Assange is accused for approximately 3 crimes. But that does not mean that he is convicted. Mr Assange still has the right to defend himself.”

Mr Assange has nothing to defend himself from since no evidence whatsoever have been presented. Clearly this case will be about two witnesses who had plenty of time to coordinate before even going to the police.

”If you do not trust Mr Assange to be able to do so, you could not express yourself any clearer than you already have done.”

Its the system I do not trust. Too many Hilda-supporters with no wish for objectivity.

”Why would Mr Assange need you to defend him if he was not guilty?”

Because in case you have missed this ”small” detail, Mr Assange do not understand swedish.

”Why would you defend him if you were not an eye witness? Do you believe in Santa, too?”

Its called OSKULDSPRESUMTION, innocent utntil proven guilty in a court of law. Did you miss that part in school or something?

”2005 rape law changes: what you are referring to are supposedly two actual cases of when the law came to use, not the actual law itself.”

Actually, the Tumba case 2004 was the reason the law was changed. However the demands for the law to include ”särskilt utsatt tillstånd” was ”avvisade” vilket fick Madeleine Leijonhuvfud going bananas in SvD.

”The law after 2005 also concerns other sex crimes of a lower degree than rape. If they may apply in this case – well, we do not know yet, do we?”

After the law changes 2005, the number of reported rapes went skyhigh and the number of reported sexuallt tvång m.m. went down.

Had the law not been changed sexuellt tvång are estimated to be at 782% and rape at 562% The real numbers today after the change is sexuellt tvång at 224% and rapes at 1064%

”Silbersky: Your assumptions about my ways of getting my information about Silbersky is very narrowing.”

That doesnt mean what I said wasnt true. Before Betner made that joke, nobody made that claim, now everyone makes that claim. You are hardly original, people at Flabban talked the same way two days ago.

-Owwwww, why would Assange choose Silbersky, we thought he was innocent haha!

”Why would I have the same sources of information that you do?”

The same reason the people at Flashback said the same thing, the exact same thing as you do.

”You see to have a very small perspective, where everything happening in the world is only those things that happen in YOUR world.”

This is not a fashion show. What things seem like or look like are not important.

”Please, don’t defend Mr Assange – if you do not want him to be convicted.”

There are no LEGAL basis for such a claim. But then, the law never stopped Mike Nifong, maybe you hold the same opinion as he did?

Kommentar av Erik — september 1, 2010 @ 9:47 e m

Thanks Erik for following up this case.
I thought i could leave all this behind me thouogh i was very engaged in these matters a couple of years ago.
My feeling was that it was like screaming in vacuum, no one hears och cares among those whose got the power to change things that is wrong in rapecases.
Now I see so obvious all the cracks I saw before in many cases and It is hard not to care, though I know it is useless.

Good luck Erik, You are doing a very good job!

Kommentar av JD — september 2, 2010 @ 8:42 f m

That guy Sven Nyström is definately scary…

To all international readers: He does by all means n o t represent the public view of how the justice system shoudl work. He is either a left wing politician or a media represantative (that is synonmous with ”extreme left wing”).

The regular Swede does sometimes of course fall prey to the lynchmob mentality but normally, he or she is rather calm and analytical…

…well again that’s providing he or she is not left wing of course…

Kommentar av Lövet — september 2, 2010 @ 9:22 f m

Sven Nyström

You really have missed the point completely!

No one is defeinding Assange in articular as far as I can see. Everyone is defending the legal security.
Not only for Assanges but for everyones concern, including you Mr Nyström.

Next one called in as a suspect for rape could be you mr Sven Nyström and I am absolutely sure that in that case you will be very concerned about your own legal rights.

Kommentar av JD — september 2, 2010 @ 9:49 f m

No one is defeinding Assange in particular as far as I can see. Everyone is defending the legal security.
Not only for Assanges but for everyones concern, including you Mr Nyström.

Kommentar av JD — september 2, 2010 @ 9:51 f m

JD:

”Next one called in as a suspect for rape could be you mr Sven Nyström and I am absolutely sure that in that case you will be very concerned about your own legal rights.”

LMAO!

For some weird reason I think JD is spot on. We need guys like Sven Nyström themselves suspect of rape for this craziness in Sweden to end. How about sending him (and his family) purple envelopes Beatrice Ask way?

Kommentar av Erik — september 2, 2010 @ 10:57 f m

@JD Word,

…but all-in-all the failure of left wing extremists is their patological lach of empathy…

Kommentar av Lövet — september 3, 2010 @ 7:20 f m

The root cause of this pathology I think is to think about people only as collective entities, forgetting about the individual.

Kommentar av Musse Pig — september 3, 2010 @ 8:29 f m

When police is using rape-kit to ensure proof in these cases…
Could it not be fair to handle a sucide-kit for the Men that is suspected for these crimes?
It would for sure shorten the pain for those men that is innocent and also strengthen the proof that a crime has been committed when the suspect is out of game and won´t be able to tell his annoying, stupid story of innocense.

Kommentar av JD — september 3, 2010 @ 2:28 e m

I know it´s a blow under the belt but…Julian Assange is not ugly. He is not poor. He is VERU famous.

Despite this he wanted to sleep with Mrs Anna Ardin? I really dont get this, was he drunk.

Did they rape him?

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 6, 2010 @ 6:17 e m

31.I know it´s a blow under the belt but…Julian Assange is not ugly. He is not poor. He is VERY famous.

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 6, 2010 @ 6:20 e m

Någonstans i texten skriver du Amelia A. Menar du inte Anna A.?

Kommentar av Torstensson — september 11, 2010 @ 12:53 e m

Nej, jag ”menar” Sofia W men texten är kronologisk och vid den tidpunkten trodde folk på Flashback den andra kvinnan var Amelia A. Men när piratpartiets Amelia.A via Twitter gjorde ett clintonskämt-svar ”i did not have sex with that man” så trodde folk inte längre det var hon. Eftersom Amelia.A är offentlig person så var ryktet att hon var en av de bägge kvinnorna tillräckligt för att rapportera om det – allt enligt massmedias behandling av Assange.

Kommentar av Erik — september 11, 2010 @ 1:44 e m

Läs och begrunda och sprid vidare..

http://oskyldig.wordpress.com/

Kommentar av Oskyldig — september 13, 2010 @ 7:00 f m

Här är ett annat fiasko för rättsväsendet.

Kommentar av godtyckligt — september 13, 2010 @ 10:11 f m

[…] […]

Pingback av Wikileaks Does it Again! — december 5, 2010 @ 5:31 e m

thats true if women say my husband raped me ,
they send to jail the man, that s a law in scandanevian, 47 years old women saying 20 man raped me. and she will got more many from the goverment realy

Kommentar av ark — december 5, 2010 @ 10:20 e m

Pingback av WikiLeaks cables expose Afghan and US contempt for British military — december 5, 2010 @ 11:28 e m

[…] Tyvärr har han bara sett början än! Han har ännu inte insett att Sverige är ett paradis för falskanmälare. Att i Sverige så hjälper samhället de som falskanklagar att slänga oskyldiga i fängelset. Att i Sverige så är rättssäkerhet inte så viktigt, speciellt inte i sexmål. […]

Pingback av Ett rättssystem som uppmuntrar lögner och politiskt manipulation | Medborgarperspektiv — september 21, 2011 @ 9:37 f m

Aktivarum