Assange has prompted a troubling double standard

marley says:

07:03am | 10/12/10

From what I’ve read, no one is suggesting that Assange raped the women - at least not in the sense that our Criminal Code refers to rape.  Whether he committed a sexual assault under the apparently very broad definitions in the Swedish criminal code is another matter.  So, I’m not sure that “trauma” would necessarily have to have been involved. 

My sense of this is that what he did might have violated Swedish law, but wouldn’t have been considered sexual assault in most other countries.  But who really knows?

Peter says:

08:58am | 10/12/10

@ marley

You’re wrong - sex with a sleeping woman is certainly a criminal offence in NSW, at least.

Ironside says:

09:05am | 10/12/10

TChong, these accusations have been investigated since before the latest batch of leaks. How can you possibly say the accusations are manufactured. From what I understand he was having consensual sex, the condom broke, the woman asked him to stop, he didn’t stop. Now its far from a clear cut case of Rape, but its certainly worse than a footballer having consensual group sex. While JA is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, so too are the victims entitled to be treated as truthful until it is proven they have lied. Don’t let your rampant anti Americanism and support of wikileaks blind you to the real issue. What is more likely? That the CIA and US state department have pressured the Swedish government who have in turn pressured the independent public prosecutor to pursue a false charge through Interpol (especially since most Europeans don’t much like Americans and there is obviously going to be a risk of it all coming out on the internet if it’s a stitch up) or is it more likely that JA who fled Sweden for the UK after the charges were first made is simply using the notoriety of wikileaks as a smokescreen to attempt to paint himself as a victim? Occam’s Razor would suggest that he is more likely to be guilty than not, although weather there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt is debateable. I understand you’re a left wing apologist, and forum troll but please don’t mindlessly sprout rubbish just because it is anti American, actually take a look at the facts.

Phill says:

09:13am | 10/12/10

It wasn’t rape as we would see it.  In Swedan unprotected sex is classified as rape.  This is what he is accused of.  Personally I think that just belittles genuine rape victims.

Apostle says:

10:18am | 10/12/10

Rape in Australia (code or case law state in conjunction with Criminal Code Act maybe), I would say would be “sex without consent of the other party”. A sleeping woman cannot give consent and rape can occur if a woman withdraws consent for a split second during the act.

It is an interesting question about the condom here. As I said, consent withdrawn is all that is required for rape. Maybe if a woman only consents to sex with a condom on (in Australia) and then the man persists with sex despite a breakage, then it could technically be rape if the woman in her does not want sex without a condom at any moment.  However, if the case is that the condom breaks and she initially only wanted sex with a condom but then changes her mind and agrees in her mind to continue with the sexual act (without one moment of lack of consent), then that is not rape.

Remember rape can be “silent”, the victim need not verbalise her not wanting sex or lack of consent. It’s all in the mind even if “conduct” could maybe used against her in evidence.

Well that is what I got taught in a law school in a central Australian state, albeit a few years ago now.

As for the Assange situation, well, rape cases are always victim’s word versus accused’s word. It’s always very line ball. Given Assange’s new found fame and his current situation, it does tilt the matter in his favour but that does not deny that rape could have occurred. Hopefully, the judge who decides this matter if it is to reach court is an impartial judge.

PaulB says:

10:30am | 10/12/10

This is all theatre to keep Assange’s name in the Press and convince people that he is some kind of opposition warrior.  If this were the real deal the media would be pointedly ignoring it as it does with every real leak of real information since 911 and probably long before.

Thre Score and Ten says:

10:30am | 10/12/10

So unprotected sex = rape. Then that follows that the birth rate in Sweden is zero.

Joan says:

11:50am | 10/12/10

The mass international hysteria associated with Assange is ludicrous- the world gone beserk… Assange`s meglomania seems to have caught on and spread via the internet like some SARS virus.-  Assange a cause celebre with Geoffrey Robertson abandoning holidays to rush back and save Assange from doom… facing up to Swedish law and accusations by women., yet others signing letters of protests. What a joke…. meanwhile the leaks that came with a pop now just a fizzle like some flat champagne…. the latest dribble about Senator Bob Brown (yawn - even leaks don’t make this guy interesting) in the Age today. ...expect the rest to get flatter as the days go on.  As for Assange the `freedom fighter` now that`s a laugh the guy with a Swiss Bank account who never got his hands dirty or bloodied….  Assange is no Che Geuevera,  Assange is just a leak. . now snivelling for Australian Consular support… Assange too scared to face his accusors…. this guy is no freedom fighter….he`s just a meglomaniac leak.

acotrel says:

04:25am | 11/12/10

‘The problem with these particular allegations is that they seem totally manufactured’

If they are manufactured, the probable intent is to provide credibility for Wikileaks!  I have no liking for Mark Arbib, but the recent leak about his activities shows the potential for the leaker to target any public figure anywhere in the world, and discredit or destroy trust in them.  As much as I would like to believe that Wikileaks is providing ‘the story, behind the story’, it’s just too good to be true, and we could be being sold a bill of goods, by people who themselves want to manipulate.  The claim that the leaks have come of the US adds credibility.  If they were supposed to have come out of MI5, I’d be certain someone was playing games.  I suggest we are now living in dangerous times, the riots in the UK indicate the system is under threat.  Wikileaks could be somebody’s way of heading off or shaping change?  I suggest we should take the whole matter with a grain of salt, and be careful of accepting the leaks at face value.

Mosaic says:

08:19am | 13/12/10

How about for once we allow both the accused and the accusers due process to be followed through the courts of the land where the alleged
Offence/ s took place. Without distraction due to whom the people are or are not. If a law has been broken in a sovereign country the perpetrator should face the appropriate ,legally legitament sentence, as long as it is not the death penalty. After that knock yourselves out with international conspiracy theories and possible wiki espionage

Helen says:

11:23am | 13/12/10

“Phill”:
“In Swedan [sic] unprotected sex is classified as rape.  This is what he is accused of.  Personally I think that just belittles genuine rape victims.”

It might if there was any truth in it. Unfortunately we can have access to information until the cows come home, but if we have an uneducated readership who are suckers for urban myths and factoids, it’s of little use.

Henry Innis says:

02:46pm | 13/12/10

@Ironside. Allegations were investigate, and then dropped. US diplomatic officials meet with Swedes inside their embassy 1 day after the leaks are announced. Charges relaid a day after that. Interpol arrest warrant issued 2 days after that.

Does that not smell fishy to you?

Zed says:

09:20am | 11/12/10

Yeah but “feminism” has turned itself into half-hearted narcissism. Its only gone halfway in 40 years, even with affirmative action and outspoken women. Is it going to take another 40 years to become equal citizens or should women stop whining and fully engage the system wholeheartedly like Wikileaks has done? Troubling double standards anyone?

Andrew says:

07:26am | 10/12/10

I do wonder how there can be a case to answer unless these women have suffered some demonstrable harm. There reported behaviour after the alleged offenses would seem to speak against this.

Tim says:

07:51am | 10/12/10

Andrew,
don’t you know that these women’s behaviour after the event was just a mask for the real pain that they were feeling inside.
They were suffering from having been used and abused by a high profile person who used his charms and power to trick them into sleeping with them.

Bobster says:

01:54pm | 10/12/10

@ Tim, if you can’t use charm, power or profile to pick up without being accused of rape then Mick Jagger and Gene Simmons are two of the most heinous criminals the world has ever seen.

A Dose of Reality says:

12:24am | 11/12/10

POST @ Marian Dalton:

You miss the point - Geoffrey Robertson, a noted human rights lawyer and activist,  is defending because of the obvious. 

Belief in this “sexual assault” claim (that was previously explored by the Swedish police and dismissed) has nothing to do with it.

If there is a country in Europe that will extradite Assange to the US it is Sweden.

The US establishment has openly called for his assassination.  The US has very dodgy “national security” laws which will see him totally without rights - and a particularly unsavoury recent history regarding the application of those laws.

Andrew` says:

07:54am | 10/12/10

Read again, Colonel of Misinformation. He is not being charged with rape.

Jecks says:

09:44am | 10/12/10

The Amercian’s only have themselves to blame for the anti-Americanism sweeping the world at the moment ... This is what happens when you have a country that doesn’t understand what the rest of the world is thinking or wants , they just try to dictate ... If Amercian’s want to restore their credibility of the world then they have to start with the own government and the way they deal with other countries ... The worlds see Amercian’s as arrogant , self serving sheep easliy lead by their own govt and the media .. Its too bad , as Amercia has lots to offer the world and is a great country to visit.

Bobster says:

11:12am | 10/12/10

If they wanted justice to be done, they would have done something sooner.

These allegations have been around for months, but somehow only became critical two days after the latest round of leaks.

I’m all for justice being done, but this situation has ensured that it will never be seen to be done in this case.

There are too many alterior motives (perceived or real) to make any charges believable.

KH says:

07:47am | 10/12/10

Recent reports have eluded to an agreement being made between Sweden and the USA to get him extradited to the USA - on what charges is anyones guess - in most democratic countries you can’t pass laws retrospectively, or just make up a law to get one person who has pissed you off.  Britain don’t have any reason to charge the guy, so this is a way to get to him by stealth.

As I have noted before, these ‘charges’ are ludicrous by standards in Britain, Australia, and yes, even the USA.  In one case, both parties agree they were there consensually, and the condom broke.  There is no argument, other than the broken condom turning an innocuous encounter into ‘rape’ under Swedish law.  Does this sound like something that warrants international arrest warrants, Interpol and QC representation?  There is no hypocrisy - equality is equality - and not all feminists sit on the left - don’t generalise.

Peetme says:

08:19am | 10/12/10

Couldn’t agree more with you Macca. I couldn’t care less about the bucketing twerps like Rudd, Arbib and those of that ilk are copping, but you are right.

A little more clarity here would also show that hacking is in fact a criminal offence in most countries and that fact sure is not a CIA conspiracy.

AdamC says:

08:39am | 10/12/10

Exactly, Macca. However odd these charges may be to our more, shall we say, knockabout attitude to sexuality, when in Sweden ...

And, of course, lefties have a long history of excusing even the most egregious abuses committed by their idols - Che Guevara, anyone?

I find all this conspiracy nonsense about Sweden being an entrepot to Gitmo for Assange quite nonsensical. If the US can make a case that warrants Assange’s extradition, say for espionage or something, they can do it just as effectively in the UK as they can in Sweden. Given how alien Sweden’s justice system seems to be to Anglophone eyes, I would have thought they would prefer to seek his extradition from London.

Macca says:

09:12am | 10/12/10

@KH, I agree that the claims of sexual assault by our standards are extreme, but they are the liberal laws of Sweden, and if he believes he is innocent he should have no concerns facing the charges.

The response from the governments, including international warrants etc. has been heavy handed and clumsy at best. However that doesn’t excuse him from trial in the country he was charged.
I never said all feminists where left, I was merely alluding to Virginia Wolf and some of her peers. And the reason I argue that they are hypocritical is because defending a man charged with sexual assault against two women in another country is against the very ideals of feminism.

Macca says:

09:15am | 10/12/10

I would also like to add that the US, and any other government, should be vary wary of making a matyr out of him.

I hate to say it, but Kevin Rudd seems to be handling it pretty well. It’s not a big deal. Secrets get out sometimes. The actions of Wikileaks are no different to that of the BBC regarding FIFA, or that of Laurie Oaks during the Federal election.

Down play it, ignore it, sweep it under the carpet and move on.

Charging, Arresting and Extraditing Assange will do the US no good

clarity says:

09:54am | 10/12/10

Peetme “hacking is in fact a criminal offence”

No one has accussed the WikiLeaks founder of Hacking. Wikileaks are the recipient of information obtained through neferious means, just as News Media are. Do you think Rupert should be fearful too?

TC says:

10:23am | 10/12/10

He answered all questions while in Sweden when the allegations were first made. He requested and received permission to leave the country, and ensured that the Swedish authorities were always able to contact him while he was in Britain if further questioning was necessary.

When the cables started to be released, the Swedes decided they wanted him back. Having been told he could leave, he refused to fly back on his own dollar. Tell me, how often is Interpol sicked on someone who has only been “accused” of a sexual assault?

Peetme says:

11:13am | 10/12/10

So you have information that the charges are bogus do you What a joke? Did you get this from Wikileaks?  Irrespective of your source, I would think that the proper place to determine this is within Sweden’s court system, just as it would be in this country and as Macca has pointed out earlier, if Assange believes he is innocent, he should face the music.

KH says:

09:06am | 10/12/10

they aren’t ‘changing their minds’ as you put it - read the articles relating to this - it is some arcane law about unprotected sex being ‘rape’ - it seems neither of the complainants are claiming they weren’t there consensually…..... One of the complaints was made ages ago, and was dismissed for lack of evidence, whilst Assange was in Sweden, and he was then allowed to leave the country.

Marilyn G says:

09:10am | 10/12/10

The fact that Gillard was so quick to act like a fool and condemn and not look at the legal/diplomatic obligation towards an Australian makes me think she is part of this conspiracy. Someone should really investigate her.

Terry Hayles says:

12:34pm | 12/12/10

I disagree entirely. The leaks now appearing show a dark picture of the U.S. government, citing cover-ups, duplicity, abusing human rights and freedoms etc. The current situation with Assange is seen by many as further evidence of U.S. “dirty tricks’ to silence him and wikileaks. We SHOULD be looking at this matter very closely and asking WHY are there so many anomalies, inconsistencies and legal irregularites.
America’s reputation as a fighter for truth, justice and liberty (including freedom of speech) is now in tatters and they are being seen as only to willing to break laws, harass and persecute people who expose their nefarious dealings.

Tombowler says:

10:06am | 10/12/10

Totally agree with you ZS….

I am at a total loss to how ‘misinformed fat nerd with laptop’ translates to ‘reliable source’

I had a read and the charges specifically state

‘Used body weight to hold victim down to force sexual intercourse’

Doesn’t sound like a ‘broken condom’ thingy to me…....

It is shocking that some tardo woman thinks that being a ‘feminist’ somehow qualifies her to assess the veracity of the rape charges. I fail to see why only a feminist should be offended or disgusted by rape or why simply through virtue of feminism one is endowed with the prescient knowledge of the outcome of this case.

If Assange thinks that his little one man crusade transcends the petty rules regarding sexual intercourse and consent then he deserves to burn on that basis alone. Having some website doesn’t preclude one from the usual treatment of the law.

The other major error in the arguments of those who arguing incoherently and vitriolically about conspiracies and the CIA is that they point to the dropping/reinstatement of the charges as incontrovertible ‘evidence’.

Sweden has a robust legal system that enshrines certain rights for the alleged victim. One of these rights is to ‘appeal’ when a prosecutor declines to take your case. This sort of thing occurs frequently and without fanfare.

Many an ill-informed, over-excited blogger has frantically tapped away about how they know for a fact that the case is bogus based on their ‘evidence’ (generally recycled from other semi-literate blogs and then reported by lazy journalists from some tabloid as fact) These ill-informed bloggers will pepper their opus with out-of-context-legal terms like ‘miscarriage of justice’, ‘justiciable’ or ‘international norms’ for good measure.

Shama says:

10:22am | 10/12/10

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11949341

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336291/Wikileaks-Julian-Assanges-2-night-stands-spark-worldwide-hunt.html#ixzz17PsSFVeE

ZSRenn says:

11:10am | 10/12/10

@ Shama Thanks for the links. But the BBC article is a time line of events it does not mention broken condoms or a farewell party. Yes it mentions the charges were dropped and that through appeal were reinstated which is anybody’s right. It says nothing about Assange being allowed to leave and sounds more like he fled. So I will cross 2 off my list. Thanks

As for the Pendleberry article: Don’t you think this is a little one sided with the author reporting from sources unnamed and news paper stories unsubstantiated. No interview was held with the women and it comes across as his opinion. Still no mention of broken condoms or farewell parties and it was written on November 7 before the charges were outlined. It would probably be a good idea also to look at his other writings. They are all anti-US or British Governments. Pendelberry’s article seems to be a trial by reporter with an axe to grind

All I am asking for is to let justice take its course.

Shama says:

11:47am | 10/12/10

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/24/assange-wikileaks-swedish-prosecutors-charges

You can get as many links as you want really, the case has been around for long and some of the tweets etc have disappeared and now there is just a swirl of rumours.  But that’s not the point.

The Daily Mail article is an opinion, as with anything else you have to filter out stuff.

Everyone understands that it is upto the courts, the speculation is because it is murky territory and also coincides with two leaks - which may be a coincidence. Its not a Polanski case where the person was underage.

Persisting with it certainly does remove attention from wikileaks itself and the content of the cables though.

Shama says:

11:53am | 10/12/10

Today in Reuters

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6B669H20101207

OK I will stop now, other things to read.

ZSRenn says:

12:44pm | 10/12/10

From the Reuters article

“according to several people in contact with his entourage at the time.”

not secound hand but third hand or even fourth hand inuendo not submissable in any court of law.

Can’t you see my point?

You probably cant as you missed this very important fact in the story and take everything that is said in his defence as coming from the horses mouth.

ZSRenn says:

01:03pm | 10/12/10

@ Shama I think the Guardian article tends to prove what an arse Assange really is. They only wanted him to have a health check to see if he had STD’s but he refused. I think waiting around for up to 6 months to find out if you had HIV would make you rethink your softly softly approach and create a growing fear and this alone could be considered sexual abuse in my book.

Shama says:

10:33am | 10/12/10

Or is journalism really dead? - It is

Though you can read the Guardian or NYT for something more substantial.

Punch readers apparently do not eyeball news on Pfizer or Shell or Burma or Kosovo in wikileaks so they are fed on a constant diet of “he said, she said”.

AdamC says:

11:22am | 10/12/10

Alf, I read the Der Spiegel story you link to. Like with most of the leaks (at least thus far) they just don’t contain much in the way of juicy, novel information. So the US and China spoke to each other about the COP15 conference before it happened? Is anyone remotely surprised by this? Just as importantly, is there anything illegitimate about it? I don’t think there is. It’s called diplomacy.

Which is the problem with these leaks. They will discourage open communication among the diplomats of the world. That is a bad thing.

John Smythe says:

12:27pm | 10/12/10

Adam, you don’t see those as simple proof that he has official documents?

JA is playing the game well. Baiting them with “trivial” cables, all the while holding out on other more important ones. The US is biting pretty hard on these as they are. Given his current situation, I would hope he is saving some as an “Ace up the sleeve.”

So, some of the cables aren’t really Tom Clancy material….do you actually find it acceptable that the US is trying to get passwords, personal information and retinal scans of people in the UN? Or is that trivial as well?

What was it 250K cables or 150K reportedly handed over to Wikileaks? Do you expect them all to be Hollywood Spy Movie level?

Here’s another angle….if I’m at work and I send emails to my mates saying how person xyz annoys the crap out of me, I can be in breach of company email usage. Is this not the same reasoning behind releasing official cables with essentially the same gripes against other members of the UN etc.?

ZSRenn says:

02:39pm | 10/12/10

Did you even read the article. Great way to make a fool of yourself.
In your huge monologue you proved exactly what the author was saying about these events including her surprise at how he is being assisted by the feminists.

I think you are the one spewing the rhetoric handed out in the save Assange handbook.

Richard says:

12:08pm | 11/12/10

You’re the one looking foolish ZSRenn with your unreasonable hatred and prejudice against a man you’ve probably never even met. Jemima Khan and Naomi Wolf spoke up in defence of freedom, liberty, justice, common-sense and opposition to tyranny, the author is an idiot to question them, and so are you.

Bobster says:

01:56pm | 10/12/10

Fine Steve, if you don’t want to know what’s going on then stop reading and watching the news. The rest of us are very interested.

Marie says:

11:58am | 13/12/10

Ever had your kids walk in on you while you were at it? Did you keep going because your mind was ‘not in a thinking capacity’ or did you stop immediately due to the change in circumstances? If a woman asks a man to stop because a condom broke or she doesn’t like what he’s doing it can be done quite easily. There are no excuses to keep going. To force a person to continue when they ask you to stop is sexual assault.

Bev says:

12:12pm | 13/12/10

Ever heard of the Australian 30 second rape case?  A man in Perth was convicted and jailed for raping his wife’s friend (living in their house) when he didn’t stop within thirty seconds of her asking to.  Turns out the whole thing was concocted by the two women to get rid of him. His conviction was subsequently overturned.

Anne says:

05:20pm | 13/12/10

@Bev. Count to 30. That’s quite a long time to be forcing yourself onto a person without their consent. We need to get over the myth that men just can’t help themselves once in the act. It’s just blatant excuse making and is no justification for sexual assault. If someone says stop, game over. It’s really very simple.

Bev says:

10:04pm | 13/12/10

@Anne While in one way I agree with you these situations are not black and white as you infer.  If a woman is feeling pain and she said so most men would stop and if they didn’t the deserve to be charged. That aside consider she said yes and then no, not before but during intercourse, such a woman would I consider has no feelings at all for the man she is with. Sparking the question. Why did she let it get this far and is she seeking to humilate and/or hurt him? If so even though the law is on her side I would consider her dispicable. Further such abrupt withdrawal can cause a medical condition called “blue balls” this is where the build up of sperm ready for ejeculation cut the circulation to the scrotum causing intense pain sometimes requiring medical intervention and no mastubation is not possible due to the pain.