Wikileak's sex flounders charges leaked.

[Freiwillige]

Oh the Irony. But after reading the charges I had to LOL. Are Swede's that up tight? The charges are laughable and would hardly constitute rape in my opinion.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110204/...ileaks_assange

[frau kaleun]

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

and would hardly constitute rape in my opinion.

Where the law defines rape as "sex without consent," initiating sexual intercourse with a partner who is unconscious and therefore cannot have consented to it is rape, the end.

[Dowly]

So, the woman let him continue the act in BOTH occasions and is now screaming RAPE RAPE?

Rrrright...

[gimpy117]

Originally Posted by Dowly

So, the woman let him continue the act in BOTH occasions and is now screaming RAPE RAPE?

Rrrright...

It happens a lot actually...but I think it's extra suspicious in this case..especially when it was thrown out but re-instated by somebody up the ladder.

but then again, you piss off world governments and this sort of thing happens to you.

[Takeda Shingen]

When you scan the thread titles quickly, this appears to read 'Wikileaks founders sex changes leaked'.

[tater]

I winder why we don't just bump him off. Even the Obama Admin for all their talk before his election have shown they are willing to kill people with no due process (that's what using a drone attack on a "high value target" is, after all.

If you can bump off some AQ guy who might not actually kill people, but instead, um, manages the AQ website and propaganda, then why not Assange?

What's the difference?

this appears to read 'Wikileaks founders sex changes leaked.

That is the real story, he released the cables to publicise his book to raise money for the operation.
He is trying to delay the extradition until the op and then get it thrown out by claiming he is now Julie-ann.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

The charges are laughable and would hardly constitute rape in my opinion

Wow.

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Where the law defines rape as "sex without consent," initiating sexual intercourse with a partner who is unconscious and therefore cannot have consented to it is rape, the end.

This.

Note that even if the woman consented AFTER the act started, the act of starting without consent was in itself rape. Intent matters.

[Freiwillige]

Now do not misunderstand me, Rape is a horrific crime that should be punished to the fullest extent of the law and then some. The Issue as I understand isn't one of consensual sex but over the issue of the usage of a condom.

So before I get hung on my statement one needs to understand that one judge already threw it out only to have it reinstated by another.

It was clear by her statement that she wasn't offended they were having intercourse but was offended that he did not use a condom the second time.

She allowed the intercourse to continue with the statement "You batter not have aids".........So STD concern is the context of the issue not sexual intercourse. That is how I read into it and just my opinion.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Freiwillige

Now do not misunderstand me, Rape is a horrific crime that should be punished to the fullest extent of the law and then some. The Issue as I understand isn't one of consensual sex but over the issue of the usage of a condom.

So before I get hung on my statement one needs to understand that one judge already threw it out only to have it reinstated by another.

It was clear by her statement that she wasn't offended they were having intercourse but was offended that he did not use a condom the second time.

She allowed the intercourse to continue with the statement "You batter not have aids".........So STD concern is the context of the issue not sexual intercourse. That is how I read into it and just my opinion.

My bad, I read frau's reply, but not the OP link.

You're right.

[Catfish]

They need a reason to accuse him. Any reason.
The oldest rule, "destroy a man publicly, before you kill him".

Imagine how many people now think that Assange is a criminal, even if he is set free this will always haunt him.

Greetings,
Catfish

[August]

Originally Posted by Catfish

They need a reason to accuse him. Any reason.
The oldest rule, "destroy a man publicly, before you kill him".

Imagine how many people now think that Assange is a criminal, even if he is set free this will always haunt him.

Greetings,
Catfish

I thought he was a criminal before these allegations surfaced.

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by August

I thought he was a criminal before these allegations surfaced.

No he was not, but see how this stuff already works ?
Sun Tzu at its finest

Greetings,
Catfish

P.S. If you probably mean that he is a criminal for making the stuff public in this wikileaks, i guess all witnesses of concentration camps spreading the word should also have been silenced ? Well, it has been tried

[August]

Originally Posted by Catfish

No he was not, but see how this stuff already works ?
Sun Tzu at its finest

My dear departed Father was fond of a saying, which I shall not repeat here, that addressed the concept that everyone has an opinion just like they have certain body parts. It fits perfectly.

P.S. If you probably mean that he is a criminal for making the stuff public in this wikileaks, i guess all witnesses of concentration camps spreading the word should also have been silenced ? Well, it has been tried

Godwins law. If you have to invoke the nazis then you have already lost the debate. Assange isn't fit to shine a concentration camp survivors shoes.

[bookworm_020]

I agree that he is a moral deprived scumbag, but the case has many holes, signs of policital grandstanding and all sides contradict themselves and each other.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/assanges...204-1aguk.html