I'm not a fan of Assange and I think the allegations in Sweden were credible. But what is currently happening to him is beyond unjust.
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?N...
https://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2018/02/13/news/few_documen...
https://english.elpais.com/spanish_news/2020-05-01/why-julia...
To complain that this report reveals the allegations as "complete fabrications" is in itself a complete fabrication, and you ruin your own credibility by saying it.
Among other things, he concluded that the investigation conducted by the Swedish government violated many of their own standard procedures in unprecedented ways, and also, at no point did the “accuser” accuse Assange of a crime or attempt to press charges.
Apparently, during consensual sex, a condom broke (I think there was slightly more to the story), and she wanted Assange to get an AIDS test. She asked the police if there was any way to compel him to get one.
That somehow then escalated (against her wishes) to a rape charge and an extradition battle.
So, “complete fabrication” is a slight exaggeration of the situation (the “accuser” exists, but didn’t accuse anyone of a crime).
I think the facts more than support the statement that it was a “politically-motivated, fabricated accusation”.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/may/13/sweden-reopens...
So no, the allegations were not "revealed as complete fabrications" by the UN rapporteur's report, and it is more than a mere exaggeration to say they were.
And an interview of the same Nils Melzer in a Swiss newspaper : https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
Quote: ...A made-up rape allegation and fabricated evidence in Sweden...
"Complete fabrication" seems fair enough to me.
I had not read his blog post, so thank you for providing this. Unfortunately, his claims about Assange's accusers are so totally unsubstantiated that it's hard to believe they were written by a law professor. One of Assange's accusers didn't appreciate Melzer's attempts to tar her as a fabricator. According to Der Spiegel [1]:
So he blames the victims, the woman writes; it was "a classic patriarchal technique to define the
conditions for how 'a real rape victim' should behave". It also accuses the lawyer of personally
slandering her and, in some cases, spreading the untruth about the investigation, such as Assange's
willingness to testify about the incidents. This is "completely unacceptable, shocking and a
reason to quit his job at the UN".
[1] https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/julian-assange-opfer-...
> Surely, I thought, Assange must be a rapist! But what I found is that he has never been charged with a sexual offence. True, soon after the United States had encouraged allies to find reasons to prosecute Assange, Swedish prosecution informed the tabloid press that he was suspected of having raped two women. Strangely, however, the women themselves never claimed to have been raped, nor did they intend to report a criminal offence. Go figure. Moreover, the forensic examination of a condom submitted as evidence, supposedly worn and torn during intercourse with Assange, revealed no DNA whatsoever — neither his, nor hers, nor anybody else’s. Go figure again. One woman even texted that she only wanted Assange to take an HIV test, but that the police were “keen on getting their hands on him”. Go figure, once more. Ever since, both Sweden and Britain have done everything to prevent Assange from confronting these allegations without simultaneously having to expose himself to US extradition and, thus, to a show-trial followed by life in jail. His last refuge had been the Ecuadorian Embassy.
https://medium.com/@njmelzer/demasking-the-torture-of-julian...
> On 20 August 2010, two women, a 26-year-old living in Enköping and a 31-year-old living in Stockholm,[6][7] reported to the Swedish police that Assange had engaged in unprotected sexual activity with them that violated the scope of their consent, also because one woman was asleep in one case.[8][9] The police told them that they could not simply tell Assange to take an STD test, but that their statements would be passed to a prosecutor.[10]
> The next day, the case was transferred to Chefsåklagare (Chief Public Prosecutor) Eva Finné. In answer to questions surrounding the incidents, the following day, Finné declared, "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape". However, Karin Rosander from the Swedish Prosecution Authority, said Assange remained suspected of molestation. Police gave no further comment at the time, but continued the investigation.[11]
> After learning of the investigation, Assange said, "The charges are without basis and their issue at this moment is deeply disturbing".[12]
> The preliminary investigation concerning suspected rape was discontinued by Finné on 25 August,[13] but two days later Claes Borgström, the attorney representing the two women, requested a review of the prosecutor's decision to terminate part of the investigation.[13][14]
> On 30 August, Assange was questioned by the Stockholm police regarding the allegations of sexual molestation.[15] He denied the allegations, saying he had consensual sexual encounters with the two women.[12][16][17]
Moment US raised its charges, the Sweden rape case is nowhere to be found.
Not to mention, Assanage agreed to that investigation if they could guarantee not to be extradited to US.
2017-05-19: Suspended investigation, revoked arrest warrant. Statement that the investigation can be resumed if Assange visited Sweden before August 2020.
2019-04-11: Case re-opened following his arrest. In September of this year 7 new witnesses were revealed.
2019-11-19: Investigation discontinued, stating "the evidence is not strong enough to form the basis for filing an indictment", adding that "the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed", but the prosecutor was still confident in the complainant.
I personally believe that he's guilty due to the sheer amount of witnesses, but that circumstances around it will result in the victims never achieving justice.
Yeah because the Swedish police is totally credible at this point.
So this is what we know of the first woman who went to the police, according to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer, starting this whole charade:
- There were no rape allegations. She described the sexual intercourse as consensual. Instead she was worried Assange may have HIV and asked whether the police could force him to take a test.
- Instead, and for no apparent reason, police try to pressure her into accusing Assange of rape. She refuses. She also refuses to sign the interrogation transcript created by the police.
- Finally, and emotionally exhausted, she goes home and writes one of her friends a SMS: "I don't want to report him. I just want him to take a test, but police want to get him for rape." and the next day: "Police is fabricating this."
- Then, that very next night, newspaper are already calling Assange a rapist.
Another fun tidbit:
- Some time later Swedish police was ready to come to the UK to interrogate Assange, but was asked not to by the UK.
- Also Swedish police was worried because their highest court wanted them to either charge him or drop the case, and was told by the UK: "Don't get cold feet now."
The ones that were curiously dropped late last year when extradition from Sweden was no longer needed?
I don't know Assange, and don't find him a likeable character from the reports I've read, and don't think much of wikileaks and its lack of filtering, but the whole Assange sexual assault allegations case stinks.
The Armoured Glass Box is an Instrument of Torture
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/03/the-armoured...
If you are up for a deep (and biased) dive, the rest of Craig Murray's daily blog posts from that trial give many more reasons that his treatment might be considered unjust:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-...
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-...
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-...
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/02/your-man-in-...
Murray is definitely a partisan in the camp of Assange, but I think his factual reporting is accurate.