Wikileaks: Heroes of free speech or dangerous subversives?

[belboid]

Mental.

English is a bit weird, yes, but I think mental is putting it a bit strong.

 

[Spymaster]

That said, the disection of the accusations and the endless speculation of the motives of the accusers is causing many to lose sight of concepts like justice.

This.

 

[detective-boy]

if something really is a danger to a country's security is it not sensible to order the publisher to cease and desist ...

How?

The whole point of the internet used in the way Assange uses it is that it is beyond the jurisdiction of any particular country.

 

[detective-boy]

I want them brought down.

And replaced by ...

 

[TopCat]

How?

The whole point of the internet used in the way Assange uses it is that it is beyond the jurisdiction of any particular country.

Thank fuck.

 

[detective-boy]

but denying him bail sees to suggest we're still playing along with the 'get assange' show, he is being treated differently to anyone else accused of rape in the country

(a) Lots of people get denied bail when charged with rape in this country. It is, in fact, the usual starting point for the consideration of the court
(b) He isn't charged with rape here. He is being held on an extradition warrant. There is a specific process which will now be gone through ... but it will NOT involve any sort of judgement as to guilt.

 

[detective-boy]

Also, it seems that in Swedish law sex which would have been consensual if had a condom been used is rape if one is not used - which makes sense.

Not really it doesn't.

 

[Citizen66]

Yeah you are right. It's about time I put him on ignore anyway.He makes my skin crawl.

Not in a sexual way I hope.

 

[kyser_soze]

And replaced by ...

Magik.

 

[Spymaster]

D-B,

Just out of interest, in the UK, how would OB treat a complaint from a woman who consents to sex with a condom, then get shagged by a bloke who removes it/breaks it without her knowledge?

 

[audiotech]

Over the years I've seen belboid out insult and abuse all of the phony 'internet hard-men' who've appeared here. There's been a number of them.

To add: Back to the subject matter.

 

[detective-boy]

Perhaps D-B can clarify the law on this one?

I've no idea what the Swedish law is.

In the UK for consent to be valid it must be "informed" consent - i.e. the person must know the nature of what they are consenting to and do so in the light of that knowledge. If consent was on condition that a condom was used and it was not, then it wouldn't be valid consent, certainly if the woman knew that a condom wasn't being worn (in fact, she'd just withdraw her consent, which can be done at any time in any event anyway). If she didn't a condom wasn't being worn it would be less clear. If she didn't know because there was some sort of deception practiced on her then it would be less clear. If a court were satisfied that the presence or otherwise of a condom was part of the "nature or purpose" of the act (and I would not like to guess which way the courts would go on that) then s.76 Sexual Offences Act 2003 would come into play and there would be a conclusive presumption that there was not consent. If they concluded otherwise any deception would be a matter which just impacted on consent generally and a matter for the jury.

 

[LiamO]

Over the years I've seen belboid out insult and abuse all of the phony 'internet hard-men' who've appeared here. There's been a number of them.

To add: Back to the subject matter.

So are you saying that Belboid is a real, genuine 'internet hard man'?

Is calling Belboid a 'real' IHM a term of abuse or is it actually something you do admiringly, with a glint of a tear in your eye?

 

[belboid]

lol, somehow I doubt he's saying either of those things liam, tho it was as badly phrased as many of Spymasters earlier posts.

 

[kyser_soze]

If she didn't know because there was some sort of deception practiced on her then it would be less clear

'Yes my love, those Spartan Invisibles' are ultra sensitive aren't they?'

 

[goldenecitrone]

 

[audiotech]

lol, somehow I doubt he's saying either of those things liam, tho it was as badly phrased...

Yes it was you loathsome creature.

 

[Spymaster]

I've no idea what the Swedish law is.

In the UK for consent to be valid it must be "informed" consent - i.e. the person must know the nature of what they are consenting to and do so in the light of that knowledge. If consent was on condition that a condom was used and it was not, then it wouldn't be valid consent, certainly if the woman knew that a condom wasn't being worn (in fact, she'd just withdraw her consent, which can be done at any time in any event anyway). If she didn't a condom wasn't being worn it would be less clear. If she didn't know because there was some sort of deception practiced on her then it would be less clear. If a court were satisfied that the presence or otherwise of a condom was part of the "nature or purpose" of the act (and I would not like to guess which way the courts would go on that) then s.76 Sexual Offences Act 2003 would come into play and there would be a conclusive presumption that there was not consent. If they concluded otherwise any deception would be a matter which just impacted on consent generally and a matter for the jury.

So what charge would the jury be considering? Rape?

 

[LiamO]

Yes it was you loathsome creature.

and this sentence could do with a comma or two as well - for clarity, like.

 

[DRINK?]

Can't see what all the fuss is about this bloke and his wiki leaking. They do tena ladies for men now, so whats the problem

 

[detective-boy]

Discussion about the founders sexual proclivities as reported in the media is perfectly in place here.

In fact, we should all be told everything about his sexual proclivities - why the secrecy?

* Wanders off to found WkiLeaksLeaks ... *

 

[Streathamite]

Why are so many people desparate to dismiss the allegations of molestation because he's the man of the minute?

for my part, because the timing and circumstances both reek to high heaven.

 

[detective-boy]

No-one has said that, as you know.

I don't "know" that at all.

In fact, I "know" the exact oppposite: YOU have said that.

 

[detective-boy]

why should anyone - you, me, anyone, subscribe to this official line uncritically, when all that we know is that it absolutely suits the purposes of those in power for us to do so?

Because it is patently obvious, and entirely beyond rational argument, that governments need to have (substantial numbers of) secrets for all sorts of entirely legitimate reasons. Whether that "suits the purposes of those in power" too is irrelevant.

 

[belboid]

Because it is patently obvious, and entirely beyond rational argument, that governments need to have (substantial numbers of) secrets for all sorts of entirely legitimate reasons.

there's nothing (or at least virtually nothing that has come out so far) in these leaks that really needed to be secret tho, is there? All diplomacy should be conducted out in the open, in my book.

 

[detective-boy]

So what charge would the jury be considering? Rape?

Yes, that would be the only relevant charge to consider.

 

[London_Calling]

The key for me about the allegations is the original Swedish prosecutor said there was insufficient evidence - that can only mean one thing in a claim like this; no spunk - she has no evidence. Sorry, but that's what it boils down to; her word against his and she was asleep.

You have to take the allegations seriously of course, but this also has very aspect of a classic smear as well.

Really shit, authority bias, reporting by the BBC last night, ITN were much more balanced.

 

[detective-boy]

there's nothing (or at least virtually nothing that has come out so far) in these leaks that really needed to be secret tho, is there? All diplomacy should be conducted out in the open, in my book.

I've commented from the outset that much of what has come out has no valid reason for being secret in the first place.

I can't agree that all diplomacy should be conducted in the open though - likesfish has commented about the discussions with the IRA, I have mentioned the stuff about Chinese officials and their apparently laid back approach to the idea of a unified Korea, run by the South which was amongst the leaks. None of this is helpful out in the open. Anyone involved in any negotiation will tell you that there is a time and a place for revealing your hand.

 

[detective-boy]

- that can only mean one thing in a claim like this; no spunk - she has no evidence.

Absolute, total, complete and utter bollocks (even if that is what the prosecutor said).

 

[London_Calling]

The allegation is unprotected sex while she was asleep. The chief prosecutor said there was no case to answer. It can't mean anything else.