re: #285 lawhawk

I’m not familiar with Swedish law, but if the alleged rape claims were ginned up by the two women involved there, they might be subject to similar charges of filing false reports (notwithstanding the other legal issues and hurdles to overcome in making the case against Assange).

They could be subject to perjury and false accusation at least. Proving rape cases is usually hard enough, proving that the accusations were entirely false would likely be even harder. And this despite otherwise good legislation in Sweden (meaning our system puts more weight behind the victim than other systems might).

The case has been a weird rollercoaster, which is unusual. The case was opened, dismissed and then reopened in short succession, based first on a lack of evidence, and then the addition of new evidence. Normally it would not have been dismissed, if the case was still under development. This latest charge of rape is under the stronger legal term “probable” (meaning the evidence is strong).

The people behind the case have had to publicly affirm that Assange isn’t to be handed over to the US (or other interested parties) following this trial, as people have seen that as the “true” motivations behind the entire case.
So far, I would say this has been handled well by the authorities. And Assange. He gave himself up without too much bull.

re: #289 Decatur Deb

I’ll try to get you SecDef Gates’ comment on the impact of WL. Note that the kids phone-bombing LBJ ultimately won.

I thought that was a joke scenario. Interesting. Off to Wikipedia I go!