

Sweden reopens Wikileaks founder rape investigation - DanielBMarkham
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11151277

======
bl4k
The bad things about this case is that whatever happens to Mr Assange, or how
he is perceived in the media and by the wider world, directly impacts the
credibility of wikileaks itself (like it or not).

A site that is built on a great ideal can now be easily dismissed by doubters
and opponents because of the actions of its figurehead.

The people behind wikileaks should have remained anonymous and not given their
enemies a target to attempt to take down.

Instead, Mr Assange reveled in the attention and tempted opponents of
wikileaks to make a case of him.

~~~
jacquesm
I think the fact that they were not anonymous tremendously helped the
credibility of wikileaks.

That that backfires now is not a reason to say it was bad of them to do this
in the first place.

Also, there is nobody guilty until they've been proven guilty.

If this is a smear job and it comes out as such in the longer term then
wikileaks stature will only grow, if it isn't and Assange steps down I don't
doubt that the next person to take his place will know that he/she is living
in a glass box and needs to act accordingly.

wikileaks > Julian Assange.

~~~
bl4k
It is a smear campaign, so they don't have to wait for a guilty or innocent
verdict - the charges alone are doing enough damage.

I like the old wikileaks, before Julian starting getting his face on the news
as being the spokesperson. Wikileaks is now editorialized, which makes it easy
for the right to write it off as part of the liberal media. It all started
with the 'collateral murder' video (the chosen title says a lot).

They should let the documents speak for themselves, and leave wikileaks to be
the online de facto venue for such documents.

~~~
mithaler
If, hypothetically, a rape had actually occurred (which we can't speak to at
this time), could a genuine prosecution occur without accusations of a smear
campaign? What if he really is a rapist? If that were the case, should he not
be prosecuted because of the work he does with Wikileaks?

But I agree that Wikileaks has been editorializing too much. I liked it when
they were acting as journalists, not activists.

~~~
bl4k
Actually I didn't word what I wrote correctly, what I meant to say is that no
matter what happens, some will see it as a smear campaign.

Sweden is country advanced enough that you would assume that they don't just
charge people with rape without there being some evidence to support the
charge. We can also assume that the legal system in that country is stable
enough to grant Julian a fair trial and judge him based on the evidence.

To date his only defense has been that this is a deliberate attempt by unnamed
powers-that-be to smear his name because of his role at wikileaks. I can't
recall him directly addressing the allegations (a good lawyer would advise him
to save it for the courtroom).

It is an interesting case because of who he is - it will also be interesting
if he mounts a 'this is a false allegation because of who I am' defense in
court.

~~~
jacquesm
> it will also be interesting if he mounts a 'this is a false allegation
> because of who I am' defense in court.

It will be very short in that case.

The thing that makes this look like a smear job is the fact that it's two
women that know each other at a _very_ convenient time combined with the fact
that Assange had already gone public before the alleged rape had happened with
the warning that 'dirty tricks' were in their future.

It all seems a bit too convenient. The way the Swedish authorities went about
the case to date also doesn't smell like roses.

Time will tell. As for the Swedish legal system being pure, I recall that not
that long ago there was a ruling in the Pirate Bay case that a judge that had
substantial ties with the recording industry was deemed impartial enough to
judge their case.

------
Tyrannosaurs
If there is sufficient evidence here then an investigation is right and
proper. It's easy to see this as about Julian Assange but it's also about
someone who claims that they've been raped - something which has to be taken
seriously.

I don't see a particular issue with the original prosecutor being overruled by
his seniors - in cases such as this I'd imagine that they want to make sure
that they do everything they can make sure that they get it right and appear
above reproach and if in doubt investigate it properly seems a sensible
approach.

~~~
Andrew_Quentin
I agree. Rape is a serious crime, regardless of who, by whom or to whom.
However, it would be difficult to say that the handling of this case has been
proper. To the contrary, it seems like a complete mess.

The prosecutors seem to be playing a PR game very publicly. A proper
investigation does not issue an arrest straight away, retreat the arrest, then
issue an arrest again once the mood has calmed down.

~~~
ithkuil
reminds me of Prosecutor Ekström from the Millenium Trilogy by Stieg Larsson
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Trilogy>)

------
judofyr
I like Opplysningskontoret's (a Norwegian version of The Onion) summary:

 _The contents of Wikileaks-founder leaks into Swedish women._

~~~
joey_bananas
Yes, nothing like rape for a good chuckle.

~~~
MarkBook
If wikileaks should be allowed to leak state secrets then why should some
jokes be taboo?

~~~
joey_bananas
No one said they weren't allowed to make the jokes.

~~~
philk
It might just be my reading of it but _Yes, nothing like rape for a good
chuckle._ conveys disapproval to me.

~~~
arst
There's a tremendous difference between expressing disapproval for what
someone says and believing that they shouldn't be allowed to say it (insert
not-actually-Voltaire quote here).

~~~
_pius
_insert not-actually-Voltaire quote here_

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it."

Done.

