Kanluwen wrote:
The women are both saying that when the condoms broke, they "told him to stop and put a new condom on, but he refused to and just kept going".
It's a reach to say that it's "rape" in anything but the loosest sense...but consent can be withdrawn during sex.

agroszkiewicz wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
The women are both saying that when the condoms broke, they "told him to stop and put a new condom on, but he refused to and just kept going".
It's a reach to say that it's "rape" in anything but the loosest sense...but consent can be withdrawn during sex.

Given the gravity of an international arrest warrant, I can only assume that the case details are FAR more complex than a simple condom breaking and refusal to stop the act of intercourse.

This is more or less what appears to have happened. The Daily Mail newspaper’s delving into how Assange had consensual sex with the women but was reported to police after he refused to use a condom or, later, take an STD test, make the affair seem more like a bedroom farce than the actions of a high-minded individual.

At least it was clear that a high minded Anna Ardin helped bring Assange to Sweden for a speaking engagement. She allegedly let Assange stay in her one-bedroom flat in Stockholm. They went out to dinner and – as consenting adults will – later had sex, according to a “police source”. During this he insisted the condom had split. To quote LOLcats: orly?

Woman No. 2 met Assange the next day at the conference organised by Ardin, was later invited out for lunch with Assange and his entourage. She lent him a charger for his laptop, paid for his metro card and they went to a movie, becoming “amorous”. A few days later they had sex without a condom, despite her insistence that he wear one, according to the Mail.

Woman No.2 then called Ardin and the pair put two and two together. They claimed a fear of STDs and pregnancy, but one can also see another angle – both were deeply concerned by Assange’s care-free approach to them.

I asked a Swedish friend about this. She says “Most women I know in Sweden/Stockholm take the pill or have a sterilet/copper ring. I have never heard of anyone demanding that their sex partner take a STD test after unprotected sex unless the woman knows for a fact that she has been infected and then in order to trace/stop the source the partner can be asked for an STD test.”

But at any rate, how would a normal, more sensitive, man react? Apologise, maybe? Certainly a man with a lot at stake and concerned about how something like this might look would think twice about his next moves.

No, Assange refused an STD test asked by the women. Incensed, they went to police and a warrant for Assange’s arrest was issued. A prosecutor decided there was no evidence of rape but by that stage the news was out. Now another Swedish prosecutor has reopened the investigation saying there was “reason to believe that a crime was committed” citing “sexual coercion and sexual molestation”.

Kanluwen wrote:It can when your partner and another woman(with no link between them other than you) contract the same STD and you refuse testing, then leave the country.

Orlanth wrote:I am not buying this.

No means no, beforehand.

No meaning no during is a bit harder to prosecute on.

Doing a runner afterwards is morally unsound but hardly a crime. Especially in a place as lax as Sweden.

What I see is, US want to throw book at him, Assange flees to Sweden tries to gain shelter there. US pulls strings, Swedes say no and Assange seeing the way it is going skips the country, hides in UK or elsewhere.

Case is blown from docs-need-him-for-a-quick-checkup to arrest warrant to satisfy the CIA. If they didnt get a warrant on that they would have found an minor unpaid bill magnified it and called it fraud or theft.

Police don't call in interpol for international arrest warrants because a condom broke during what appeared to be consensual sex girl worried and changed her mind. I don't even think local police would waste their time over it.

It is not against the law to refuse to take a voluntary medical exam. Now a court ordered STD test....sure to refuse that WOULD be a crime.

B. If it did, it would only be a crime if,

1. It were proved the STDs came from the subject, and,
2. It were proved he had prior knowledge of being infected and thus deliberately put his partners at risk, even in this case;

C. It would not be a sex crime, it would be assault with a noxious substance or attempted poisoning, something like that. People have been successfully prosecuted for this in various countries, most recently that pop star in Germany.

BBC wrote:Wikileaks founder Julian Assange had a reputation for being suspicious and paranoid even before everyone was out to get him.

Everyone, in this case, is the US - where government lawyers are hoping to prosecute on espionage charges - and the European Union, where he is wanted for questioning about an allegation of rape.

As of Tuesday, Mr Assange has also been liable to arrest in any of the 188 member countries of Interpol - from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe - in connection with the Swedish case.

Last seen in London, he is widely assumed to be in the UK now, though remaining continuously on the move.

If he appeared in public, British police would be obliged to arrest him under a European Arrest Warrant issued by the Swedish authorities - though it's not clear that anyone is going to go out of their way to find him.

"If there is no indication that the accused is in a particular region, you won't expect a police force to investigate," said a spokesman for the UK's Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA).

So, supposing Mr Assange is still in the UK, and he lies low, he may be able to avoid arrest. In spring, however, his six-month visa will run out, creating additional problems for him.

Whispers

It would not be safe for him to appear in person at a news conference, but he has shown this week that he can continue to communicate with journalists virtually - via video recorded on a mobile phone or via Skype.

According to New York Times reporter John F Burns, who interviewed Mr Assange in October, he changes mobile phones "the way other men change shirts", uses cash instead of credit cards and stays either with friends, or in hotels under false names.

When the two men met in a London Ethiopian restaurant, Mr Assange spoke in a whisper, for fear of eavesdropping by Western intelligence agencies.

A journalist who met Mr Assange earlier this year told the BBC his "over-suspicious" behaviour made the meeting unnecessarily awkward.

"You ask him a harmless question - and he looks at you as if to ask 'Why do you want to know?'" the journalist said.

At that point, Mr Assange was not a wanted man. It's only recently that has freedom of movement has been seriously curtailed.

In April he travelled to the National Press Club in Washington to show a video of a US military helicopter killing 12 people in Baghdad in 2007, including two Reuters journalists.

His position became more precarious in July, after Wikileaks made public 77,000 US military documents on the Afghan conflict in July, and even more so after the publication of nearly 400,000 secret papers on the Iraq war in October.
Espionage charge

He was still able to unveil the Iraq documents to the media at a news conference in London, though US officials were already muttering then about a possible espionage prosecution.

A senior Pentagon official told the Associated Press this week that lawyers from the Justice, State and Defense departments were now actively discussing whether or not some kind of charge could be made to stick.

A possible obstacle to a prosecution under the Espionage Act could be the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which guarantees free speech and freedom of the press.

But experts quoted by the Associated Press also raised the possibility of other charges, such as theft of government property, receipt of stolen government property, mishandling of classified documents, or aiding and abetting illegal leaks of documents by government employees.

It has also been suggested that Mr Assange could be successfully prosecuted under the Espionage Act, without falling foul of the First Amendment, for wilfully withholding information in defiance of an official demand for its return. Just such a demand was made by the State Department on Saturday, before the latest release of US diplomatic cables.

Rape allegation

After the Afghan document release, Mr Assange travelled to Sweden and applied for residence and a work permit.

With its strong traditions of press freedom, the country could have become a safe haven. However, he soon faced allegations of rape and sexual molestation from two Swedish women, which now represent the most immediate threat to his liberty.

He denies any wrongdoing, saying he had consensual sex with both women.

In November a warrant was issued for his arrest, to enable Swedish prosecutors to question him, followed by the European Arrest Warrant. Two appeals against the Swedish warrant have failed, though the European Arrest Warrant has had to be re-issued because of a procedural problem.

Mr Assange's London lawyer, Mark Stephens, has argued that the European Arrest Warrant is invalid, because his client has not been charged. However, SOCA says no charge is necessary - it is sufficient that the individual is "facing prosecution".

In the midst of these legal proceedings, in October, Sweden rejected his request for residency.

Subsequently, Mr Assange is said to have raised the possibility of taking refuge in Switzerland or Iceland.
'Red notice'

While both are members of Interpol and both have extradition treaties with the US, this does not automatically make them hostile territory for him.

A "red notice" issued by Interpol on Tuesday informing all of its 188 member countries that he is wanted in Sweden does not legally oblige any of them to hand Mr Assange over - though a spokesman told the BBC that "usually they feel duty bound to do so".

Equally, while a country that has signed an extradition treaty with the US might usually be expected to give him up, it might not if the crime was regarded as a political one.

Ecuador briefly appeared a promising haven earlier this week, when deputy foreign minister Kintto Lucas said he would be welcome to take up residence there - but President Rafael Correa subsequently dismissed the idea.

Another possible destination might in theory have been Australia, as Mr Assange was born there and holds an Australian passport. However, this does not in practice look like a good choice for the Wikileaks founder.

Like Iceland and Switzerland, Australia is also a member of Interpol and has an extradition treaty with the US. In addition, Australia's Attorney General, Robert McClelland, said this week that police were investigating whether the latest round of Wikileaks disclosures had broken Australian law.

Furthermore, a senior Australian official once warned Mr Assange that since he played "outside the rules", he would be dealt with outside the rules - or so he told the New York Times.

Whichever country Mr Assange aims for next, his biggest problem could be getting there.

If he is currently in a European Union member state, he risks arrest as soon as he presents his passport at the border.

Furthermore, a senior Australian official once warned Mr Assange that since he played "outside the rules", he would be dealt with outside the rules - or so he told the New York Times.

Kilkrazy wrote:You have implied he infected them with STDs, and you don't have any evidence for that.

Kanluwen wrote:
There's a few fun tidbits in there that show that he's either got a guilty conscience or he's just a freakin' nutter.

Obviously, I've underestimated Australian law enforcement. They must be putting those Drop Bears to great use now as political assassination tools.

Plus, it is theoretically possible to have an STD without knowledge of it as you never have any outbreaks. Very rare, but possible.

Average risks for a single exposure are approximately:
Receptive anal intercourse 1-3%
Insertive anal intercourse 0.1-1 %
Receptive vaginal intercourse (the woman) 0.1-1 %
Insertive vaginal intercourse (the man) 0.01-5.6%
Receptive oral sex with ejaculation almost zero, although it can happen.
These numbers appear to be very small, but health care workers who get a needle stick have a risk of 0.3 % of getting infected, and PEP (post exposure prophylaxis for occupational exposure) is recommended for them. For health care workers who get blood splashed in the eye or mouth, PEP is offered but not recommended. The risk from that kind of exposure is about 0.03 %.

agroszkiewicz wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
There's a few fun tidbits in there that show that he's either got a guilty conscience or he's just a freakin' nutter.

Obviously, I've underestimated Australian law enforcement. They must be putting those Drop Bears to great use now as political assassination tools.

Plus, it is theoretically possible to have an STD without knowledge of it as you never have any outbreaks. Very rare, but possible.

Opinion

Opinion

REALLY reaching on the last point.

Furthermore, a senior Australian official once warned Mr Assange that since he played "outside the rules", he would be dealt with outside the rules - or so he told the New York Times.

You ever had a condom break, or a bitch come back on you yelling baby daddy or something? That happens constantly too...probably more often than semi-consensual sex that turns into rape after the condom breaks and infects them with STDs. FYI, its fairly rare to become infected with any serious (IE not Herpes or HPV) STD during first time intercourse with an infected person. As this was a one time deal, and supposedly in both cases the condom broke combined with the fact that the lubricant in condoms not only is spermicidal but also helps to kill STD's....did you think that 99.9% effectiveness in prevention was because of only latex?

To illustrate my point here is a quote from statistical data provided to me by my medical doctor during an instance when I had a condom break and flipped my wig about STD's. Facts and data generally make a point better than random comments spewing completely uninformed opinions.

Average risks for a single exposure are approximately:
Receptive anal intercourse 1-3%
Insertive anal intercourse 0.1-1 %
Receptive vaginal intercourse (the woman) 0.1-1 %
Insertive vaginal intercourse (the man) 0.01-5.6%
Receptive oral sex with ejaculation almost zero, although it can happen.
These numbers appear to be very small, but health care workers who get a needle stick have a risk of 0.3 % of getting infected, and PEP (post exposure prophylaxis for occupational exposure) is recommended for them. For health care workers who get blood splashed in the eye or mouth, PEP is offered but not recommended. The risk from that kind of exposure is about 0.03 %.

PEP refers to the antiviral load that will kill HIV infections dead as piss if taken within the first 72 hours after exposure. Any other STD (herpes and HPV excepted) are cureable if caught early with nothing more than antibiotics. I SERIOUSLY doubt that given these statistics and modern medicine (which Sweden has a very high standard of practice in) that these crazy bitches are actually infected with ANY STD even if Assange were a walking petri dish....which he looks like he might actually be.

Just to give you the cliff notes in case you don't actually look at the numbers I quoted, women are almost 6x more likely to transmit STD's to male sexual partners that engage in vaginal intercourse than the man is likely to infect her. That's presuming you accept something as clearly useless and silly as large sample number statistics gathered over a 25 year study that covers just about every demographic and sexual proclivity in America.

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't have any evidence that you haven't infected those two women with STDs.

Would that justify my accusing you of crimes?

Kanluwen wrote:
There's a few fun tidbits in there that show that he's either got a guilty conscience or he's just a freakin' nutter.

Obviously, I've underestimated Australian law enforcement. They must be putting those Drop Bears to great use now as political assassination tools.

Plus, it is theoretically possible to have an STD without knowledge of it as you never have any outbreaks. Very rare, but possible.

Kanluwen wrote:
If it covers "just about every demographic and sexual proclivity in America", then we should be seeing that "6x more likely" in roughly the same exposure rate for bisexual women giving STDs to other women.

agroszkiewicz wrote:./facepalm

I'm amazed that you seem to enjoy taking factual evidence based claims and spinning them into some kind of bizzare interpretation.

Kanluwen wrote:
There's a few fun tidbits in there that show that he's either got a guilty conscience or he's just a freakin' nutter.
Obviously, I've underestimated Australian law enforcement. They must be putting those Drop Bears to great use now as political assassination tools.
Plus, it is theoretically possible to have an STD without knowledge of it as you never have any outbreaks. Very rare, but possible.

These statements ARE opinions. Period. No matter how much you believe they are true, they are totally impossible to prove because you are trying to quantify unquantifiables....essentially.

Kanluwen wrote:
Of course they're opinions. Just like you saying that these women, who had no ties between them sexually before they slept with him gave him the STD.

Kanluwen wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:You have implied he infected them with STDs, and you don't have any evidence for that.

I don't have any evidence that he didn't either.

Plus, it is theoretically possible to have an STD without knowledge of it as you never have any outbreaks. Very rare, but possible.

Kanluwen wrote:
If someone is exposed to a STD, particularly something nasty, then yes. INTERPOL and local police would definitely "waste their time over it".

Kanluwen wrote:
It's voluntary...until it's not. In a case where two complaining witnesses, with no link whatsoever between them sexually outside of one night stands with you, have contracted STDs and both have the same complaint of "In the midst of sex, he says the condom split but it never felt like there was one there to begin with!"...then it most definitely is not a voluntary test if you don't want them seriously looking at you for poisoning, etc.

Kanluwen wrote:
This is where it seems to get weird. There was a case in Pennsylvania of a guy with HIV that kept claiming his condoms "split", and he's actually been charged with(if I'm remembering right) attempted manslaughter and reckless endangerment of the public good.

Kanluwen wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't have any evidence that you haven't infected those two women with STDs.

Would that justify my accusing you of crimes?

I'm not accusing him of any crimes. Sweden and INTERPOL are

Kanluwen wrote:Doing a runner after your one night stand partners, who only have the fact that they've had sex with you in common, have contracted a STD is a crime though.
Publicly naming the two women who are accusing you, in violation of most rape/sexual harassment laws, is also a sleazy as feth thing to do.

Ahtman wrote:This whole scenario is going to be hilarious when all it really leads to more security and more controls on the internet.

Ahtman wrote:This whole scenario is going to be hilarious when all it really leads to more security and more controls on the internet.

dogma wrote:

Ahtman wrote:This whole scenario is going to be hilarious when all it really leads to more security and more controls on the internet.

Next talking point on the docket: net neutrality jeopardizes national security.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't have any evidence that you haven't infected those two women with STDs.

Would that justify my accusing you of crimes?

I'm not accusing him of any crimes. Sweden and INTERPOL are

You posted:

Kanluwen wrote:Doing a runner after your one night stand partners, who only have the fact that they've had sex with you in common, have contracted a STD is a crime though.
Publicly naming the two women who are accusing you, in violation of most rape/sexual harassment laws, is also a sleazy as feth thing to do.

That actually isn't a crime, as I pointed out earlier but you ignored. When I called you on it, you justified the statement on the fact that we don't know the women haven't got STDs.

This matter isn't what the Swedish prosecutor has accused Assage of.

You have accused him of doing it.