Is this the photo that could clear Assange ?

[dipsydoodle]

Is this the photo that could clear Assange? Grinning for the camera, WikiLeaks boss and woman who says he sexually assaulted her 48 hours earlier.

>

It seems an unremarkable image: a group of friends smiling broadly. But this is the photograph Julian Assange hopes will clear his name.

The face of the woman on the left has been obscured for legal reasons.

For although she is seen beaming, she would later tell police that 48 hours before the picture was taken, the WikiLeaks founder pinned her down in her flat and sexually assaulted her.

>

The photograph was taken on August 15, 2010, at the Glenfiddich restaurant in Stockholm, at a dinner of meatballs and schnapps hosted by Rickard Falkvinge, the founder of the Swedish Pirate Party (PP), which campaigns for greater government transparency.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2193641/Is-photo-clear-Assange-Grinning-meal-meatballs-schnapps-WikiLeaks-boss-woman-says-sexually-assaulted-48-hours-earlier.html#ixzz24dXIjXQA

[HiPointDem]

1. I don't know why they bother to block woman A's face: that picture, & her name, have been all

over the internet already.

There's also video of her on the platform with assange at one of his speaking engagements after her supposed 'assault'.

her 'assault' according to her testimony, is that she 'suspects' he purposefully broke the condom he was using during intercourse.

the 'pinning down' is not quite as billed either.

[dipsydoodle]

5. The Mail cites legal reasons

and there is no means of knowing exactly who and when did the masking. The fact her picture may already have been on the internet is incidental : the Mail is covered by UK law on what they publish and as such may not wish to overstep a line.

[girl gone mad]

56. The same condom which the prosecutors could not find any of his DNA on?

[cali]

2. I doubt it.

Last edited Sun Aug 26, 2012, 08:02 AM - Edit history (1)

Women, after a rape, can behave in ways that seem paradoxical to the event.

I don't buy the Assange rape allegations, but I don't think this pic will help him. And I don't necessarily think it should.

I speak, btw, from personal experience:

When I was 20, my physician, who was a big shot Boston doc, molested me. He was also socially acquainted with my family. When I encountered him at a social occasion, I was friendly toward him. I even went back to see him once after it happened. I felt like it was my fault.

[Lefta Dissenter]

21. Cali,

I'm really sorry for what you went through.

[cali]

22. thank you. that's kind of you.

I appreciate it. Honestly, it didn't scar me for life. I came to terms with it.

[Raine1967]

43. (hug)

I understand your experience in many way. I too came to terms with it, Cali.

[Zorra]

3. Don't know. Waiting for confirmation of credibility.

Can't see the accuser's face, and it's the Daily Mail.

[Scootaloo]

4. The more I learn in this case, the more I get a gnawing worry in my gut

There's already this belief that women regularly "fake" rape allegations to "get even" or some bullshit like that. Even though in the majority of cases, such a claim is patently false... every time it's not - such as the Duke lacrosse team case - secures that notion even more firmly, in spite of all evidence to the contrary. If this turns out that way, well...

I really have no idea what to think. There's just so many weird things and double-backs going on here that even an opinionated bastard like me has trouble finding any comfortable position.

[HiPointDem]

6. read the women's testimony to the police, for starters.

[Scootaloo]

8. I have

I've read so much in both directions that all I can say is "I'll have to see how this works out." - Either way, my opinion carries zero weight.

Like I said, my worry is that, rightly or wrongly the allegations are found false, and the "OMG WOMEN LIE ABOUT RAPE ALL THE TIME" asswipes have themselves a new landmark case to back themselves up with.

[msanthrope]

11. I find the debate over whether or not a sleeping woman can

consent to sex to be distressing.

[Scootaloo]

15. I'm certainly not debating that

I would have hoped that would be within the bounds of "fucking duh," but yeah, apparently common sense isn't that common.

My thoughts lean towards the notion that yes, the allegations must be investigated, he needs to be questioned... but why the need to take him to Sweden for questioning? Why no assurances against extradition to the US? I've read that Swedish Authorities went to Romania to question a suspect in a murder case, no need for him to come to Stockholm. Is there some reason Assange can't be questioned where he is?

[msanthrope]

17. Because they want to arrest him, not question him. And they have no power

to do that outside of Sweden. Also, once you flee a jurisdiction the day before your scheduled police interview, you don't get courtesies extended to you.

As for the US, why would they promise anything? They have nothing to do with this case.

[girl gone mad]

57. I think the debate is over whether or not she was actually sleeping.

She was sending text messages to a friend at the time stating that she was awake. She had already been up, gotten dressed and left the apartment to get breakfast. She claims that she returned and got back into bed, immediately went back to sleep and slept right through a 6'2" man getting into the bed and climbing around on top of her, only to awake suddenly with his penis inside of her. Looking at the available evidence, there is a lot of doubt in my mind about the story she is telling.

But, really, it's the larger picture which is so much more disturbing than any of this he said/she said debate. Whatever one thinks of Assange, there is no denying his talent for revealing to the world how truly pathetic our respective governments have become. He has illuminated governmental ineptitude, not just directly through his work with Wikileaks, but now indirectly as his bid for asylum has exposed just how many incredibly stupid people now occupy the highest positions of power around the world. These are the people making decisions on our behalf and they are absolute morons guided solely by self-interest, greed, irrational fear and hatred. We are all truly fucked.

[HiPointDem]

12. women lie. men lie. children lie. human beings lie. there isn't one group that's more or less

likely to lie. i doubt that a high-profile rape case that involves lying is likely to make the public believe all rape accusations are lies.



The Cowlitz County prosecutor says she won't charge a Longview woman who admitted she lied when she said her father raped her -- sending him to prison for more than nine years.

Now 23 years old, xxx says guilt prompted her to tell police in January that she lied as an 11-year-old in 2001.... her father...denied the allegation but was convicted by a jury and sentenced in 2002 to more than 15 years in prison....

xxx says she lied because she was disappointed in her father after her parents divorced.

http://www.king5.com/news/local/Rape-lie-recanted-after-man-spends-9-years-in-prison-145775175.html

[The Doctor.]

24. Yeah, but sometimes the source of the lie matters.

I know from first hand experience that the lies of a woman are taken as gospel while every piece of proof to the contrary is dismissed.

It depends on the venue, of course, but you'd have an easier time convincing me the Sun revolves around the Earth than the victimhood status of women is not enshrined in certain sectors of society. Your link is an excellent example of how horribly damaging lies can be.

[mythology]

33. Wow

I don't know what to say to somebody who admits they would rather believe something that is absolutely false like the sun rotates around the earth over the idea that a woman's sex life is put on trial if she files a charge of rape, especially in a thread talking about a central piece of evidence is that there is a photograph in which one of the women who brought the charge is seen smiling in a group of people including the man she says assaulted her.

But if anecdotes are so convincing:

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-06-27/news/bs-md-ci-rapes-20100519_1_fbi-data-mayor-orders-review-detectives

[The Doctor.]

60. That's a pretty ridiculous interpretation of what I said.

And since I'm sick of trying to correct people who simply make shit up that I never said, I'll just welcome you to my ignore list unless you choose to apologize.

[cpwm17]

37. It's good to have high profile rape case where the woman is the proven liar

There was a dangerous myth pushed by the media and some pseudo scientists that women don't lie about rape, and a woman's word is superior to a man's. That idea invades our current justice system where an anonymous woman can falsely accuse an innocent man and face no negative consequences. Innocent until proven guilty is disregarded.

I don't hear that myth as much as I used to, probably due to some well publicized false rape accusations. Cases need to stand on their own merits regardless of the genders involved.

Some claim that it is a bad thing that some high profile cases where proven frauds. No, it's the opposite. It reminds the public of the importance of maintaining a fair and just legal system.

[Nevernose]

39. That wasn't a myth exactly

But more like a reaction to the old ways and the old days, when it was assumed that women always lied about being raped. Two extremes on the same swinging pendulum.

[The Doctor.]

23. Very valid concern.

Every time a woman lies about being raped, it undermines the credibility of real victims of rape. It's a horrible truth that the reason so many rape victims are not taken seriously is because some women use rape accusations as a weapon against men who have slighted them in some other way.

If there is to be real justice, the liars must be punished very severely. But they seldom are. So too many real victims of rape are treated as liars.

[treestar]

36. That is NOT the reason rape victims have trouble

It's the Akin-type of thinking that has caused that.

[The Doctor.]

61. Umm.... except for the fact that rape victims are often treated as liars....

because some women do lie about being raped, you're absolutely correct.

It certainly varies from community to community. I'm sure there are places where women are ignored regardless of their veracity, and others where their every word is considered gospel.

Since I have been the victim of women who have committed perjury and got away with it, I know for a fact that the latter exists.

If you can't wrap your head around the concept that women who lie undermine justice for real victims of rape, then I really can't bring you to a reality you choose not to face.

[sabrina 1]

63. Which version? She changed her story three times. A fact her own attorney acknowledges

contributes to the fact that as he said, 'this is a weak case'.

Then there is, entered into evidence and seen by the defense and acknowledged by the prosecution, the messages between the women joking about 'making money' from 'destroying his reputation' and plans to 'go to the tabloids'. Someone beat them to the tabloids, illegally as it turns out.

Not to mention the condom, handed over to the police by the woman, torn in just the right place to coincide with her testimony, which turned out not to have any DNA at all. Who would tear what appears to be an unused condom to make it match testimony already given? Or was the tear just a coincidence? I imagine these questions will be asked if the prosecution ever gets around to filing its case.

And of course there is Assange's own statements to the police which deny all of the allegations. In a 'he said' 'she said' case, it's amazing how rarely we hear about what 'he said'.

[NCTraveler]

73. "And of course there is Assange's own statements to the police which deny all of the allegations."

"And of course there is Assange's own statements to the police which deny all of the allegations. In a 'he said' 'she said' case, it's amazing how rarely we hear about what 'he said'. "

lol. It is really rare to hear a guy deny criminal allegations.

[sabrina 1]

74. Thanks for proving my point. If 'she said it' it must be true even if she changes the story

multiple times, produces a condom, torn, but with no DNA on it, jokes about 'making money by destroying him' and gives instructions publicly on how to get 'revenge' on a man. And even if their own lawyer says 'this case is weak'.

But if he said it never happened, even if it didn't, he must be lying.

And of course that's why, in the CIA memo published on Wikileaks, the CIA settled on a 'sex scandal' in order to destroy Wikileaks. They are so effective if you want to destroy someone. Or used to be.

The problem is this time, people actually want to see proof.

Sometimes I wonder about people who jump to conclusions as soon as a woman makes an allegation like this, it almost seems as if they want the woman to have been raped.

I would prefer, for the woman's sake, that she is lying about it. Because rape is such a violent, brutal, mentally destructive, vicious and hateful crime, that I truly hope it never happens to anyone, even if they are saying it did. Better to be caught lying about such a horrific crime than for it to actually have happened.

[NCTraveler]

75. You said it is rare for a guy to deny criminal allegations.

I just got a kick out of that. No point of yours was proven. You statement was actually very funny. Not sure what the rest of your post had to do with my comment.

Some parts of this post are funny. Some simply display a frightening mindset.

[sabrina 1]

77. I was talking about this case. I said that throughout the discussions of this case it has been

rare to see the 'he said' side. All we see is the 'she said' side. Especially since his interview with the Swedish police is online, you would think that those who have such an interest in the case would have read it and mention it for balance, assuming they are interested in the facts.

[Odin2005]

40. The PTB is good at using our own progressivism against us.

I honestly don't know what to believe anymore. I honestly believe the charges against Assange are BS, yest my holding that opinion, in the light of how many rape victims are called liars, make me feel like an asshole, which is what the PTB wants.

[Cleita]

46. For one thing she never really accused him of rape.

Apparently she and the other woman had gone to the police to ask them if they could force Assange to take a test for stds. The police from their statements decided it was rape. The second woman even refused to sign the statement. The woman whom they said he raped, even insisted that he stay with her while he was in Sweden even though his sponsors offered to move him to another place. So it gets stranger and stranger.

Was she suffering from some kind of strange rape ptsds that made her keep her rapist in her apartment a few more days, and in which they probably had sex?

[girl gone mad]

58. I believe she did want to force him to be tested for STDs..

either because she was genuinely concerned or in an effort to embarrass him.

Once the police told her it wasn't possible to compel him to be tested if she consented to sex without a condom, her story changed.

This is what makes the most sense because the stories the women have told are very odd. The idea that a man would intentionally tear a condom open during sex mostly defies logic. The idea that a person, after having been wide awake moments before, could sleep soundly with a grown man climbing around on top of her defies logic. The idea that someone would change a few details in her story in order to make it appear unprotected sex was at least partially non-consensual in order to compel a man to take an STD test is actually highly logical.

[Spider Jerusalem]

7. Probably not, since there are two women and separate allegations.

[msanthrope]

9. That's the woman he sexually assaulted, not the one he raped. It won't clear him of the rape

charge.

[dipsydoodle]

10. I've not followed this closely enough to know who is who.

How do you know which is which ?

[msanthrope]

13. Ms. A was Aug 13/14. Ms. W was Aug 17/18.

If you read the EAW charges listed on page 21, you can see that offense #4 is the basis of the rape charge, and that the victim (from the dates) was Ms. W.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

[dipsydoodle]

14. By charges I assume you mean allegations as stated in that PDF - page 21.

Thanks for that anyway.

[msanthrope]

16. No...charges. The Belmarsh magistrate detailed the differences

between the Swedish and UK systems, and indicated that in his view the Swedish inquiry had progressed to a
prosecution of Assange. Which is what makes the claim "why can't Sweden interview him in Britian" laughable. They aren't looking to interview Assange. They are looking to arrest him.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

18. The photo cannot clear Assange because the rape allegation is a pretext to get him to Sweden.

[Swagman]

19. If you read Sweden's official prosecutor's page about Assange

they use very tricky language.
Although they admit the Chief Prosecutor first looked at the case and decided their was none to answer and Assange was free to travel.

However they use decidedly dodgy language to imply- and this has been picked up by UK journalists who repeat the fib- that Assange cannot be questioned in another country.

It just isn't true. Under EU laws all Swedish authorities have to do is get permission from British police to formally interview Assange in the UK.
If after questioning they can also apply for an arrest warrant likewise yet so many British newspapers and others have perpetuated this hogwash that Assange can only be questioned in Sweden,.

If that was the case Interpol would be useless.

there is also the odd matter that one of the complainants wrote on a blog about getting revenge on cheating boyfriends .

*** the changes in EU law where made with the Stockholm Programme which not only gives the accused similar rights but also makes it easier to arrest suspects, yet time and time again politicians and journalists repeat the myth that for some reason, Assange must be in Sweden. It is a falsehood.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/13/rundle-assange-accuser-wrote-of-need-for-revenge-against-cheating-lovers/

[msanthrope]

31. There is nothing tricky about it. They aren't looking to question Assange.

They are looking to arrest him. Thus, the arrest warrant. As you can read, Sweden will give Assange the due process he is entitled to...in Sweden.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

[reorg]

44. LOL, the talking points are getting confused

As Glenn Greenwald recently pointed out:

One myth Green purports to debunk is the notion that "the Swedes should interview Assange in London." This cannot be, Green argues, because "Assange is not wanted merely for questioning. He is wanted for arrest." He also echoes numerous other Assange critics by arguing that the "he-has-not-yet-been-charged" claim is a mere technical irrelevancy: the only reason this is true, he says, is because he must be in Sweden for that to happen.

But back in early 2011, Assange critics were telling a much different story. Back then, they were arguing that Assange was wildly overstating the danger he faced from extradition to Sweden because the investigation there was at such a preliminary stage and he was merely wanted for questioning. Indeed, here's what the very same David Allen Green wrote on 28 February 2011 when explaining the status of the investigation to his readers [my emphasis]:

"This extradition order does not necessarily mean, of course, that he will be extradited, still less that he will be charged, tried, or convicted. Assange may win an appeal of the extradition order, or Sweden may decide either not to continue or to interview him while he remains in England. However, unless some such external event intervenes, Assange will be shortly extradited to Sweden to be questioned about an allegation of rape, two allegations of sexual molestation, and an allegation of unlawful coercion."

Back when it suited Green, he emphasized that Assange has not been charged with any crime, that there is far from any certainty that he would be, and that extradition to Sweden is merely for him "to be questioned" on these allegations: exactly the "myths" and "zombie facts" which he now purports to bust. Moreover, Swedish law professor Marten Schultz, who strongly supports Assange's extradition to Sweden, has said the same:

"The UK supreme court's decision means only that Assange will be transferred to Sweden for interrogation. It does not mean that he will be tried, or even charged. It is entirely possible that he will be transferred to Sweden, questioned, and released if the Swedish authorities find that there are insufficient grounds for prosecution. It is impossible – as it should be – to predict how the case will unfold."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/aug/22/julian-assange-media-contempt

Justice for Sweden
Marten Schultz
Mårten Schultz is Professor of Law, Stockholm University.
Jun. 25, 2012

The UK Supreme Court’s decision means only that Assange will be transferred to Sweden for interrogation. It does not mean that he will be tried, or even charged. It is entirely possible that he will be transferred to Sweden, questioned, and released if the Swedish authorities find that there are insufficient grounds for prosecution. It is impossible – as it should be – to predict how the case will unfold.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/justice-for-sweden

[msanthrope]

48. No...the British court does not agree with the Swedish prosecutors on that point.

I have no doubt the defendant is wanted for prosecution in Sweden.

That's page 20 of the ruling. Sweden apparently still disputes this point.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110224-Britain-Ruling-Assange-Extradition-to-Sweden.pdf

I think the court got it right.

[reorg]

49. LOL, I'd admire your persistance in arguing a lost cause

as you have done here repeatedly, were it not for the fact that I'm positive you're doing it against your better knowledge.

As if you didn't know that a magistrate in the UK has no say whatsoever over how the Swedish prosecutor may proceed after questioning Assange. Why, he even freely admits he is not familiar with laws and procedures in Sweden.

Justice for Sweden
Marten Schultz
Mårten Schultz is Professor of Law, Stockholm University.
Jun. 25, 2012

The UK Supreme Court’s decision means only that Assange will be transferred to Sweden for interrogation. It does not mean that he will be tried, or even charged. It is entirely possible that he will be transferred to Sweden, questioned, and released if the Swedish authorities find that there are insufficient grounds for prosecution. It is impossible – as it should be – to predict how the case will unfold.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/justice-for-sweden

[msanthrope]

52. He wasn't saying how they may proceed. He was analyzing the defense argument

that the issuance of an EAW was premature, and therefore invalid. The judge found that the issuance was not, but not for all of the reasons Sweden gave.

That the British court and the Swedish prosecutors are not in lockstep is a good thing. As for the professor you cite, she seems competent...perhaps Mr. Assange can take comfort from her words.

[freedom fighter jh]

20. If she's smiling in a picture with him, the assault isn't legitimate?

To me, Assange is a hero, standing up for the people's right to know what government is doing.

But that's no reason to discredit this woman. People are complex. Maybe he doesn't know how to respect a sex partner's limits. Or maybe her charges are false. Can't really tell from here.

It does look like the sex-related charges are being used as an excuse to get Assange to Sweden so he can be extradited to the U.S. But that's government, not the accuser, using the accusation to persecute Assange.

Parsing her appearance -- when does she smile? -- is not an appropriate way to determine what went on between them. The implications of that are right next to "What was she wearing?"

[Jim Lane]

26. It's not dispositive proof but it's evidence.

In a case of conflicting testimony, it's certainly reasonable to look at the each person's conduct as part of assessing his or her credibility. That's miles away from "What was she wearing?", which implies that rape is acceptable under some circumstances. The issue here is whether a rape occurred in the first place.

[freedom fighter jh]

27. I don't think anyone is saying it was rape --

rather, some lesser kind of sexual assault. Correct me if I'm wrong.

And I've never heard anyone say rape is acceptable under certain circumstances. I think the reasoning is, "If she was wearing that, then she wanted it, and it was not rape."

Here, the reasoning seems to be "She still smiles in a picture with him two days later, so he could not have assaulted her."

"To look at each person's conduct as part of assessing his or her credibility" is just the problem, because just about anything a woman does after accusing a man or rape or sexual assault can be (however irrationally), and often is, taken as evidence that she is lying. After a rape a woman is typically told to push her feelings down and go on as if nothing had happened. Then if she does that's taken as evidence that nothing has happened.

[Jim Lane]

68. There is such a thing as rape or sexual assault, BUT....

there is also such a thing as a false accusation. There is also such a thing as a true accusation in which the accuser is smeared as making a false accusation.

How do you take a particular case and decide which kind it is? In American law, at least, you give it to a jury, and the jurors hear all the evidence. A photograph of a woman smiling as if nothing had happened is admissible evidence that nothing happened. The test isn't that the evidence indisputably proves that conclusion to be true, or even that it makes the conclusion more likely to be true than false. The test (in American law) is that the evidence makes the conclusion more likely to be true than it would be without the evidence.

Of course, it's also admissible for the prosecution to introduce evidence as to why the woman felt pressured into smiling, even though there was an actual rape. Nevertheless, you can't exclude a whole class of evidence just because it sometimes supports an inaccurate conclusion.

[freedom fighter jh]

70. I think we agree on half the issue.

"There is such a thing as rape or sexual assault, BUT....there is also such a thing as a false accusation. There is also such a thing as a true accusation in which the accuser is smeared as making a false accusation."

Yes.

Sounds like you're a lawyer. You certainly seem to know much more about the rules of evidence than I do.

But what if the assault charge is valid? This poor woman, because she made the choice of turning him in, gets her name and picture all over the newspapers and the Internet I don't know what the answer is. Certainly there should be no compromise on Assange's defense. But consider that in the past week and a half or so, about two-thirds (my rough estimate) of all the posts on DU's front page were on the "legitimate rape" issue -- a whole lot of DUers, clearly many of them men (even if the majority were women) -- bent out of shape because of the way rape charges are typically received: with no credibility for the victim, putting all her words and actions under a microscope, all at a time when she's just been traumatized and invalidated.

But I wanted to try to bring together these two different trains of thought on DU. The OP strikes me as a good example of "illegitimate rape" (in this case sexual assault): a sex charge that gets knocked down by discrediting the accuser in a contemptuous way.

[Jim Lane]

71. Maybe more than half

Yes, I am a lawyer, but I don't do criminal law, so I'm not trying to pull rank on you.

Where we disagree is whether this defense constitutes "discrediting the accuser in a contemptuous way." There are apparently conflicting accounts about what happened that night, with the only two eyewitnesses disagreeing, so it's inevitable that we look to indirect evidence. That evidence reasonably includes the behavior of each participant over the succeeding few days. Each side can argue that the other acted in ways that are inconsistent with his or her testimony.

[alphafemale]

25. oh...gawd. Really? I was noncommitted on this until just now. He's guilty as hell isn't he?

Did I just read a post that a rape was NOT LEGITIMATE on DU!!!!???

I'm sure Jerry Sandusky has plenty of pictures of himself with smiling kids he butt raped too.

[renie408]

29. Exactly. My first thought was "If Julian Assange thinks THAT is going to save him, he's an idiot"

[girl gone mad]

62. Leave aside the silly tabloid headline and read the article.

It isn't merely about a picture. It is about witnesses who were there that night and presented testimony on how the woman comported herself at the event. Just days after the alleged assault, she was reportedly very happy to be at Assange's side.

Please do not infantilize adult women by comparing us to children.

[Chorophyll]

28. There is no standard way to behave after you've been raped.

So this picture "clears" nothing.

Also, this is the Daily Mail, known for its sensationalist gossip and right-wing blather.

If we're gonna analyze pictures, I could probably write an essay about Julian Assange's body language in this one. But that wouldn't hold water in a court of law either.

[renie408]

30. No, this is the photo that Julian Assange is using to attempt to make this charge about the

woman. You know, like most rapists try to do.

[ananda]

32. Or, ya know, like most innocent people try to do...

... in order to clear their falsely accused name.

[treestar]

34. This argument is so sexist and old fashioned

She's smiling in a photo of a group of people so that invalidates her testimony about the night before? It's the "she deserved it" thing - how about talk about how she was dressed before - about the same thing really.

And he doesn't plan on answering to the legal system anyway. So where will this "clearing" occur? In the minds of those who already can't deal with the idea he even might be guilty.

[treestar]

35. I wonder if this material would even be admissible in the US:

For Mr Falkvinge, one of the things that was striking about it, in view of what he later learned, was that Woman A volunteered to become Mr Assange’s press secretary during the meal. Mr Falkvinge has refused to go into details about the way Woman A behaved with Mr Assange, because he has to give evidence in court if a trial is held.
But he made it clear that he did not think Woman A behaved like a victim or someone who had suffered a traumatic sexual experience only two days earlier.
He said: ‘You can look at objective facts and draw far-reaching conclusions: the fact that we are at the dinner and it was with very passionate people and with good food and drinks; the fact that I and Anna Troberg have left depositions as key defence witnesses in the upcoming trial – that does tell you a lot.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2193641/Julian-Assange-rape-claim-Is-photo-clear-him.html#ixzz24fDiNCnz

If Sweden is the Saudi Arabia of feminism, is it not interesting that people can testify about the woman's behavior the day after?

[Nye Bevan]

38. And Anita Hill remained on friendly terms with Clarence Thomas

throughout the so-called "harassment". Even going with him from job to job.

So if you believe this argument, you should believe Clarence Thomas.

[Odin2005]

41. This is a misogynist BS argument

[cali]

42. You're right.

that's what I should have said.

[Cleita]

45. What I think is weird is she threw a party for him and his associates

the day after the rape was supposed to have occurred. She texted a friend that she had met the coolest people at that party. For some reason it doesn't seem like a victim of rape would be so relaxed the next day. She was asked twice during that time period if she wanted Assange out of her apartment. The people who were sponsoring him had given him her place to stay thinking she would be gone but she returned earlier than expected. But she said no on those occasions and insisted that he was staying with her. It seems like it was only when she learned that he had sex with another woman during the period he stayed with her that she became concerned about stds and involved that second woman into going to the police.

I didn't know that there was another party the following day, which she attended also. It seems all very strange.

[Lionessa]

47. Not to mention that in this day and age, with no type of restriction upon the women,

they waited 48 hours and removed all forensic evidence and proceeded with their lives and parties.

Now maybe I'd expect this in the deep South or even in some radically red states here in the US, but in Sweden? Where sex isn't a sin and so rape should be easily and guiltlessly claimed immediately and at either a police station or hospital as soon as it happened?

Makes no rational sense to me.

[sabrina 1]

64. Actually one of the women brought a condom she claimed was the one

Assange deliberately tore, to the police. It was torn, but when tested for DNA, there was none.

[LadyHawkAZ]

50. Testimony and texts from one of her contacts

says she already knew about the other woman. I think it's more likely that when the younger girl showed up upset and wanting an HIV test, she changed her story to support that. And she DID change her story- that's been well established, he went from the coolest guy in the world that she was proud to have been with, to a vicious rapist in the police report. For some reason it's become misogynist and shaming to all rape victims when this is pointed out.

I'm getting just a little tired of being told how much I don't know about how rape victims, and what rape is like, and how rape victims react.

[Cleita]

51. My sympathy goes out to all rape victims.

But it seems that they might not be able to leave their pain behind in many instances and just look with a cold and unemotional eye at the facts that have emerged. Quite honestly, very few facts have emerged. The rest is conjecture and conflicting testimony.

[fascisthunter]

59. Great point

[brush]

53. Guilty or not Guilty?

It's almost too convenient that this guy exposes the lies and dirty doings of governments the world over is all of a sudden accuse and wanted for rape. There is an Australian produced video going around (sorry I don't have the link) that examines the case pretty thoroughly and links one of the women with a US intelligence agency. Also, it reveals that the women didn't go to the police to file rape charges. They went to the police when they found out that both of them had had sex with Assange and they wanted the police to bring him back to take an STD test to make sure they weren't infected with anything. The police told them they had been raped and filed the charges.

[struggle4progress]

54. It's nice to think that only evil men are rapists

It's nice to think that only evil men are rapists - that it's only pantomime villains with knives in alleyways. But the reality is different
Laurie Penny
Saturday 25 August 2012
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/laurie-penny-its-nice-to-think-that-only-evil-men-are-rapists--that-its-only-pantomime-villains-with-knives-in-alleyways-but-the-reality-is-different-8079403.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/101639874

[smirkymonkey]

66. I can't tell you how angry that story makes me

I am less and less on team Assange. He just seems like another piggish asshole.

[Honeycombe8]

55. It's best that this be investigated by authorities. Who knows who is in that pic,

when it was taken, or anything else. Only authorities can verify any photos and other purported evidence.

To the extent that I care about this, he should go back and face the music, give a statement, give them the photos, let them do their investigation. What is he so scared of, if he has what he says is rock solid proof he didn't molest/rape two women?

[girl gone mad]

65. It isn't really about the picture.

Witnesses at the event describe her as inseparable from Assange.

Even if he is guilty of every allegation, he does not deserve the death penalty or life in prison. The Swedish and/or UK government should provide him with protection against extradition to the USA. The ball is in their court now, as Assange has acted within the law by requesting and being granted asylum.

[Honeycombe8]

67. Fleeing is legally evidence of guilt. Lots of women in Ecuador, Julian! Get your camera ready!nt

[FreeState]

69. To me it makes him look more guilty

Not the photo but that he thinks the photo shows he's innocent. Abused women never act normal, they just cry and hid away from everyone /sarcasm

Trying to use the photo makes him look like a sexist pig to me. People who have been abused do not all act the same.

[NCTraveler]

72. If a woman is married to an abuser...

and has a family photo where she is smiling, does that clear the husband.

[jberryhill]

76. Here are the pictures that clear Jerry Sandusky

Okay, maybe not that third one. But the other kids are all smiling.