Damn! Hope this isn't an attack on their site! We need the bank industry info released!
The thought of a bank getting turned upside-down for their shenanigans sounds great, but who will end up suffering the most if one of the biggest financial institutions collapses? The banks are not the ones suffering for their greed throughout the 90's and aughts. I doubt they will be the ones that suffer if Assange's claims are true.
true, indeed.
we were talking about this at the dinner table.
"is it more damaging to world stability, if the "little people...us." live in a fog?
people need to simply clean their own house....and stop attempting to clean others.
live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
WikiLeaks website pulled by Amazon after US political pressure
Site hosting leaked US embassy cables is ousted from American servers as senator calls for boycott of WikiLeaks by companies
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
The Guardian, Thursday 2 December 2010
The US struck its first blow against WikiLeaks after Amazon.com pulled the plug on hosting the whistleblowing website in reaction to heavy political pressure.
The company announced it was cutting WikiLeaks off yesterday only 24 hours after being contacted by the staff of Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate's committee on homeland security.
WikiLeaks expressed disappointment with Amazon, and insisted it was a breach of freedom of speech as enshrined in the US constitution's first amendment. The organisation, in a message sent via Twitter, said if Amazon was "so uncomfortable with the first amendment, they should get out of the business of selling books."
While freedom of speech is a sensitive issue in the US, scope for a full-blown row is limited, given that Democrats and Republicans will largely applaud Amazon's move. Previously a fully fledged Democrat, Lieberman won re-election to the Senate in 2006 as an independent; his status is that of an independent, albeit with continued close associations with the Democratic party's Senate contingent.
The question is whether he was acting on his own or pressed to do so by the Obama administration, and how much pressure was applied to Amazon.
Although there are echoes of the censorship row between Google and China earlier this year, constitutional lawyers insisted it was not a first amendment issue because Amazon is a private company, free to make its own decisions.
The WikiLeaks main website and a sub-site devoted to the diplomatic documents were unavailable from the US and Europe yesterday, as Amazon servers refused to acknowledge requests for data. WikiLeaks switched to a host in Sweden.
Lieberman said: "[Amazon's] decision to cut off WikiLeaks now is the right decision and should set the standard for other companies WikiLeaks is using to distribute its illegally seized material. I call on any other company or organisation that is hosting WikiLeaks to immediately terminate its relationship with them."
The department of homeland security confirmed Amazon's move, referring journalists to Lieberman's statement.
Kevin Bankston, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which supports internet freedom, said it was not a violation of the first amendment but was nevertheless disappointing. "This certainly implicates first amendment rights to the extent that web hosts may, based on direct or informal pressure, limit the materials the American public has a first amendment right to access," Bankston told the website Talking Points Memo.
The development came amid angry and polarised political opinion in America over WikiLeaks, with some conservatives calling for the organisation's founder, Julian Assange, to be executed as a spy.
The fury building up among rightwingers in the US, ranging from the potential Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee to conservative blogsites such as Red State, contrasted with a measured response from the Obama administration. The White House, the state department and the Pentagon continued to denounce the leaks, describing them as "despicable". But senior administration officials, with a sense of weary resignation, also called on people to put the leaks into context and insisted they had not done serious damage to US relations.
The White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, shrugged aside as "ridiculous" a call by Assange, interviewed by Time magazine, via Skype from an undisclosed location, for the resignation of the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, over an order to spy on the United Nations. "I'm not entirely sure why we care about the opinion of one guy with one website," Gibbs said. "Our foreign policy and the interests of this country are far stronger than his one website."
John Kerry, the Democratic head of the Senate foreign relations committee, on Sunday denounced the leaks but he sounded more sanguine at an event in Washington on Tuesday night. He said there was a "silver lining" in that it was now clear where everyone stood on Iran. "Things that I have heard from the mouths of King Abdullah [of Saudi Arabia] and Hosni Mubarak [Egyptian president] and others are now quite public," Kerry said. He went on to say there was a "consensus on Iran".
But others, particularly rightwingers, are seeking retribution, with Assange as the prime target. Legal experts in the US were divided over whether the US could successfully prosecute Assange under the 1917 espionage act. Sceptics said the US protections for journalists would make such a prosecution difficult and also cited pragmatic issues, such as the difficulty of extraditing Assange, an Australian.
Huckabee, who was among the contenders for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and is likely to stand again in 2012, told the Politico website: "Whoever in our government leaked that information is guilty of treason, and I think anything less than execution is too kind a penalty."
His later comments suggest he had in mind Bradley Manning, the US private in Iraq who is suspected of leaking the information and is under arrest in Virginia, rather than Assange.
Typical of attacks on Assange is a blog by lexington_concord on Red State, a popular rightwing site, in which the writers says Assange is a spy.
"Under the traditional rules of engagement he is thus subject to summary execution and my preferred course of action would [be] for Assange to find a small calibre round in the back of his head."
• This article was amended on 2 December 2010. The original said: Joe Lieberman, though an independent, is a former Republican who switched to the Democrats last year. This has been corrected.
WTF!!! Shame on these "Americans" - Joe you Mother F'er! The info will get out one way or another- I'm pretty sure their protocol is set up and ready for the next move- This shut down shouldn't come as a surprise - The cyber war is before us!
WTF!!! Shame on these "Americans" - Joe you Mother F'er! The info will get out one way or another- I'm pretty sure their protocol is set up and ready for the next move- This shut down shouldn't come as a surprise - The cyber war is before us!
WTF!!! Shame on these "Americans" - Joe you Mother F'er! The info will get out one way or another- I'm pretty sure their protocol is set up and ready for the next move- This shut down shouldn't come as a surprise - The cyber war is before us!
I do find it ironic that a former hacker is complaining about having his site hacked.
and i find it ironic that we are persecuting the people that exposed all of this instead of the ones who are committing these acts. this is the same thing as a guy robbing your house, you go to the police to report him, and you get arrested instead of the criminal. how does that work? this is how the americans are going to choose to go in this case, and we will look even more foolish to the rest of the world. the other international papers are lambasting us for going after assange while not going after the people who made these mistakes and wrote these cables...and we deserve to be laughed at. we did not go after libby and cheney for outing valerie plame, and the obama administration put pressure on spain to not go after those in the bush administration for allowing torture. it is funny how the american government will go to great lengths to try to uphold the fascade of us having some sort of moral high ground, while we do the opposite of what we say we will do publicly..
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
WTF!!! Shame on these "Americans" - Joe you Mother F'er! The info will get out one way or another- I'm pretty sure their protocol is set up and ready for the next move- This shut down shouldn't come as a surprise - The cyber war is before us!
I do find it ironic that a former hacker is complaining about having his site hacked.
and i find it ironic that we are persecuting the people that exposed all of this instead of the ones who are committing these acts. this is the same thing as a guy robbing your house, you go to the police to report him, and you get arrested instead of the criminal. how does that work? this is how the americans are going to choose to go in this case, and we will look even more foolish to the rest of the world. the other international papers are lambasting us for going after assange while not going after the people who made these mistakes and wrote these cables...and we deserve to be laughed at. we did not go after libby and cheney for outing valerie plame, and the obama administration put pressure on spain to not go after those in the bush administration for allowing torture. it is funny how the american government will go to great lengths to try to uphold the fascade of us having some sort of moral high ground, while we do the opposite of what we say we will do publicly..
Again..... Well said gimme.
Most of the info regarding things that were said about other countries, and what not - can be brushed off....Or isn't registering with average citizen.
But I think the biggest bomb is yet to be dropped! The one that will affect the banking industry! I think this one will hit more at home with the average person. This is the one that probably has the real potential of getting Assange killed..... not by the US Gov, but by some rich corrupt cats(ofcourse with the approval of the US Gov)!! The banking info has the real potential of causing some kaos.
so what's going to happen to Assange if they do catch him? will he be handed over to the US so he can be waterboarded 300 times?
and uhm,
have you found Bin Laden yet or did you let him go again?
You didn't hear?? They know where Bin L. is!!! Only problem is that if they take him down a lot of contractors will lose their $$$$$$ --- Also, we would lose our excuse to be in the middle east......
so what's going to happen to Assange if they do catch him? will he be handed over to the US so he can be waterboarded 300 times?
and uhm,
have you found Bin Laden yet or did you let him go again?
no we haven't. bin laden has not been the primary target. as our aussie PM might have told you.......you are a smart woman, so you should know better....
if you think that we waterboard everyone then you are just as disgusting as those that believe all of us are as guilty as those prosecuting those at gitmo....
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
so what's going to happen to Assange if they do catch him? will he be handed over to the US so he can be waterboarded 300 times?
and uhm,
have you found Bin Laden yet or did you let him go again?
no we haven't. bin laden has not been the primary target. as our aussie PM might have told you.......you are a smart woman, so you should know better....
if you think that we waterboard everyone then you are just as disgusting as those that believe all of us are as guilty as those prosecuting those at gitmo....
so what's going to happen to Assange if they do catch him? will he be handed over to the US so he can be waterboarded 300 times?
and uhm,
have you found Bin Laden yet or did you let him go again?
no we haven't. bin laden has not been the primary target. as our aussie PM might have told you.......you are a smart woman, so you should know better....
if you think that we waterboard everyone then you are just as disgusting as those that believe all of us are as guilty as those prosecuting those at gitmo....
but we do waterboard right?
yes we have waterboarded. and i am pretty much the first person on here to complain about it...and i am the first person to call for cheney's fucking head on a platter to the hague as a result of it..
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
if you think that we waterboard everyone then you are just as disgusting as those that believe all of us are as guilty as those prosecuting those at gitmo....
but we do waterboard right?
yes we have waterboarded. and i am pretty much the first person on here to complain about it...and i am the first person to call for cheney's fucking head on a platter to the hague as a result of it..
do you really believe she thinks "everyone" is waterboarded?
so what's going to happen to Assange if they do catch him? will he be handed over to the US so he can be waterboarded 300 times?
and uhm,
have you found Bin Laden yet or did you let him go again?
no we haven't. bin laden has not been the primary target. as our aussie PM might have told you.......you are a smart woman, so you should know better....
if you think that we waterboard everyone then you are just as disgusting as those that believe all of us are as guilty as those prosecuting those at gitmo....
so what's going to happen to Assange if they do catch him? will he be handed over to the US so he can be waterboarded 300 times?
and uhm,
have you found Bin Laden yet or did you let him go again?
no we haven't. bin laden has not been the primary target. as our aussie PM might have told you.......you are a smart woman, so you should know better....
if you think that we waterboard everyone then you are just as disgusting as those that believe all of us are as guilty as those prosecuting those at gitmo....
are you serious? i read back through this whole thread. where did i ever say that we waterboard everybody? that is pretty cynical IMO.
and i really doubt that if caught assange would be waterboarded 300 times. or even one time. as far as i know nobody has died over his leaks, so no need to go all jack bauer on him. not that going all jack bauer is ever ever approproate...he is wanted for and is going to be charged with sexual assault, and nothing more at the moment. i am thinking that the US justice dept is going to try to make an example of him instead of investigating those in the leaked cables...
sad...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Again... I ask...
Why is it worse to report these things... than the actual things, themselves?
Would I be the one that should be imprisoned if I heard details about a rape... and reported the rape? Shouldn't the rapist get... at the very least... some sort of trouble?
I don't get it either. Is it the spin machine of corporate run media? Making it all about Julian instead of what actually is important? Dick Cheney could've released this info and I would say "good for you .....Dick". I don't care who does it.
At one time in US history. This was called good reporting and was written in history books that caused change for the better. Now we don't even talk about the conent.
I hate the media with a passion. They fail us at every turn.
and our country has a "free press"....with the constant failures of the media it is almost as if we are "press free"...
a free press is only free for those that have one.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
But tell me... how can he be prosecuted for "rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion" when...
"Two women - who met Mr Assange when he was in Sweden for lectures - claimed he sexually attacked them. Both said they had consensual sex with the notorious campaigner, but said he refused to wear a condom."
Consensual.... how can that become 'attacked'? OK... so the pratt didn't want to wear a condom but it would seem, at the time, the ladies didn't mind. The mind boggles.
Is "Sex by Surprise" Illegal in the United States?
How would the alleged Swedish sex crimes of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange fare in an American court?
By Jessica Grose
Julian Assange's lawyer told AOL News on Thursday that the WikiLeaks founder has been charged with "sex by surprise" in Sweden. Though the lawyer says he doesn't know what "sex by surprise" means, the Swedish prosecution office announced that they are charging Assange with "rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion." These charges allegedly stem from consensual sexual encounters with two separate women that became nonconsensual at some point during the act. If this had happened in the United States, could Assange have been charged with a crime?
Possibly. The traditional common-law rule is that there needs to be both lack of consent and the threat of physical force in order for a sexual violation to constitute rape. By that standard, Assange might be in the clear if his alleged activities took place in the United States (and if no violence was involved). But in some states, lack of consent can by itself serve as the basis for a rape charge. The exact circumstances under which a woman might revoke her consent varies: In Illinois, for example, it is considered rape if a woman says "no" at any time during sex and her partner does not stop. Other states are vague on the question of whether someone can change her mind after penetration has occurred. And some courts have been very clear that consent is locked in once intercourse has begun.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
'Sex by Surprise' at Heart of Assange Criminal Probe
(Dec. 2) -- The international manhunt for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in a sex-crime investigation in Sweden apparently stems from a condom malfunction.
Assange's London attorney, Mark Stephens, told AOL News today that Swedish prosecutors told him that Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715.
Assange is the subject of an international manhunt, as a result of Interpol issuing a "red notice," a warrant indicating the person should be arrested with a view to extradition.
'Sex by Surprise' at heart of Swedish criminal case against Julian Assange
Julian Assange, founder of the WikiLeaks website, is wanted in a sex-crime investigation in Sweden.
"We don't even know what 'sex by surprise' even means, and they haven't told us," Stephens said, just hours after Sweden's Supreme Court rejected Assange's bid to prevent an arrest order from being issued against him on allegations of sex crimes.
"Whatever 'sex by surprise' is, it's only a offense in Sweden -- not in the U.K. or the U.S. or even Ibiza," Stephens said. "I feel as if I'm in a surreal Swedish movie being threatened by bizarre trolls. The prosecutor has not asked to see Julian, never asked to interview him, and he hasn't been charged with anything. He's been told he's wanted for questioning, but he doesn't know the nature of the allegations against him."
The strange tale of Assange's brief flings with two Swedish women during a three-day period in mid-August -- and decisions by three different prosecutors to first dismiss rape allegations made by the women and then re-open the case -- has more twists, turns and conspiracy theories than any of Stieg Larsson's best-sellers.
True, one of Assange's accusers sounds tailor-made for those who think Assange is being set up in Sweden by dark CIA-backed operatives who want him smeared or silenced for his document dumping with WikiLeaks. She's a 31-year-old blond academic and member of the Social Democratic Party who's known for her radical feminist views, once wrote a treatise on how to take revenge against men and was once thrown out of Cuba for subversive activities.
But others say Assange, who denies any wrongdoing and says the sex was consensual, may have just run afoul of Sweden's unusual rape laws, which are considered pro-feminist because of the consideration given issues of consent when it comes to sexual activity -- including even the issue of whether a condom was used.
In fact, the current prosecutor, Marianne Ny, who re-opened the case against Assange, has been active in the proposed reforms of Swedish rape laws that would, if passed, involve an investigation of whether an imbalance in power between two people could void one person's insistence that the sex was consensual.
Swedish tabloids and the country's blogosphere have been rife since August with stories and speculation about Assange's accusers, the flip-flopping prosecutors and just what, if any, crime was committed by Assange during sex with the two women.
"He's innocent, that I can tell you," Bjorn Hurtig, Assange's Stockholm-based lawyer, told AOL News today. Hurtig later issued a statement saying the international arrest warrant for Assange is based on "exaggerated grounds."
Assange arrived in Sweden on Aug. 11 to speak at a weekend seminar sponsored by the Social Democratic Party and arranged to stay at a Stockholm apartment belonging to the event organizer, a member of the branch of the party who would become one of Assange's two accusers.
According to a police report obtained by the Daily Mail in August, she and Assange had sex, and at some point the condom broke. While she was apparently not happy about the condom breaking, the two were seen the next day at the seminar, and nothing appeared amiss.
Another woman at the seminar, a 27-year-old art photographer, said in her police statement that she'd come to hear Assange's lecture because of her fascination with him and his work. She can be seen in video footage on the Internet sitting in the front row during Assange's lecture, wearing a pink sweater and snapping pictures of him.
According to the police report, the woman managed to get an invitation to go out for lunch with Assange and his entourage after the seminar. They spent time together before he went back to stay at the event organizer's apartment.
Two days later, on Aug. 16, they reconnected by phone and the woman invited him to her apartment, more than 40 miles outside Stockholm. She paid for the ticket since Assange apparently had no cash and doesn't like to use credit cards because they could be traced.
She complained in her police statement that during the train ride to her hometown, "he paid more attention to his computer rather than me." She also said that by the time they arrived at her apartment, "the passion and excitement seemed to have disappeared."
The woman and Assange also reportedly had sex. According to the Daily Mail account, Assange did not use a condom at least one time during their sexual activity. The New York Times today quoted accounts given by the women to police and friends as saying Assange "did not comply with her appeals to stop when (the condom) was no longer in use."
According to the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet, the photographer contacted the other woman two days after her assignation with Assange, and the two apparently had a conversation in which it became clear they had both had sex with Assange. The photographer was worried about having had unprotected sex and decided she wanted to go to the police.
The other woman accompanied her to the police station on Aug. 20 just to support her but then told the investigating officer on duty that she, too, had had sex with Assange, Aftonbladet reported.
Based on what was said to police, the on-call prosecutor, Marie Kjellstrand, decided to issue an arrest warrant on charges of rape and molestation, and the next day the story hit the Swedish paper Expressen and newspapers all over the world.
Kjellstrand's decision was overruled the following day by a higher-level prosecutor, Eva Finne, who withdrew the arrest warrant and said she did not see any evidence for rape allegations.
Then, on Sept. 1, a third prosecutor, Ny, re-opened the rape investigation, implying that she had new information in the case.
On Nov. 18, Swedish judicial officials approved a prosecutorial request that Assange be detained for questioning for alleged sex crimes, and on Nov. 30 Interpol issued a "red notice" against Assange for alleged sex crimes in Sweden. Despite what has happened, the woman who organized the event and had Assange stay at her apartment told Aftonbladet that she never intended that Assange be charged with rape.
"It is quite wrong that we were afraid of him. He is not violent, and I do not feel threatened by him," she told the newspaper in an interview that did not identify her by name. "The responsibility for what happened to me and the other girl lies with a man who had attitude problems with women."
When the second accuser was reached on her mobile phone today by AOL News, she said simply, "I have nothing to say on the matter."
Stephens, Assange's lawyer, said that even though British police know Assange's whereabouts -- reportedly in southeastern England -- they have not yet arrested him because of the inadequacy of the arrest warrants issued by Sweden.
"The Swedes couldn't even produce another warrant today that was valid," Stephens told AOL News. "The police here sent it back."
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It is a bulls**t reason, any reason to lock him up.
Democracy is dead.
the charge apparently doesnt come with a custodial sentence. but i suspect it might be easier for the US to extradite him from sweden. who the fuck knows... as you said its a bullshit reason/charge.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I wonder how long it will be before the reason for the rape charge is leaked. Sounds like a stitch up to me. And the Wikileaks site has a major cyber attack.
An interesting article about the "effects" of the Wikileaks... er... leaks.
In summary, they're only releasing a fraction of what they have, and even then it's only after it's all been looked at by five major newspapers and had redactions applied. Wikileaks also went to the U.S. embassy in London to ask for help with the redactions, but was rebuffed.
And also, to be filed under "Misplaced Priorities" (like people getting mad at Julian Assange and calling for his execution while not worrying at all about the things he exposed), comes this gem: Visa and Mastercard have suspended operations with Wikileaks, but they are continuing to process payments made to the KKK.
And I listen for the voice inside my head... nothing. I'll do this one myself.
This is a stitch-up. No doubt about it. The U.S has been pressuring it's lapdog Britain to arrest him so he can then be extradited to Sweden on these bullshit charges. The Swedes will then probably extradite him to the U.S where he can be charged on the matter of the leaked documents and permanently silenced. Fucking disgusting. This is the sort of thing that used to occur in Stalinist Russia.
Julian Assange denied bail over sexual assault allegations
Judge fears WikiLeaks founder – who denies all charges – has 'means and ability' to abscond
Caroline Davies, Sam Jones and Afua Hirsch
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 7 December 2010
Julian Assange Julian Assange arriving at Westminster magistrates court. The WikiLeaks founder's request for bail was denied. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA
The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks said last night it would not to be gagged by the imprisonment of its founder, Julian Assange, after a judge refused him bail at a dramatic extradition hearing in London.
Assange, 39, who is wanted in Sweden over claims he sexually assaulted two women, was in Wandsworth prison last night after district judge Howard Riddle ruled there was a risk he would fail to surrender if granted bail. Assange denies the allegations.
Despite Jemima Khan, former wife of Pakistan cricket captain Imran Khan, the campaigning journalist John Pilger, the film director Ken Loach and others offering to stand surety totalling £180,000, the judge said the Australian Assange's "weak community ties" in the UK, and his "means and ability" to abscond, represented "substantial grounds" for refusing bail.
He was remanded until 14 December, when the case can be reviewed at the same court. His legal team said he would again apply for bail at that hearing.
Last night Kristinn Hrafnsson, a spokesman for WikiLeaks, confirmed it would continue publishing US diplomatic cables. In a statement he said: "This will not stifle WikiLeaks. The release of the US embassy cables – the biggest leak in history – will still continue. We will not be gagged, either by judicial action or corporate censorship."
WikiLeaks volunteers met in London last night to finalise plans for how the organisation would operate without Assange. The majority of staff would continue to work on the publication of the US embassy cables while a small group concentrates on campaigning for his release.
WikiLeaks staff will today move into a London office, having spent weeks commuting between the capital and the home counties bolthole from which Assange has been co-ordinating the release of the leaked cables. Staff had been required to take elaborate measures to ensure they were not followed to Assange's location and use of mobile phones was banned to avoid detection.
A WikiLeaks source said last night that Assange had been unprepared for being taken into custody, expecting that he would be granted bail. "We thought he'd be out. All he's got is the suit he was sitting in the box in," the source said.
The source added that although Assange was exhausted, he remained "together, positive and strong" after he was refused bail. It is understood his lawyers have requested that he be held alone.
The refusal to grant Assange bail came on a day when increasing pressure was brought to bear in the US on companies and organisations with ties to WikiLeaks.
As Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate's homeland security committee, urged businesses to sever their ties with the website, Visa suspended the payment of donations to the website through its credit card.
Asked about the New York Times's role in publishing the leaked cables, Lieberman told Fox news the newspaper "has committed at least an act of bad citizenship. Whether they have committed a crime I think bears very intensive inquiry".
Michael Mukasey, a former US attorney general, said last night that American lawyers should try to extradite Assange to the US for betraying government secrets. "If I was still in charge there would have been an investigation," he told the BBC's Newsnight. "This is a crime of a very high order. Julian Assange has been leaking this information. He came into possession of it knowing that it was harmful."
Mukasey, who stepped down from the post of attorney general last year, implied that the Swedish sexual accusations may only be a holding charge. "When one is accused of a very serious crime," he said, "it's common to hold him in respect of a lesser crime … while you assemble evidence of a second crime."
Assange, wearing a black suit and open-necked white shirt, stood in the glass-panelled dock at Westminster magistrates yesterday as more than 50 journalists from around the world packed into the well and more than 20 supporters and friends crammed into the public gallery. Outside, the pavement was swallowed up as more photographers and camera crew jostled with protesters gathered at the building's main entrance.
After the ruling – with supporters waving A4 printouts reading "Character Assassination" and "Protect Free Speech" – his solicitor, Mark Stephens, emerged from court to claim the prosecution was "politically motivated" and pledged WikiLeaks would not be cowed. Assange was entitled to a high court appeal, he said, adding the judge was "impressed" with the number of people prepared to "stand up" on his client's behalf. "[Those supporters] were but the tip of the iceberg," he said. "This is going to go viral. Many people believe Mr Assange to be innocent, myself included. Many people believe that this prosecution is politically motivated."
Pilger, who told the judge he knew Assange and had "very high regard for him", said outside court: "Sweden should be ashamed. This is not justice – this is outrageous."
Assange was arrested by appointment at a London police station at 9.20am after a European arrest warrant was received by the Metropolitan police extradition unit yesterday. He appeared in court at 2pm, where he spoke to confirm his name and date of birth and to tell the court: "I do not consent to my extradition."
There was confusion when he initially refused to give an address except a Post Office box number. When told this was unacceptable, his lawyer, John Jones, read out an address at 177 Grantham Street, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. Assange is wanted in connection with four allegations including of rape and molestation.
Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish prosecutors, said the first involved complainant A, who said she was the victim of "unlawful coercion" on the night of 14 August in Stockholm. The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
The second charge alleged Assange "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
The third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity". The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on 17 August without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.
Lindfield argued there was a "high risk of flight" because of Assange's "lifestyle, connections and potential assets".
He had access to funds, through PayPal donations to the WikiLeaks website, had a "network of international contacts", lived a "nomadic" lifestyle, and spent his time in "hiding", she said. The court later heard that for the past three weeks he had been staying at a UK address, and before then had spent two months living at the Frontline media club in Paddington.
There was no record of him entering the UK in the first place. He had displayed an unwillingness to co-operate, refusing to be photographed, fingerprinted or give a DNA sample on arrest, she added.
No details were given about the strength of evidence, with Lindfield saying it "is not a factor in relation to bail". She also opposed bail for reasons of his personal safety, saying if granted "any number of unstable persons could take it upon themselves to cause him serious harm".
"This is someone, simply put, to whom no conditions, even the most stringent conditions, could be imposed that would ensure he surrendered to the jurisdiction of this court," she said.
John Jones, lawyer for Assange, said the case must be "shorn of all political and media hysteria" associated with WikiLeaks. Assange was of previous good character, and had voluntarily handed himself in to Kentish Town police station in London. His refusal to be photographed, fingerprinted or give a DNA sample was on legal advice.
He had stayed in Sweden for 40 days after the allegations were made to answer the charges and only left the country after being given "express permission" by the Swedish prosecutor.
Since he arrived in the UK he had "consistently agreed to talk to the Swedish authorities". His defence fund had been frozen, and he would be "instantly recognised" if he tried to leave the country, said Jones. "He resists extradition as it is disproportionate to extradite someone under these circumstances. There has been every indication that the point of this warrant is to get him back for questioning."
The judge said the warrant did state it was for prosecution.
Others offering surety were Professor Patricia David, and the lawyer Geoffrey Sheen, president of Union Solidarity International, who both said although they did not know Assange they were concerned about human rights. An unnamed relative of Assange offered £80,000.
But Judge Riddle said: "The nature and strength of the evidence is not there, this is normal at this stage in proceedings. What we have here is the serious possible allegations against someone with comparatively weak community ties in this country. He has the means and ability to abscond if he wants to and I am satisfied that there are substantial grounds to believe if I granted him bail he would fail to surrender."
Downing Street said Assange's arrest was "a matter for the police" and there had been no ministerial involvement.
Unlike the UK, Swedish rape law is not based on consent but on the aforementioned concept of sexual integrity. There are a number of possible offences against this integrity. Those that involve both penetration and either physical force or a threat of some illegal act, such as violence, are classified as rape. So are assaults on people who are helpless at the time, either as a result of intoxication or severe mental disturbance. The degree of physical force involved need only be very small. It can be enough merely to move the victim's legs apart, according to Gunilla Berglund, at the Swedish ministry of justice. Rape carries a sentence of between two and six years; aggravated rape a sentence of four to 10 years.
An issue concerning Assange's lawyers is the lack of bail in Swedish criminal procedure. Suspects are remanded in custody when legal grounds can be made out for their detention – particularly when they are foreigners who are deemed at risk of absconding. But there are strict limits on the timescale for bringing a suspect to trial, with a formal charge required within two weeks of being remanded into custody, and trial one week after that. The Swedish director of public prosecutions, Marianne Ny, dismissed suggestions of a political motive for the rape allegations.
Another thing, the judge refused bail because he feared Assange may attempt to flee the country...BUT...didn't Assange just VOLUNTARILY turn himself into the police??
...
The third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity". The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on 17 August without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.
...
as opposed to accidently molested, cause we all know how often that happens. :roll: .... and in a way to violate her sexual integrity??? what the hell does that mean...cause ive got some ideas and theyre none id charge someone with. oh and does it really matter if he used a condom or not if he had sex with someone while she was asleep?? seems a bit superfluous really.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Comments
true, indeed.
we were talking about this at the dinner table.
"is it more damaging to world stability, if the "little people...us." live in a fog?
people need to simply clean their own house....and stop attempting to clean others.
WTF!!! Shame on these "Americans" - Joe you Mother F'er! The info will get out one way or another- I'm pretty sure their protocol is set up and ready for the next move- This shut down shouldn't come as a surprise - The cyber war is before us!
http://twitter.com/wikileaks
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Again..... Well said gimme.
Most of the info regarding things that were said about other countries, and what not - can be brushed off....Or isn't registering with average citizen.
But I think the biggest bomb is yet to be dropped! The one that will affect the banking industry! I think this one will hit more at home with the average person. This is the one that probably has the real potential of getting Assange killed..... not by the US Gov, but by some rich corrupt cats(ofcourse with the approval of the US Gov)!! The banking info has the real potential of causing some kaos.
Spread the information....
and uhm,
have you found Bin Laden yet or did you let him go again?
You didn't hear?? They know where Bin L. is!!! Only problem is that if they take him down a lot of contractors will lose their $$$$$$ --- Also, we would lose our excuse to be in the middle east......
Anything else is treason on the truth!!!
if you think that we waterboard everyone then you are just as disgusting as those that believe all of us are as guilty as those prosecuting those at gitmo....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
do you really believe she thinks "everyone" is waterboarded?
its obvious that's not what she's sayin.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
and i really doubt that if caught assange would be waterboarded 300 times. or even one time. as far as i know nobody has died over his leaks, so no need to go all jack bauer on him. not that going all jack bauer is ever ever approproate...he is wanted for and is going to be charged with sexual assault, and nothing more at the moment. i am thinking that the US justice dept is going to try to make an example of him instead of investigating those in the leaked cables...
sad...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
a free press is only free for those that have one.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/ ... 5967095676
But tell me... how can he be prosecuted for "rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion" when...
"Two women - who met Mr Assange when he was in Sweden for lectures - claimed he sexually attacked them.
Both said they had consensual sex with the notorious campaigner, but said he refused to wear a condom."
Consensual.... how can that become 'attacked'? OK... so the pratt didn't want to wear a condom but it would seem, at the time, the ladies didn't mind. The mind boggles.
Any excuse.
Is "Sex by Surprise" Illegal in the United States?
How would the alleged Swedish sex crimes of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange fare in an American court?
By Jessica Grose
Julian Assange's lawyer told AOL News on Thursday that the WikiLeaks founder has been charged with "sex by surprise" in Sweden. Though the lawyer says he doesn't know what "sex by surprise" means, the Swedish prosecution office announced that they are charging Assange with "rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion." These charges allegedly stem from consensual sexual encounters with two separate women that became nonconsensual at some point during the act. If this had happened in the United States, could Assange have been charged with a crime?
Possibly. The traditional common-law rule is that there needs to be both lack of consent and the threat of physical force in order for a sexual violation to constitute rape. By that standard, Assange might be in the clear if his alleged activities took place in the United States (and if no violence was involved). But in some states, lack of consent can by itself serve as the basis for a rape charge. The exact circumstances under which a woman might revoke her consent varies: In Illinois, for example, it is considered rape if a woman says "no" at any time during sex and her partner does not stop. Other states are vague on the question of whether someone can change her mind after penetration has occurred. And some courts have been very clear that consent is locked in once intercourse has begun.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
'Sex by Surprise' at Heart of Assange Criminal Probe
(Dec. 2) -- The international manhunt for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in a sex-crime investigation in Sweden apparently stems from a condom malfunction.
Assange's London attorney, Mark Stephens, told AOL News today that Swedish prosecutors told him that Assange is wanted not for allegations of rape, as previously reported, but for something called "sex by surprise," which he said involves a fine of 5,000 kronor or about $715.
Assange is the subject of an international manhunt, as a result of Interpol issuing a "red notice," a warrant indicating the person should be arrested with a view to extradition.
'Sex by Surprise' at heart of Swedish criminal case against Julian Assange
Julian Assange, founder of the WikiLeaks website, is wanted in a sex-crime investigation in Sweden.
"We don't even know what 'sex by surprise' even means, and they haven't told us," Stephens said, just hours after Sweden's Supreme Court rejected Assange's bid to prevent an arrest order from being issued against him on allegations of sex crimes.
"Whatever 'sex by surprise' is, it's only a offense in Sweden -- not in the U.K. or the U.S. or even Ibiza," Stephens said. "I feel as if I'm in a surreal Swedish movie being threatened by bizarre trolls. The prosecutor has not asked to see Julian, never asked to interview him, and he hasn't been charged with anything. He's been told he's wanted for questioning, but he doesn't know the nature of the allegations against him."
The strange tale of Assange's brief flings with two Swedish women during a three-day period in mid-August -- and decisions by three different prosecutors to first dismiss rape allegations made by the women and then re-open the case -- has more twists, turns and conspiracy theories than any of Stieg Larsson's best-sellers.
True, one of Assange's accusers sounds tailor-made for those who think Assange is being set up in Sweden by dark CIA-backed operatives who want him smeared or silenced for his document dumping with WikiLeaks. She's a 31-year-old blond academic and member of the Social Democratic Party who's known for her radical feminist views, once wrote a treatise on how to take revenge against men and was once thrown out of Cuba for subversive activities.
But others say Assange, who denies any wrongdoing and says the sex was consensual, may have just run afoul of Sweden's unusual rape laws, which are considered pro-feminist because of the consideration given issues of consent when it comes to sexual activity -- including even the issue of whether a condom was used.
In fact, the current prosecutor, Marianne Ny, who re-opened the case against Assange, has been active in the proposed reforms of Swedish rape laws that would, if passed, involve an investigation of whether an imbalance in power between two people could void one person's insistence that the sex was consensual.
Swedish tabloids and the country's blogosphere have been rife since August with stories and speculation about Assange's accusers, the flip-flopping prosecutors and just what, if any, crime was committed by Assange during sex with the two women.
"He's innocent, that I can tell you," Bjorn Hurtig, Assange's Stockholm-based lawyer, told AOL News today. Hurtig later issued a statement saying the international arrest warrant for Assange is based on "exaggerated grounds."
Assange arrived in Sweden on Aug. 11 to speak at a weekend seminar sponsored by the Social Democratic Party and arranged to stay at a Stockholm apartment belonging to the event organizer, a member of the branch of the party who would become one of Assange's two accusers.
According to a police report obtained by the Daily Mail in August, she and Assange had sex, and at some point the condom broke. While she was apparently not happy about the condom breaking, the two were seen the next day at the seminar, and nothing appeared amiss.
Another woman at the seminar, a 27-year-old art photographer, said in her police statement that she'd come to hear Assange's lecture because of her fascination with him and his work. She can be seen in video footage on the Internet sitting in the front row during Assange's lecture, wearing a pink sweater and snapping pictures of him.
According to the police report, the woman managed to get an invitation to go out for lunch with Assange and his entourage after the seminar. They spent time together before he went back to stay at the event organizer's apartment.
Two days later, on Aug. 16, they reconnected by phone and the woman invited him to her apartment, more than 40 miles outside Stockholm. She paid for the ticket since Assange apparently had no cash and doesn't like to use credit cards because they could be traced.
She complained in her police statement that during the train ride to her hometown, "he paid more attention to his computer rather than me." She also said that by the time they arrived at her apartment, "the passion and excitement seemed to have disappeared."
The woman and Assange also reportedly had sex. According to the Daily Mail account, Assange did not use a condom at least one time during their sexual activity. The New York Times today quoted accounts given by the women to police and friends as saying Assange "did not comply with her appeals to stop when (the condom) was no longer in use."
According to the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet, the photographer contacted the other woman two days after her assignation with Assange, and the two apparently had a conversation in which it became clear they had both had sex with Assange. The photographer was worried about having had unprotected sex and decided she wanted to go to the police.
The other woman accompanied her to the police station on Aug. 20 just to support her but then told the investigating officer on duty that she, too, had had sex with Assange, Aftonbladet reported.
Based on what was said to police, the on-call prosecutor, Marie Kjellstrand, decided to issue an arrest warrant on charges of rape and molestation, and the next day the story hit the Swedish paper Expressen and newspapers all over the world.
Kjellstrand's decision was overruled the following day by a higher-level prosecutor, Eva Finne, who withdrew the arrest warrant and said she did not see any evidence for rape allegations.
Then, on Sept. 1, a third prosecutor, Ny, re-opened the rape investigation, implying that she had new information in the case.
On Nov. 18, Swedish judicial officials approved a prosecutorial request that Assange be detained for questioning for alleged sex crimes, and on Nov. 30 Interpol issued a "red notice" against Assange for alleged sex crimes in Sweden. Despite what has happened, the woman who organized the event and had Assange stay at her apartment told Aftonbladet that she never intended that Assange be charged with rape.
"It is quite wrong that we were afraid of him. He is not violent, and I do not feel threatened by him," she told the newspaper in an interview that did not identify her by name. "The responsibility for what happened to me and the other girl lies with a man who had attitude problems with women."
When the second accuser was reached on her mobile phone today by AOL News, she said simply, "I have nothing to say on the matter."
Stephens, Assange's lawyer, said that even though British police know Assange's whereabouts -- reportedly in southeastern England -- they have not yet arrested him because of the inadequacy of the arrest warrants issued by Sweden.
"The Swedes couldn't even produce another warrant today that was valid," Stephens told AOL News. "The police here sent it back."
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Democracy is dead.
the charge apparently doesnt come with a custodial sentence. but i suspect it might be easier for the US to extradite him from sweden. who the fuck knows... as you said its a bullshit reason/charge.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Total bullshit!
An interesting article about the "effects" of the Wikileaks... er... leaks.
In summary, they're only releasing a fraction of what they have, and even then it's only after it's all been looked at by five major newspapers and had redactions applied. Wikileaks also went to the U.S. embassy in London to ask for help with the redactions, but was rebuffed.
And also, to be filed under "Misplaced Priorities" (like people getting mad at Julian Assange and calling for his execution while not worrying at all about the things he exposed), comes this gem: Visa and Mastercard have suspended operations with Wikileaks, but they are continuing to process payments made to the KKK.
Its only dead if we let em
Fuck the politicians and their lying ways.
If he goes down with the rape charge others will stand up after him. he only is the face of the group.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/de ... enied-bail
Julian Assange denied bail over sexual assault allegations
Judge fears WikiLeaks founder – who denies all charges – has 'means and ability' to abscond
Caroline Davies, Sam Jones and Afua Hirsch
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 7 December 2010
Julian Assange Julian Assange arriving at Westminster magistrates court. The WikiLeaks founder's request for bail was denied. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA
The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks said last night it would not to be gagged by the imprisonment of its founder, Julian Assange, after a judge refused him bail at a dramatic extradition hearing in London.
Assange, 39, who is wanted in Sweden over claims he sexually assaulted two women, was in Wandsworth prison last night after district judge Howard Riddle ruled there was a risk he would fail to surrender if granted bail. Assange denies the allegations.
Despite Jemima Khan, former wife of Pakistan cricket captain Imran Khan, the campaigning journalist John Pilger, the film director Ken Loach and others offering to stand surety totalling £180,000, the judge said the Australian Assange's "weak community ties" in the UK, and his "means and ability" to abscond, represented "substantial grounds" for refusing bail.
He was remanded until 14 December, when the case can be reviewed at the same court. His legal team said he would again apply for bail at that hearing.
Last night Kristinn Hrafnsson, a spokesman for WikiLeaks, confirmed it would continue publishing US diplomatic cables. In a statement he said: "This will not stifle WikiLeaks. The release of the US embassy cables – the biggest leak in history – will still continue. We will not be gagged, either by judicial action or corporate censorship."
WikiLeaks volunteers met in London last night to finalise plans for how the organisation would operate without Assange. The majority of staff would continue to work on the publication of the US embassy cables while a small group concentrates on campaigning for his release.
WikiLeaks staff will today move into a London office, having spent weeks commuting between the capital and the home counties bolthole from which Assange has been co-ordinating the release of the leaked cables. Staff had been required to take elaborate measures to ensure they were not followed to Assange's location and use of mobile phones was banned to avoid detection.
A WikiLeaks source said last night that Assange had been unprepared for being taken into custody, expecting that he would be granted bail. "We thought he'd be out. All he's got is the suit he was sitting in the box in," the source said.
The source added that although Assange was exhausted, he remained "together, positive and strong" after he was refused bail. It is understood his lawyers have requested that he be held alone.
The refusal to grant Assange bail came on a day when increasing pressure was brought to bear in the US on companies and organisations with ties to WikiLeaks.
As Joe Lieberman, chairman of the Senate's homeland security committee, urged businesses to sever their ties with the website, Visa suspended the payment of donations to the website through its credit card.
Asked about the New York Times's role in publishing the leaked cables, Lieberman told Fox news the newspaper "has committed at least an act of bad citizenship. Whether they have committed a crime I think bears very intensive inquiry".
Michael Mukasey, a former US attorney general, said last night that American lawyers should try to extradite Assange to the US for betraying government secrets. "If I was still in charge there would have been an investigation," he told the BBC's Newsnight. "This is a crime of a very high order. Julian Assange has been leaking this information. He came into possession of it knowing that it was harmful."
Mukasey, who stepped down from the post of attorney general last year, implied that the Swedish sexual accusations may only be a holding charge. "When one is accused of a very serious crime," he said, "it's common to hold him in respect of a lesser crime … while you assemble evidence of a second crime."
Assange, wearing a black suit and open-necked white shirt, stood in the glass-panelled dock at Westminster magistrates yesterday as more than 50 journalists from around the world packed into the well and more than 20 supporters and friends crammed into the public gallery. Outside, the pavement was swallowed up as more photographers and camera crew jostled with protesters gathered at the building's main entrance.
After the ruling – with supporters waving A4 printouts reading "Character Assassination" and "Protect Free Speech" – his solicitor, Mark Stephens, emerged from court to claim the prosecution was "politically motivated" and pledged WikiLeaks would not be cowed. Assange was entitled to a high court appeal, he said, adding the judge was "impressed" with the number of people prepared to "stand up" on his client's behalf. "[Those supporters] were but the tip of the iceberg," he said. "This is going to go viral. Many people believe Mr Assange to be innocent, myself included. Many people believe that this prosecution is politically motivated."
Pilger, who told the judge he knew Assange and had "very high regard for him", said outside court: "Sweden should be ashamed. This is not justice – this is outrageous."
Assange was arrested by appointment at a London police station at 9.20am after a European arrest warrant was received by the Metropolitan police extradition unit yesterday. He appeared in court at 2pm, where he spoke to confirm his name and date of birth and to tell the court: "I do not consent to my extradition."
There was confusion when he initially refused to give an address except a Post Office box number. When told this was unacceptable, his lawyer, John Jones, read out an address at 177 Grantham Street, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. Assange is wanted in connection with four allegations including of rape and molestation.
Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish prosecutors, said the first involved complainant A, who said she was the victim of "unlawful coercion" on the night of 14 August in Stockholm. The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
The second charge alleged Assange "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
The third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity". The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on 17 August without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.
Lindfield argued there was a "high risk of flight" because of Assange's "lifestyle, connections and potential assets".
He had access to funds, through PayPal donations to the WikiLeaks website, had a "network of international contacts", lived a "nomadic" lifestyle, and spent his time in "hiding", she said. The court later heard that for the past three weeks he had been staying at a UK address, and before then had spent two months living at the Frontline media club in Paddington.
There was no record of him entering the UK in the first place. He had displayed an unwillingness to co-operate, refusing to be photographed, fingerprinted or give a DNA sample on arrest, she added.
No details were given about the strength of evidence, with Lindfield saying it "is not a factor in relation to bail". She also opposed bail for reasons of his personal safety, saying if granted "any number of unstable persons could take it upon themselves to cause him serious harm".
"This is someone, simply put, to whom no conditions, even the most stringent conditions, could be imposed that would ensure he surrendered to the jurisdiction of this court," she said.
John Jones, lawyer for Assange, said the case must be "shorn of all political and media hysteria" associated with WikiLeaks. Assange was of previous good character, and had voluntarily handed himself in to Kentish Town police station in London. His refusal to be photographed, fingerprinted or give a DNA sample was on legal advice.
He had stayed in Sweden for 40 days after the allegations were made to answer the charges and only left the country after being given "express permission" by the Swedish prosecutor.
Since he arrived in the UK he had "consistently agreed to talk to the Swedish authorities". His defence fund had been frozen, and he would be "instantly recognised" if he tried to leave the country, said Jones. "He resists extradition as it is disproportionate to extradite someone under these circumstances. There has been every indication that the point of this warrant is to get him back for questioning."
The judge said the warrant did state it was for prosecution.
Others offering surety were Professor Patricia David, and the lawyer Geoffrey Sheen, president of Union Solidarity International, who both said although they did not know Assange they were concerned about human rights. An unnamed relative of Assange offered £80,000.
But Judge Riddle said: "The nature and strength of the evidence is not there, this is normal at this stage in proceedings. What we have here is the serious possible allegations against someone with comparatively weak community ties in this country. He has the means and ability to abscond if he wants to and I am satisfied that there are substantial grounds to believe if I granted him bail he would fail to surrender."
Downing Street said Assange's arrest was "a matter for the police" and there had been no ministerial involvement.
Unlike the UK, Swedish rape law is not based on consent but on the aforementioned concept of sexual integrity. There are a number of possible offences against this integrity. Those that involve both penetration and either physical force or a threat of some illegal act, such as violence, are classified as rape. So are assaults on people who are helpless at the time, either as a result of intoxication or severe mental disturbance. The degree of physical force involved need only be very small. It can be enough merely to move the victim's legs apart, according to Gunilla Berglund, at the Swedish ministry of justice. Rape carries a sentence of between two and six years; aggravated rape a sentence of four to 10 years.
An issue concerning Assange's lawyers is the lack of bail in Swedish criminal procedure. Suspects are remanded in custody when legal grounds can be made out for their detention – particularly when they are foreigners who are deemed at risk of absconding. But there are strict limits on the timescale for bringing a suspect to trial, with a formal charge required within two weeks of being remanded into custody, and trial one week after that. The Swedish director of public prosecutions, Marianne Ny, dismissed suggestions of a political motive for the rape allegations.
as opposed to accidently molested, cause we all know how often that happens. :roll: .... and in a way to violate her sexual integrity??? what the hell does that mean...cause ive got some ideas and theyre none id charge someone with. oh and does it really matter if he used a condom or not if he had sex with someone while she was asleep?? seems a bit superfluous really.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say