Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:24 PM

For those who talk of 'just a split condom': One Assange allegation is rape, in the UK

Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2012, 01:01 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

I've seen a lot of DUers saying "all this over a split condom", or words to that effect, in the past 24 hours. That's not true. One of the allegations is that he started sex with one of the women when she was asleep. Here's Jack of Kent, probably the premier legal blogger in the UK (and liberal, FWIW):

Many people appear to confidently believe that the rape allegation in Sweden against Julian Assange would not be an allegation of rape under English law.

Assange’s legal team argued this point at both the Magistrates’ Court and on appeal at the High Court. Ther submission was that “Offence 4″ (the fourth of the four alleged offences). Offence 4 is staed as follows:

4. Rape

On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep was in a helpless state.

It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.

The Magistrates’ Court ruled (emphasis added):

The position with offence 4 is different. This is an allegation of rape. The framework list is ticked for rape. The defence accepts that normally the ticking of a framework list offence box on an EAW would require very little analysis by the court. However they then developed a sophisticated argument that the conduct alleged here would not amount to rape in most European countries. However, what is alleged here is that Mr Assange “deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state”. In this country that would amount to rape.

I have not thought it necessary or desirable to consider extraneous material. I have looked only at the language used in the warrant. The parties have taken me to some further information in the bundle. This appears to consist of an interview with the complainants. I am not sure if this information provides the full extent of the allegation. Even if it does, however, it is unnecessary to consider this material in this context. Section 64(2) applies.

As I am satisfied that the specified offences are extradition offences I must go on to consider whether any of the bars to extradition specified in section 11 are applicable. No bars are raised and none is found.

The High Court decided the appeal on the same point:

It is clear that the allegation is that he had sexual intercourse with her when she was not in a position to consent and so he could not have had any reasonable belief that she did.

...
But there is no doubt that, as a statement of positive law, English courts have held – twice – that the relevant allegation would also be an allegation of the offence of rape in English law.

http://jackofkent.com/2012/06/assange-would-the-rape-allegation-also-be-rape-under-english-law/

And a link to an explanation by a sexual offences lawyer on the law in this area: http://stretlaw.co.uk/2011/10/29/there-are-no-dream-lovers-for-%E2%80%98sleep-rape%E2%80%99-victims/

128 replies, 6576 views

Thread info

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

128 replies	Author	Time	Post
For those who talk of 'just a split condom': One Assange allegation is rape, in the UK (Original post)	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	OP
Just to clear it up a little more	Marrah_G	Aug 2012	#1
So?...nt	SidDithers	Aug 2012	#8
That doesn't make it less of a rape. She didn't consent,	pnwmom	Aug 2012	#18
I didn't say it made it any less rape	Marrah_G	Aug 2012	#26
I don't remember if I've ever seen her statement, but both things could be true.	pnwmom	Aug 2012	#69
and every word they say are true...I think at least one of them already changed	movonne	Aug 2012	#59
How do you know one of them wasn't intimidated by outsiders to change her story? n/t	pnwmom	Aug 2012	#71
Why does that have to be so?	treestar	Aug 2012	#119
Except that Assange's extradition isn't really about "rape" at all.	ananda	Aug 2012	#2
If it was not 'really about "rape" at all', something would have happened before the rape allegation	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#3
since when did the us/uk extradite & storm embassies over rape charges. it's just laughable.	HiPointDem	Aug 2012	#4
it's worse than that. there are no charges, just allegations.	cali	Aug 2012	#7
Valid warrant, and I've listed the four charges below. He should	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#13
But cop-killers get a walk...	truebrit71	Aug 2012	#121
He refused to be interviewed, which they needed to do before they charged him.	pnwmom	Aug 2012	#23
Theres no reason he cant be interviewed in the embassy.	HooptieWagon	Aug 2012	#31
Yes--there is a reason.	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#44
You don't give a reason why he can't be interviewed where he's at	uponit7771	Aug 2012	#50
Because there is no reason.	HooptieWagon	Aug 2012	#58
Let me try again--fugitives are returned to the relevant jurisdiction	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#65
Oh yeah, the UK has a long history of returning fugitives to their relevant jurisdiction...	riderinthestorm	Aug 2012	#72
Hey..I agree Pinochet should have been returned. But letting Pinochet go doesn't	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#78
But the UK can and does. Murderers, spies, arms dealers and other international "criminals"	riderinthestorm	Aug 2012	#92
Well, I kinda like a rape allegation being pursued. nt	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#96
If that's what this was really about, I'd 100% agree.	riderinthestorm	Aug 2012	#102
The warrant is for questioning, I understand?	HooptieWagon	Aug 2012	#93
No. Apparently the British court thinks it's for prosecution.	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#95
Then if he steps outside the embassy, onto British soil,	HooptieWagon	Aug 2012	#107
Actually, I don't think the Swedes should do anything.	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#108
Typically, that is what happens.	HooptieWagon	Aug 2012	#110
Boom	SnohoDem	Aug 2012	#115
Especially since ovatures to answer the charges have been rejected.	HooptieWagon	Aug 2012	#116
Who thinks that? It's British exceptionalism, pure and simple....	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#11
2 years in British courts?	Nuclear Unicorn	Aug 2012	#25
Extradition over rape charges? Frequently	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#15
yeah, for people like roman polanski.	HiPointDem	Aug 2012	#32
Poor Roman Polanski....raped a 13 year-old, still is 'persecuted.'	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#45
So the problem there is a program that detains people indefinitely	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#62
Pentagon Plans Indefinite Detention of Bradley Manning (Video & Transcript)	HiPointDem	Aug 2012	#64
Um...dude. You realize that Manning isn't at Quantico? He was moved over a year ago	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#76
ignoring that member for good reason i'm sure	HiPointDem	Aug 2012	#87
Are you ignoring me again? Still doesn't change the fact that	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#97
That's the problem right there	Aerows	Aug 2012	#122
No one "knows" that, including you. You weren't there. n/t	pnwmom	Aug 2012	#19
At best a flawed hero.	Robb	Aug 2012	#5
I'm going to say something that will surely be unpopular	cali	Aug 2012	#6
Yeah. Why did Anita Hill continue to work with Clarence Thomas? Why didn't she just.....	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#10
that's different.	cali	Aug 2012	#22
Right. Because Assange is a 'lefty' and Clarence Thomas is not.	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#28
Reasonable doubt exist for a .....reason	uponit7771	Aug 2012	#53
Which is why he should go to Sweden, face the charges, and plead his case. nt	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#55
Here's the problem	Aerows	Aug 2012	#117
Maybe it was a set up	Rosa Luxemburg	Aug 2012	#16
Would your opinion differ if you had told him when you picked him up to use a condom for safety?	Bodhi BloodWave	Aug 2012	#17
Some people are very heavy sleepers even without alcohol (which could have been involved).	pnwmom	Aug 2012	#27
are you effing kidding? Rape is rape. n/t	progressivebydesign	Aug 2012	#39
happened to me...	Londoncalling	Aug 2012	#86
This message was hidden by jury decision.	TedTiger	Aug 2012	#120
happened to me too and more than once	TorchTheWitch	Aug 2012	#128
No shit. Another thing, the woman cited in the OP refused to sign the statement as written by the	Luminous Animal	Aug 2012	#98
Wait...	Aerows	Aug 2012	#124
It's not up to her to drop "charges" that she never made.	Luminous Animal	Aug 2012	#125
I'm confused	Aerows	Aug 2012	#127
Here's all four charges Muriel....	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#9
But one of the women recanted her "rape" allegation	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#12
No. She didn't 'recant.' If she had, don't you think Assange's lawyers might have	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#20
She was quoted at the time by the Guardian	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#33
The Guardian? Did they interview her???	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#35
But if the victim has previously been quoted denying she was a victim	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#60
That is important to Assange's defense. The one he mounts in Sweden.	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#66
Why would Sweden guarantee the safety of someone who is not their citizen?	randome	Aug 2012	#68
The crime is embarassing the US	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#80
That's nothing to the US	treestar	Aug 2012	#123
Well I am not a lawyer so I may get the language wrong...	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#43
Again, you got a court cite for that, or more British tabloid speculation?	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#46
I just took it from the link you gave me	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#61
Where??? And please, take the time to read and distinguish between	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#70
You asked if it was brought up in the court papers	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#83
Where in the court papers? Quote it. nt	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#84
PAGE 24	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#85
That's a defense allegation, unproven, as the judge notes on page 26.	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#91
I was asked if Assange's lawyers had brought it up in court	Generic Other	Aug 2012	#106
If this was a republican right winger of any sort everybody would be all over the rape charges-	snooper2	Aug 2012	#14
Rape apologia for Assange, DSK, Polanski....apparently	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#24
How quickly we believe the powers that be...	joeybee12	Aug 2012	#30
Why don't you, and show us what you mean? nt	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#36
ah discredit the victim. nice. n/t	progressivebydesign	Aug 2012	#42
No kidding... they'd be screaming for his head.	progressivebydesign	Aug 2012	#41
And if it was Obama, everyone would be defending him. n/t	girl gone mad	Aug 2012	#63
Me too	Londoncalling	Aug 2012	#89
and then there is the reason all these countries are after him	Enrique	Aug 2012	#21
...right, that little tidbit thrown in puts reasonable doubt on the TIMING of the allegations	uponit7771	Aug 2012	#56
Unrec...google the woman who is making the allegation..	joeybee12	Aug 2012	#29
That is what Hermain Cane said. n/t	vaberella	Aug 2012	#40
Because whenever a woman alleges rape, the first thing to do is to go after the woman.	Nye Bevan	Aug 2012	#51
whenever a woman blogs about "7 Steps to Legal Revenge" against cheating lovers..	frylock	Aug 2012	#104
so he has been found guilty? guilty on DU already without a trial. nice nt	msongs	Aug 2012	#34
Do you understand the meanign of 'allegation'?	muriel_volestrangler	Aug 2012	#37
The court of public opinion doesn't....	NCTraveler	Aug 2012	#38
Perhaps you misunderstood the OP? I don't see where he said that.	Nye Bevan	Aug 2012	#47
He at the Ecuador embassy	Aerows	Aug 2012	#126
Has he been formally charged yet or was the red notice just for questioning?	ProgressiveProfessor	Aug 2012	#48
The Swedish process is not directly comparable to the process in the UK: this was one of the	struggle4progress	Aug 2012	#111
Either (1) obvious pretext or (2) a bona fide rape prosecution unrelated to leaks re	AnotherMcIntosh	Aug 2012	#49
Total Disinformation all the time!	Bragi	Aug 2012	#52
+1, I think bottom line this is what an objective observer would look at...MIC big time...	uponit7771	Aug 2012	#54
This case is about "rape" just like Clinton's impeachment was about "perjury"	riderinthestorm	Aug 2012	#57
clinton dared to challenge the ptb? hardly. it's about one group of political/economic 1%-ers	HiPointDem	Aug 2012	#67
Fine, doesn't change it though.	riderinthestorm	Aug 2012	#74
clinton joined their ranks before entering the WH. that's how he got into the WH.	HiPointDem	Aug 2012	#75
The supposed rape victims were CIA "honeytraps".	FarCenter	Aug 2012	#73
Sure they were. nt	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#77
I doubt it	LadyHawkAZ	Aug 2012	#114
Thank You	Londoncalling	Aug 2012	#79
Julian Assange Asylum: Ecuador is Right to Stand Up to the US	xchrom	Aug 2012	#81
Problems with the EAW for Julian Assange	xchrom	Aug 2012	#82
Of course Assange's lawyers challenged every single aspect of the EAW. That's their job!	randome	Aug 2012	#88
They lost those arguments at every level	struggle4progress	Aug 2012	#112
ecuador says he has not been charged with a crime	xchrom	Aug 2012	#90
re Correa and media	tama	Aug 2012	#109
The Swedish process is not directly comparable to the UK process. The UK courts held	struggle4progress	Aug 2012	#113
from 2010: Q&A: Julian Assange allegations	xchrom	Aug 2012	#94
Here's the charges...and the determination that the warrant is for prosecution.	msanthrope	Aug 2012	#99
the country that wants him has not charged him with a crime.	xchrom	Aug 2012	#100
Julian Assange's right to asylum	xchrom	Aug 2012	#101
...	xchrom	Aug 2012	#103
Sex accusers boasted about their 'conquest' of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange	frylock	Aug 2012	#105
He should face up to that rather than hiding behind	treestar	Aug 2012	#118

Response to muriel_volestrangler (Original post)

Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:30 PM

Marrah_G (22,679 posts)

1. Just to clear it up a little more

Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2012, 12:31 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

The allegation isn't that he jumped in some woman's bed and start having sex with her while she was sleeping. They were in bed sleeping together after already having sex together.

For those who talk of 'just a split condom': One Assange allegation is rape, in the UK

1. Just to clear it up a little more

8. So?...nt

18. That doesn't make it less of a rape. She didn't consent,

26. I didn't say it made it any less rape

69. I don't remember if I've ever seen her statement, but both things could be true.

59. and every word they say are true...I think at least one of them already changed

71. How do you know one of them wasn't intimidated by outsiders to change her story? n/t

119. Why does that have to be so?

2. Except that Assange's extradition isn't really about "rape" at all.

3. If it was not 'really about "rape" at all', something would have happened before the rape allegation

4. since when did the us/uk extradite & storm embassies over rape charges. it's just laughable.

7. it's worse than that. there are no charges, just allegations.

13. Valid warrant, and I've listed the four charges below. He should

121. But cop-killers get a walk...

23. He refused to be interviewed, which they needed to do before they charged him.

31. Theres no reason he cant be interviewed in the embassy.

44. Yes--there is a reason.

50. You don't give a reason why he can't be interviewed where he's at

58. Because there is no reason.

65. Let me try again--fugitives are returned to the relevant jurisdiction

72. Oh yeah, the UK has a long history of returning fugitives to their relevant jurisdiction...

78. Hey..I agree Pinochet should have been returned. But letting Pinochet go doesn't

92. But the UK can and does. Murderers, spies, arms dealers and other international "criminals"

96. Well, I kinda like a rape allegation being pursued. nt

102. If that's what this was really about, I'd 100% agree.

93. The warrant is for questioning, I understand?

95. No. Apparently the British court thinks it's for prosecution.

107. Then if he steps outside the embassy, onto British soil,

108. Actually, I don't think the Swedes should do anything.

110. Typically, that is what happens.

115. Boom

116. Especially since ovatures to answer the charges have been rejected.

11. Who thinks that? It's British exceptionalism, pure and simple....

25. 2 years in British courts?

15. Extradition over rape charges? Frequently

32. yeah, for people like roman polanski.

45. Poor Roman Polanski....raped a 13 year-old, still is 'persecuted.'

62. So the problem there is a program that detains people indefinitely

64. Pentagon Plans Indefinite Detention of Bradley Manning (Video & Transcript)

76. Um...dude. You realize that Manning isn't at Quantico? He was moved over a year ago

87. ignoring that member for good reason i'm sure

97. Are you ignoring me again? Still doesn't change the fact that

122. That's the problem right there

19. No one "knows" that, including you. You weren't there. n/t

5. At best a flawed hero.

6. I'm going to say something that will surely be unpopular

10. Yeah. Why did Anita Hill continue to work with Clarence Thomas? Why didn't she just.....

22. that's different.

28. Right. Because Assange is a 'lefty' and Clarence Thomas is not.

53. Reasonable doubt exist for a .....reason

55. Which is why he should go to Sweden, face the charges, and plead his case. nt

117. Here's the problem

16. Maybe it was a set up

17. Would your opinion differ if you had told him when you picked him up to use a condom for safety?

27. Some people are very heavy sleepers even without alcohol (which could have been involved).

39. are you effing kidding? Rape is rape. n/t

86. happened to me...

128. happened to me too and more than once

98. No shit. Another thing, the woman cited in the OP refused to sign the statement as written by the

124. Wait...

125. It's not up to her to drop "charges" that she never made.

127. I'm confused

9. Here's all four charges Muriel....

12. But one of the women recanted her "rape" allegation

20. No. She didn't 'recant.' If she had, don't you think Assange's lawyers might have

33. She was quoted at the time by the Guardian

35. The Guardian? Did they interview her???

60. But if the victim has previously been quoted denying she was a victim

66. That is important to Assange's defense. The one he mounts in Sweden.

68. Why would Sweden guarantee the safety of someone who is not their citizen?

80. The crime is embarassing the US

123. That's nothing to the US

43. Well I am not a lawyer so I may get the language wrong...

46. Again, you got a court cite for that, or more British tabloid speculation?

61. I just took it from the link you gave me

70. Where??? And please, take the time to read and distinguish between

83. You asked if it was brought up in the court papers

84. Where in the court papers? Quote it. nt

85. PAGE 24