Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bruce Banner

Julian Assange Rape Allegations.

Recommended Posts

Case was just hit by an anti tank missile.

Textmessages found say that the 'victims' discussed this for 'economic advantage' and for revenge.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8311589/Julian-Assange-extradition-hearing-womans-text-messages-showed-she-wanted-revenge.html

Judge Howard Riddle, the chief magistrate for Westminster, reserved judgment in the case and is expected to give his ruling next week.

I think erranta needs to be told about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Case was just hit by an anti tank missile.

Textmessages found say that the 'victims' discussed this for 'economic advantage' and for revenge.

http://www.telegraph...ed-revenge.html

Shock horror. Birds are apparently mentalist vindictive vengueful psychos.

Not exactly an exclusive. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Case was just hit by an anti tank missile.

Textmessages found say that the 'victims' discussed this for 'economic advantage' and for revenge.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8311589/Julian-Assange-extradition-hearing-womans-text-messages-showed-she-wanted-revenge.html

If the evidence was that significant the judge would have dismissed the application, I reckon. They may well have decided to exploit the situation for profit but that in its self doesn't mean that he didn't do the crime. It just makes the women somewhat morally suspect.

If the text evidence were more inclined to demonstrate that they had actually conspired to lie about a crime having taken place then that would be far more significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the evidence was that significant the judge would have dismissed the application, I reckon. They may well have decided to exploit the situation for profit but that in its self doesn't mean that he didn't do the crime. It just makes the women somewhat morally suspect.

If the text evidence were more inclined to demonstrate that they had actually conspired to lie about a crime having taken place then that would be far more significant.

So if these allegations are true, could these women actually be prosecuted - perverting the course of justice (or something like that)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if these allegations are true, could these women actually be prosecuted - perverting the course of justice (or something like that)...

In January 4 women went to prison in the UK for lying about it..... I spotted them on my news trawls when I had sleeping problems. Oddly though the antirape organisations were infuriated at the idea of somebody who had made a false allegation being imprisoned in each and every case, Nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In January 4 women went to prison in the UK for lying about it..... I spotted them on my news trawls when I had sleeping problems. Oddly though the antirape organisations were infuriated at the idea of somebody who had made a false allegation being imprisoned in each and every case, Nuts.

A man's name is damaged forever, if they've been completely cleared of rape, whereas the woman who deliberately made those wrong allegations can still claim anonymity...is this right? We don't want woman to be put off reporting rape, but it seems innocent men get tarnished even if they've done nothing wrong...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A man's name is damaged forever, if they've been completely cleared of rape, whereas the woman who deliberately made those wrong allegations can still claim anonymity...is this right?

Yup EVEN if they are convicted of making a false allegation/ perveting course of justice they still cannot be named for legal reasons.... which is total BS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup EVEN if they are convicted of making a false allegation/ perveting course of justice they still cannot be named for legal reasons.... which is total BS.

I think the Judge can, but only in extreme circumstances..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup EVEN if they are convicted of making a false allegation/ perveting course of justice they still cannot be named for legal reasons.... which is total BS.

Do they get put on the CRB list?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the evidence was that significant the judge would have dismissed the application, I reckon. They may well have decided to exploit the situation for profit but that in its self doesn't mean that he didn't do the crime. It just makes the women somewhat morally suspect.

If the text evidence were more inclined to demonstrate that they had actually conspired to lie about a crime having taken place then that would be far more significant.

The judge may not have had the option to dismiss; from the report, these alleged text messages were not produced in court, Assange's lawyers merely testified that the messages existed, without providing the exact content of the messages nor context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The judge may not have had the option to dismiss; from the report, these alleged text messages were not produced in court, Assange's lawyers merely testified that the messages existed, without providing the exact content of the messages nor context.

That sounds awfully like the standard process for a rape allegation to me..:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds awfully like the standard process for a rape allegation to me..:rolleyes:

Not quite; the lawyers evidence is hearsay. The victim of an alleged rape testifies themself, and can be cross-examined.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what is the definition of rape in this case? I read that the alleged offence would not have been considered to be rape in most countries. My twenty something daughter commented that "it looks like she consented but then didn't enjoy it".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In January 4 women went to prison in the UK for lying about it..... I spotted them on my news trawls when I had sleeping problems. Oddly though the antirape organisations were infuriated at the idea of somebody who had made a false allegation being imprisoned in each and every case, Nuts.

The ani-rape organisations should be celebrating the fact that someone who has made fictional rape allegations has gone to prison. The reasons why are too blindingly obvious to point out but if these people can't see them they really should be questioning their motivations and/or sanity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A man's name is damaged forever, if they've been completely cleared of rape, whereas the woman who deliberately made those wrong allegations can still claim anonymity...is this right? We don't want woman to be put off reporting rape, but it seems innocent men get tarnished even if they've done nothing wrong...

I think the anonymity thing disappears if they are convicted. Not 100% sure, it may be at the discretion of the court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The judge may not have had the option to dismiss; from the report, these alleged text messages were not produced in court, Assange's lawyers merely testified that the messages existed, without providing the exact content of the messages nor context.

If they weren't produced at court then that sounds somewhat sus to me. Why mention them as being potentially case-breaking if you aren't prepared to produce them for the court?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what is the definition of rape in this case? I read that the alleged offence would not have been considered to be rape in most countries. My twenty something daughter commented that "it looks like she consented but then didn't enjoy it".

We did a long thread on this around Christmas time. The allegations certainly could be rape in most counties. Also, it's worth remembering that the reason for his extradition is so that the Swedish police can interview him to ascertain the details as to precisely what went on - although it's difficult to see why that can't be done here or even by video-link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We did a long thread on this around Christmas time. The allegations certainly could be rape in most counties. Also, it's worth remembering that the reason for his extradition is so that the Swedish police can interview him to ascertain the details as to precisely what went on - although it's difficult to see why that can't be done here or even by video-link.

Which is precisely why the whole thing is suspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is precisely why the whole thing is suspect.

That one fact alone does not make it suspect. It's an unanswered question, to be sure, but that in its self does not mean that there is anything untoward going on. I suspect that there is a legitimate legal reason as to why he can't be interviewed here or the Court would probably not be entertaining the extradition application. What that is though is anyones guess. Of course, anyone wanting to keep things looking suspect (for instance, to lend weight to Assange's claims that it's politically motivated) wouldn't go about publiciseing this reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That one fact alone does not make it suspect. It's an unanswered question, to be sure, but that in its self does not mean that there is anything untoward going on. I suspect that there is a legitimate legal reason as to why he can't be interviewed here or the Court would probably not be entertaining the extradition application. What that is though is anyones guess. Of course, anyone wanting to keep things looking suspect (for instance, to lend weight to Assange's claims that it's politically motivated) wouldn't go about publiciseing this reason.

If it was answerable, then you can be sure the answer would already have been given in the media by those seeking extradition and their cheer squad. To my knowledge, it hasn't been answered. That Assange made himself available in Sweden for interview for a couple of months before leaving, got the okay to leave and then this extradition request arises at a later stage suggests that something is up. Surely if the case was deemed serious at the time he would have been interviewed toot sweet. He wasn't, ergo there has been some form of political (in the broadest sense of that word) intervention at some level.

As to the court entertaining the extradition, just because their might be multiple legal options it doesn't mean that one side cannot attempt to apply for a ruling to force a particular one.

Regardless of what one thinks of Assange, there is a whiff about this extradition request when the temporal context of events is taken into consideration. Surely you don't not interview someone accused of a serious sexual assault for 10 weeks and allow them to leave the country and then decide you just have to have him extradited back to you without some sort of political (and therefore suspect) interference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.