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
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: The Swedish Prosecutor Lied As Charged. Admits No Legal Impediment to London Interview w/Assange. [View all]cemaphonic
(4,138 posts)106. Yeah, I noticed that too
The article plainly states that it's a far-from-ideal compromise as far as the Swedish legal system is concerned, but necessary to keep the case active.
Still, the Assange fan club have been using "why does Sweden refuse to charge/interview Assange?" as bedrock for their conspiracy theories, so it will we interesting to see what they turn to next.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
421 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
The Swedish Prosecutor Lied As Charged. Admits No Legal Impediment to London Interview w/Assange. [View all]
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
OP
On the other thread DUers suddenly have amnesia that they ever believed Ny's lies
riderinthestorm
Mar 2015
#1
There is way, way too much evidence that they did indeed claim it 'was against Swedish Law' to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#2
As with Snowden, the important thing is to continue to maintain a vilification narrative.
Warren Stupidity
Mar 2015
#4
You are right, as it turns out. Now they are attempting to attempting to move the goalposts
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#150
I wonder why people allow others to do their thinking for them. We on the Left were not the kind to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#212
I remember that, and that it was always the same group of posters whose screen names escape me...
1monster
Mar 2015
#252
You are correct, it IS always the same few. As for Snowden, Greenwald, and now just about
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#256
Indeed--so this thread, where the OP is debunked below, won't be scrubbed. nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#131
The prosecutor LIED and has now been forced to admit that lie. She, iow, has been DEBUNKED.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#247
'Allegations' btw, there have no charges filed against Assange. And those allegations began in
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#276
It isn't a good catch---sabrina didn't include that Ny wasn't directed by the courts to try a London
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#88
The Prosecutor and her fans LIED. For years. Feel free to explain why NO CHARGES
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#233
That is exactly what they are claiming. Having no response to the LIES told by the Prosecutor for
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#249
There never was any 'legal impediment' to interviewing Assange in London. Is it rude to tell the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#307
Sssshhh, we are in the process of attempting to create amnesia regarding the years long false claims
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#314
The right thing for them to do now, including all the Right Wing 'Journalists' who shouted from the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#8
That isn't the question. 'After all this will the lying Swedish Prosecutor FINALLY file
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#32
Here's a thread from 2012, where Spider Jerusalem explains the Swedish legal process to you
tammywammy
Mar 2015
#45
Amazing, isnt it? Even with the evidence of the egregious lies told by the Prosecutor and her
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#245
Lol! It certainly is a lesson on why the internet's legal experts should always be taken with a
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#251
Yes, I created an OP here recently that attracted many experts in the finer points of Swedish law.
pa28
Mar 2015
#409
As someone said in this thread, the proper thing for all the 'legal experts' to do now would be to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#410
Don't worry, I don't give legal advice on the internet. I simply report facts from those who
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#419
Of note--the prosecutor was ordered by the courts to try to interview and arrest Assange in London--
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#92
Of further note. The Prosecutor lied by claiming she could not interview Assange in London forcing
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#260
Are you suggesting that the Swedish Court is bending the established law in this case,
1monster
Mar 2015
#274
Good question. It appears there never was any legal impediment to conducting this interview in
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#309
I know the Swedish Process. Now explain why this Prosecutor DIDN'T know it. Why did she claim
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#130
You've been given the Court of Appeals link a few times now. Is it that you don't understand
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#134
When did the law change? When did they decide that THEY COULD interview Assange in London after
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#141
Did you not read the article on the Court of Appeals decision and look at the date? That would
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#143
Was their excuse for not filing Charges against Assange 'There is a legal impediment' to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#148
Again, Sabrina, if you don't read the material offered, I can't help you. As the other attorney on
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#153
Was this used an excuse for years, when it was not true, as many of us stated?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#156
Again, Sabrina, I and others have pointed out the Court of Appeals November 2014 decision.
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#161
Again, msanthrope, why did YOU cling to what we know now was an egregious lie told by the prosecutor
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#235
Um no.....you're quoting a defense attorney who just had a ruling go against
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#176
Why would the UK refuse approval? They've been spending big bucks LEOs covering Assange to
1monster
Mar 2015
#277
Why did she wait nearly five years to make that trip? Why did she LIE? Why did she claim
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#237
I know a diversionary tactic when I see one. The question is WHY would anyone on THIS forum
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#328
Lol, still avoiding answering the question. I don't blame you, there is only one answer.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#343
She had to be 'ordered' to finally stop lying as to why she has failed to file charges.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#360
Like Obama, I can wait patiently and let the various players work this out for themselves.
randome
Mar 2015
#366
You were wrong, can't escape that fact. The 'players'? Well we know there ARE 'players' but I am
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#372
There are no charges filed against Assange. There are 'allegations' many of which
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#236
Who are the bootlickers you speak of? The ones who think a rapist should have a trial?
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#93
That sounds like 'woo'. Since not one charge has ever been FILED against Assange..
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#244
Um, no.....just like OJ is a murderer. Assange is a rapist.....and I get to
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#194
'It IS embarrassing for you to have your whole argument for 4 years shot down'.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#304
Lol, so you are looking into your crystal ball again? I suggest you throw it away, it appears to be
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#312
Glad you got rid of that crystal ball. Why did she have to be ORDERED to go to London?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#317
The pretzel logic required for rape apologia is stunning. .....imagine, one cannot call
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#228
'Pretzel logic' thank you, that is a good way to describe the impossible twisting and turning
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#339
So it's not one of those 'legal opinions' you have been providing us with re this case for so long?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#334
Assange denies those 'allegations' cobbled together with zero evidence to back them up and
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#279
Yes, we KNOW that Ny was so ignorant of Swedish Law that after YEARS of lying, or not knowing,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#254
Why has this lying prosecutor NEVER filed charges in all these years? SHE claimed that
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#35
There are four charges on his arrest warrant. He has been charged. He has not been indicted.
hack89
Mar 2015
#58
Wrong, AGAIN. Could you please stop commenting on a case you clearly know nothing about?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#127
Ahem .... warrants do NOT equal Charges! So, again, where are the charges filed by
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#250
Lol, so you admit finally what you have been trying to deny, there are no charges filed against
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#299
Thanks for finally admitting that there have never been charges filed against Assange. That took a
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#359
Well you've been wrong so far about everything else, so I'm not going to take your speculations
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#365
And yet, he voluntarily stayed in Sweden long after he was supposed to leave, voluntarily went to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#370
If I were you I would stop while I was only this far behind. Because I might be in the mood to show
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#373
She has no CASE. THAT is why she doesn't want an interview. I guess you didn't follow the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#374
If we're demanding accountability let's ask the prosecutor to explain her years of lying.
pa28
Mar 2015
#66
Are you trying to be funny? And no offense, but msanthrope, sadly, has proven over the years,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#323
Has the offer of an interview (from Ny) in the Ecuadoran Embassy even been offered yet?
1monster
Mar 2015
#283
You're asking the wrong questions. WHY did this prosecutor NOT FILE CHARGES when we know for sure
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#11
No, Prosecution LIES! She LIED. Is that not clear to you now? I'll be happy to explain
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#17
No prosecutor would DARE to lie about their own LEGAL SYSTEM and expect to get away with it.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#37
Er.....yes. As part of the Swedish arrest procedure. They are arresting him. nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#145
Sssshhh, legal experts and all that! No charges, no case, DNA provided VOLUNTARILY YEARS AGO.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#416
It didn't happen years ago because they never had a case. You can bet everything you have that
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#15
Will the Prosecutor FINALLY file charges? And surely you know that Assange DID
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#40
He did leave Sweden the day after the prosecutor notified his lawyer of an interview
hack89
Mar 2015
#60
Naturally they should travel to another country to question a fugitive from justice
BainsBane
Mar 2015
#19
The most important question is: WHY have charges never been filed by the Swedish Prosecutor?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#152
There ARE NO CHARGES filed against Assange. What are you talking about?? There are allegatons,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#214
Your lack of understanding of this case is astounding. So once again, WHERE ARE THE CHARGES
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#234
Those that hate whistle-blowers live in their states of denial willfully. There is no
rhett o rick
Mar 2015
#325
Did you disagree with something he said? The FACTS of this case are clear and have been
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#327
Being open to listen to facts is a trait commonly found with liberals. It's a conservative mindset
rhett o rick
Mar 2015
#331
Yes, and Liberals tend to be interested in facts. I have asked, eg, that the person who
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#332
Did I strike a nerve? I notice that you don't offer anything except cute (?) comments.
rhett o rick
Mar 2015
#329
Why did the prosecutor lie about interviewing Assange in London? She DID lie, and you know it.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#216
Who are you calling a 'rape apologist'?? Are you calling ME a 'rape apologist'. Other DUers here?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#324
Do you speak for Zappaman? If so, then go right ahead and name names. It is NOT
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#407
Reserved for those in the rarified air of privilege, unassailable by lessers.
freshwest
Mar 2015
#385
So, why do you think the Prosecutor LIED about Swedish Law for so long Sid?? n/t
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#42
I'm not the one saying 'we can't interview him in London, am I? Why did she say that for so many
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#138
Know your BFEE: WikiLeaks Stratfor Dump Exposes Continued Secret Government Warmongering
Octafish
Mar 2015
#104
Wikileaks had to be silenced because they exposed the corruption of the Big Banks. They were about
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#209
Yep, that is another aspect of this case, Rove's 'advice' to the Swedish Right Wing PM. Not to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#43
HEre--it's the Court of Appeals decision in November, where the court suggested that
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#86
Curious, so if she breaks the laws of her own country and arrests him after the interview
Rex
Mar 2015
#94
Sweden has a very different system from ours. I think what everyone here is missing is that this is
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#96
I've never had an innocent client behave as Assange has. I've had rapist clients behave like him,
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#105
I had some rough friends early in life, some innocent and some guilty as hell for various petty
Rex
Mar 2015
#111
That is exactly correct. Innocent people want it cleared up, right away. nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#125
What BS. I've known many innocent people who have finally broken down and accepted
1monster
Mar 2015
#306
Assange wanted it cleared up right away, but the Swedish Prosecutor did everything in her power
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#320
If the "rape victim" insists that there was no rape (stipulating that the rape victim is of age and
1monster
Mar 2015
#303
Pretty damned hard to win a conviction if the "victim" denies the crime ever happened without
1monster
Mar 2015
#395
Yes, and that "the women they've nearly killed" is pretty much the "overwhelming evidence to the
1monster
Mar 2015
#413
You are only making things worse for the Prosecutor. She didn't know her own laws? She didn't know
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#157
Sabrina....no one can make you read the 11/14 Court of Appeals decision. And no one can
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#162
I don't see where that quote implies interviewing Assange elsewhere is against the law?
Fumesucker
Mar 2015
#241
I, myself, have posted that information to sabrina scores of times. Her narrative does not deviate
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#135
Now Assange is interview and then arrested. What did you think was going to happen?
hack89
Mar 2015
#71
So they're finally going to interview him now, and move the prosecution forward?
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Mar 2015
#46
Well, he fled Sweden before his scheduled interview there....here, Sweden has already indicated they
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#91
Because then it sounds all spy-novel-ish! That makes it SO much more true! (nt)
jeff47
Mar 2015
#128
James Blond, living in the Ladies' Loo in the embassy.....no one would believe it is I wrote it...nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#137
Also, it wasn't until November that the Swedish courts suggested she try a London interview.
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#87
Exactly---the OP seems to be arguing that this rapist deserves special treatment. As a criminal
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#90
Wait! It was November! when the Swedish Court "suggested" that Ny interview Assange in London?
1monster
Mar 2015
#311
Easy. Until Sweden guarantees he won't be arrested, Assange will continue to obfuscate.
randome
Mar 2015
#108
No--I just figured out Ny's fairly brilliant strategy......the Court of Appeals ruling in November
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#101
He's not going to be able to delay. Ecuador wants him out of that embassy. Interestingly,
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#109
Because that nefarious Obama will clone it and spread it across the continent!
randome
Mar 2015
#115
Assange is the one stringing this along....like a guilty man. Two years of appeals in the UK
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#151
Well, yes. James Blond has essentially imprisoned himself, and public support has completely eroded
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#159
He was free on bail in the UK for a couple years, and then in the embassy, of his own volition,
cemaphonic
Mar 2015
#200
Got it. So the only thing Assange does now is further strain public perception of him.
randome
Mar 2015
#107
This makes me think, probably a good idea if visiting another country to know something
Rex
Mar 2015
#95
So they are extending the case and nullifying the SOL (or pushing the SOL to a future date)?
Rex
Mar 2015
#129
Rex, it's simple. The Swedish Prosecutor claimed that under Swedish Law before filing charges,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#268
Actually it was Bank of America who most likely set him up. The set up began a couple of weeks
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#286
Assange (and others) WELCOME the interview. This isn't even a question nt
riderinthestorm
Mar 2015
#206
Yes....his Swedish lawyer testified that he had advised Assange that he would
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#238
You mean they have never been 'investigated'?? But we were told they WERE. Lol!
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#211
Assange should run as MP for the Cities of London and Westminster constituency!
struggle4progress
Mar 2015
#218
Thanks you, sabrina 1, for your dogged pursuit of this story. Vilifying whistleblowers is ...
Scuba
Mar 2015
#227
I don't have to conveniently set aside anything. He's being smeared for exposing crimes. Period.
Scuba
Mar 2015
#353
Facts are facts, Scuba and the propagandists, regarding actual Journalists and Whistle Blowers
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#271
We know it won't stop the propaganda. However it grows weaker by the day as the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#259
I find it interesting that the UK spent millions of pounds to have their cops hound Assange.
backscatter712
Mar 2015
#263
That's exactly how it smells to most rational human beings. The despicable part of it is how
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#285
Kicked for the ultimate disinfection - SUNSHINE… Kicked for the Whistle Blowers
MrMickeysMom
Mar 2015
#289
The question is 'can the Prosecutor refuse to do what she has refused to do for years now'
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#301
Amazing that anyone with that patriarchal view of women should have been allowed anywhere near DU
Fumesucker
Mar 2015
#340
Exactly, but that is who we are supposed to 'look to' for 'facts' about this case. The man has
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#344
I don't do upset. Especially in response to a transparent attempt to provoke me.
randome
Mar 2015
#345
You seem to care an awful lot about Wikileaks. So does the US, the UK, Swedish prosecutors and right
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#346
Yes, you are correct, that is a good analogy of the false claimers over the past several years.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#379
Can you provide something, ANYTHING about this case, some documentation, or anything, that
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#382
So nothing at all to add to the 'documentation' in this case? Okay, good to know.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#397
You must know that people who have READ documents related to this case, witness interviews, police
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#404
Why did Assange flee Sweden right after the prosecutor scheduled an interview with his lawyer?
hack89
Mar 2015
#349
Ignoring the facts about that too, are you? Assange was told by the Prosecutor who had no time
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#351
That seems to have been the position of the Swedish Prosecutor, assuming she
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#357
By being a Publisher and prize winning Journalist. Democracies flourish when they have a free and
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#380
Hmmm... What are your thoughts on the Pentagon Papers release? Bernstein and Woodwards
1monster
Mar 2015
#398