No. Stuff was leaked about it, including the names of the women involved. Distasteful and wrong, no doubt, but that did happen. I can't be arsed going over it again. Touching faith in various legal system being shown here.
Do you really want you comments from the last thread bringing in? You've mentioned it twice now. I will if you like.
Who here is placing faith in legal systems?
By whom does it look like he's being set up?
It is for me. The extradition and European warrant systems are rotten in any case - as a broader point - nobody should ever be extradited on the say-so of a prosecution lawyer. That applies to everyone. But setting that aside, the charges were originally dropped, have now been reinstated and are being pursued in a strange way. I don't know if he's been set up - if I had to stake my life on it, I'd say that it looks like he has, though. In which case, he's right to do all he can to avoid extradition. Of all the arguments on this thread, the one that says 'if he's innocent, he should go to Sweden to clear his name' strikes me as the most naive of the lot.
What evidence have you seen and what of it leads you to this conclusion?
Because what? Sweden is notorious for unfair trials? Because rape accused can't get a fair trial? Or because he's being set up by the Swedish authorities, and the whole Swedish legal system is in on it?
Assange probably knows more on this than any of us. He himself knows whether he had sex with someone who was sleeping, without a condom. If he knows he did this, he must also know that this is what he's being prosecuted for. If he knows all this and still says he's got no case to answer then he is not deserving of our respect.
The thing is, in this case the precautionary principle can easily take over. If the chance of being shipped off to the USA is only 0.01 per cent I can't really blame him for not taking it.
Well, that brings us back to establishing the moment the fear beset him.
That's his views. We're talking about the muppets on here who've offered a bit more in terms of why he's right to resist going to sweden (who now think that he should have all along)
Indeed. And relying on ignorance about Sweden.
It must have been when he was accused of rape and molestation, especially when the case was reopened. Which goes back to my earlier point, that if he himself knows he did sexually assault people, then he's guilty of cooking up a big ego-defence.
smmudge did - conclusively.
Taking Assange's position, he could feel that Sweden has launched a prosecution against him, hence elements in Sweden must be in the vanguard of a Western attempt to take him in.
Exactly.
Plenty of people are willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Likewise lots of people here in Sweden are willing to give the women's statements credibility.
The thing about the benefit of the doubt, is that the more he does and says the more he seems to erase doubt. He's doing himself no favours at all. I'm not going to repeat myself and others ad nauseam, but there is no coherence in saying he feared extradition from Sweden to the US, then coming to the UK.
