Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: ‘Assange won’t come’: Swedish MPs urge end to whistleblower case [View all]reorg
(3,317 posts)64. Retired Swedish district prosecutor Rolf Hillegren begs to differ:
The decision to close the case was well-founded and was made by an experienced prosecutor. The decision to reopen the investigation was not well-founded, something especially unfortunate, given everything that happened afterwards. It should also be mentioned that a decision to dismiss a sex case is taken very carefully, due to all the hysteria surrounding such cases. The motto was to turn over all stones, which resulted in turning over stones that were of no interest - and all this just to minimise heat from the media.
But the investigation leaked onto the net and now anyone can read it and draw their own conclusions. And I believe that few people with any sense of evidentiary evaluation will see the case as something to not be closed. The women have been interrogated and there are no more steps to the investigation. It's highly unlikely that were Assange to be interrogated again, he'd say something that made it possible to bring the case to court. It is therefore incomprehensible what the prosecutor expects him to say. So the interrogation of Assange is completely unnecessary. The situation with Assange and the women is mostly about differences of opinion about the use of condoms. And that's not the type of dispute that's settled in our courts.
http://rixstep.com/1/20140112,00.shtml
But the investigation leaked onto the net and now anyone can read it and draw their own conclusions. And I believe that few people with any sense of evidentiary evaluation will see the case as something to not be closed. The women have been interrogated and there are no more steps to the investigation. It's highly unlikely that were Assange to be interrogated again, he'd say something that made it possible to bring the case to court. It is therefore incomprehensible what the prosecutor expects him to say. So the interrogation of Assange is completely unnecessary. The situation with Assange and the women is mostly about differences of opinion about the use of condoms. And that's not the type of dispute that's settled in our courts.
http://rixstep.com/1/20140112,00.shtml
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
70 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Agree...What is the Purpose...it's just to Jail Him...without Interview about the Charges!
KoKo
Feb 2014
#15
No one confines St Julian to the embassy: he went there voluntarily, jumping bail in the process,
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#21
Unfortunately, sabrina, in my experience, you are an extraordinarily unreliable source: much of
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#31
Do feel free to provide your own attempt at unbiased fact-based discussion
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#44
The point is that the interview with Assange will allow the prosecutor to determine
Egalitarian Thug
Feb 2014
#4
Actually, I think he already has agreed to that, if they promise not to rendition him.
reusrename
Feb 2014
#8
The magistrates in the UK wrestled with this question for quite a while, before folding.
reusrename
Feb 2014
#12
No. Assange's lawyers could have made that forward-rendition argument in the UK courts but
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#20
St Julian has already said repeatedly that he won't leave the Sanctuary of Blessed Ecuador
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#18
I merely urged you to review the actual court documents in the Assange extradition case, before
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#40
"No one who disagrees with me has any character, honesty, or seriousness"
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#53
Here's the simplest explanation, requiring no paranoid hallucinations:
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#67
So after the plane landed, Portugal and Spain said it was a misunderstanding, France
MannyGoldstein
Feb 2014
#54
Portugal and Spain's "apologies" were "we regret any misunderstanding/inconvenience but
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#56
France admitted a delay in allowing the airspace request, but it may make sense
struggle4progress
Feb 2014
#59