I despise women who file false rape charges!

It trivializes rape and makes it hard for women who have REALLY been raped to get anybody to believe them!

If the two women who are accusing Assange of rape end up to be LIARS!

THEY should go to JAIL too!

you cannot make this shit up

"surprise! we're having sex!"

Which we don't know. Until we know what happened in these encounters we can't judge either the women or Assange. As far was we can gather from the precious little the media has said is that the sex in the cases of both women began as consensual and at least in one case there was some sort of conflict about a condom. Without knowing WHAT occurred during either of the sexual encounters none of the people involved can fairly be judged.

Did the condom break and it wasn't known by either party until the act was over?

Did the condom break and Assange knew it but continued the act without his partner knowing until the act was over?

Did the condom break and Assange was told to stop by his partner but he didn't and completed the act without consent?

Did Assange take off the condom on purpose and continue the act unknown by his partner until the act was over?

Did Assange take off the condom on purpose and continue the act even though his partner told him to stop when she realized the condom was off?

Did the condom come off by accident and was unknown by either party until the act was over?

Did the condom come off by accident and Assange knew it but his partner didn't until the act was over?

Did the condom come off by accident and was unknown by either party until the act was over?

Did the consensual sex act take place without a condom and neither party insisted one be used?

Did the consensual sex act take place without a condom when Assange's partner insisted one be used but he refused and commenced the act anyway?


All sorts of different scenarios may have occurred with either or both of the women that run the gamut between nothing happened whatsoever that is in any way criminal all the way to what anyone could consider to be rape, yet we don't have any of the details about what occurred during the sexual encounters to make this judgment. The media has been spending all their time on every OTHER detail that is immaterial to coming to any reasonable conclusion as to guilt or innocence and frankly does nothing but flay the reputations of both women and Assange. The media has been so ridiculously irresponsible in reporting on this situation that at this point even if they finally DID give these details I wouldn't be so inclined to believe them what with the flaying they've already done to all three of these people.

they are viewed as victims because they supposedly asked him to stop after the condom broke, and he refused.

This is a VERY murky area.

The fact that issue was dropped months ago, then suddenly resurfaced is prima facia evidence that the charge is politically motivated. They (the Obama administration) want him arrested so he can be extradited to the U.S. and face charges of espionage.

That is one weird law.

Sonoman

Obviously that's not the actual law. If it were, besides the obvious problem of a negative population growth, both parties would be guilty, not just the man.

I think it actually involves requests for STD testing because of the lack of a condom.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

LOL

Both women are sexual beings with a natural and understandable desire to have sex
Both women know that about the other
Both women found out that Assange had unprotected sex with the other
They are now concerned about STDs

That can be done anywhere, and does not require an INTERPOL international warrant for arrest.

And he did this TWICE?

Let's just say that this case has built-in reasonable doubt.

:crazy:
rocktivity

I don't know what Sweden considers to be "sex by surprise", but given the title it sure as shit sounds like unconsentual sex which in anyone's book is rape. Being charged with "sex by surprise" doesn't mean he actually committed "sex by surprise" but it sure as hell makes me wonder what the hell happened and what the hell Sweden considers "sex by surprise" to be if not rape.

but exactly what it is, is lost in translation.


Nevermind that Sweden had 8 weeks from mid-August to act and they're acting much later than that. This whole situation stinks to high heaven.

eom

Here are the details which show consensual sex with 2 women:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1307137/Supporters-dismissed-rape-accusations-WikiLeaks-founder-Julian-Assange--women-involved-tell-different-story.html

Hardly the stuff to put out an Interpol Most Wanted poster.

if they "lied" only THEY would go to jail.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,957001,00.html

Remember how Phyllis George suggested on air that Webb and Dotson hug to show all was "forgiven"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathleen_Crowell_Webb

Both have stated that the sex was consensual. The only thing they've accused him of is deception, in not wearing a condom. For the first woman, there's some disagreement over whether the condom accidentally broke, or whether it broke on its own and Assange just failed to mention it. In the second case, it sounds like they had sex more than once, and he failed to "suit up" the second time around. Poor behavior for sure, but not criminal in any American court.

Apparently, under the interpretation of Swedish law being followed by the prosecutors, failing to wear a condom when requested is rape. This was a decision made by the prosecutors, and not by the women. They have never accused him of doing anything nonconsensual, but simply of being deceptive.

the two women basically accused the guy of being a dog (having sex w. them without a rubber and/or with a rubber that broke)

they admit the sex was consensual but of course they did not consent to the rubber breaking

i'm sure assange didn't like the fact that the rubber broke either

there appears to be some obscure swedish law never before enforced that makes it illegal to have sex w.out a working condom, which begs the question of how swedes reproduce...

the whole thing is ridiculous, if this is the best they can do to discredit the guy, it REALLY makes them look weak and ridiculous

if he's doing something wrong, come back with something better than he's a healthy single guy in his 30s who likes to "score"

And yet there is still a small core of true believers on this site who think that the "victim"/false accuser is the Salt of the Earth and did nothing wrong and that the lacrosse players must continue to be vilified.

in the night and the date rape thing, to me. There are many ways to defend yourself against that sort of thing. But, me, I grew up with 5 older brothers. I spent the first 10 years of my life in a headlock and the next 7 years running as fast as I could, barefooted as a yard dog. Not from sexual assaults, but from boys' games out in the dirt road and woods around our house. Otherwise I could have sat in the house and play tea party with my doll. Boys seemed to have a lot more fun. We played tackle football as far back as I can remember, and I was needed as a lineman. Two men tried to rape me, one time, and I defended myself. They gave up. They weren't armed. And they weren't serious rapists, but, still...

Extrapolating her own experience to everyone else.

:sarcasm:

to file (or rewarded for doing so)--either way, it sucks. The US has very dirty hands in this whole issue, I am convinced..... sigh....

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

they allege a weird Swedish "Don't piss off a girl you sleep with" law.

That's all.

That's an instance the phrase 'zero tolerance' works for me.

Here's another article.



http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/02/when-it-comes-to-assange-r-pe-case-the-swedes-are-making-it-up-as-they-go-along/

countries are in on it.