Assange and the Swedish legal system deserve each other

Just as the international watchdog organization Wikileakes threatens to blow it's strongest whistle with promises of alarming revelations second to none it has previously revealed, the stage is being set here in Stockholm for Act 2 of the Swedish legal circus in which it's founder Julian Assange continues in absentia to play the leading role. After having dropped some of the lesser accusations against him and after reducing the rape accusation from aggravated rape to a lower form of rape, the Swedish High Court to which Assange appealed has upheld the previous verdict of the District Court according to which he is to be held in custody pending the police interview which for several reasons has been unable to previously take place.

Julian Assange has instructed his Swedish lawyer, Björn Hurtig to immediately appeal the decision to the Swedish Supreme Court, but one can only assume that Hurtig has already told him that the chances are slim that the case will ever be considered by the highest court. The Supreme Court only takes up cases which have a precedential value, and this hardly applies in the Assange case. Julian Assange has therefore little choice now but to come to Sweden and face the music and the quicker he does it the better for his own sake!

If he had been smart and listened to his Swedish lawyer, Björn Hurtig instead of his somewhat cocky loud mouthed British solicitor Mark Stephens, Assange would have come back to Sweden weeks ago and avoided being remanded in custody. But by defying the system, he has caused the two things which he fears most to happen, namely arrest and worldwide media exposure. This more or less proves that despite his talents as an internationally accomplished researcher Julian Assange obviously has a few screws loose in his head and he has now become his own worst enemy because in almost every step throughout this case the Wikileakes founder has shot himself in the foot!

The question now remains if his brilliant Swedish defence lawyer can successfully in the eyes of the court, justify the conduct which has been displayed by Assange up to now? By "conduct" is meant Assange's clearly displayed defiance of the law and his stubborn attitude. Even if the accusations turn out in the end, to be absurd and wrongful, Europe happens to be a civilized continent, and despite it's faults, Sweden is one of Europe's most civilized nations and perhaps its high time for Australian born Julian Assange to wake up to the fact that he needs to comply with the law and that the fact he happens to be the founder of Wikileakes and thereby a world public figure doesn't render him above the law or exempt him from compliance with what is required of him by Police and Prosecutors. Even if they are totally wrong, they have the right to question him and by avoiding them he has created somewhat of a mess for himself.

But Julian Assange is not the only one who has shot himself in the foot and created a mess for himself. The Swedish legal system is as much to blame for this circus and there is no doubt whatsoever that any eventual formal charges will be based on extremely flimsy evidence. There is however a high risk that if formally indicted, Assange could be declared guilty because what he and most foreign observers do not know about the Swedish courts, especially when it comes to sex cases, is that guilty verdicts are declared more than often due to the court having played "God" and decided who is lying and who is telling the truth! One only needs to examine any Swedish Court judgement notice in a rape case which lacks viable evidence and is based only on the word of the plaintiff, to see how the courts have determined guilt or innocence merely upon the behaviour of the parties involved.

So far Julian Assange's behaviour is definitely a liability to his own case, and the Swedish legal system's own conduct is , to say the least, a liability to it's case against Julian Assange. They most definitely deserve each other!

Trackback URL: http://www.newsmill.se/trackback/30569

5 kommentarer Logga in för att kommentera
I kommentarsfältet har kommentatorn juridiskt ansvar för sina inlägg.

Couldn´t have said it better myself. Except I don't think Assange is as chanceless in court as most people seem to believe.

Permalänk | Anmäl #1 Carina Rydberg, 2010-11-26, 13:10

From a point of feministic understandig William Butt...

I am certain of this; the Swedish legal system will behave at top level of correctness in relation to Mr Assange. Presumably they have already done so, following every rule that might exist.

Which, in turn, explains this total mess :-)

Permalänk | Anmäl #2 Gunnel Gomér, 2010-11-26, 16:46

Personally, I wouldn't have much confidence in a prosecutor who follows every rule that MIGHT exist, as opposed to one who follows the rules that DO exist... ;)

Sadly, not mere speculation on GG's part: Marianne Ny's actual job description at the Prosecution Authority Development Center, Gothenburg is to be creative with the laws and dream up wild extensions and new interpretations of sex crime law in order to fill new and ever-higher prisoner quotas.

Sweden already has twice the incarceration rate of Denmark and nearly three times that of the UK, partly due to the appallingly wide definition of "rape", partly to the fact that many judges consider proof unnecessary, believing themselves able to divine the merits of a rape allegation solely from the plaintiff's appearance in court. Which, in Swedish courts, is perfectly sufficient for sentencing people to six-year prison terms...

Permalänk | Anmäl #3 Anton Bergquist, 2010-11-26, 17:42

Sweden Legal System is a joke internationally.

Permalänk | Anmäl #4 Ahmed Ahmed, 2010-11-26, 23:44

I´ll make an attepmt to guide the discussion to the ethical/legal core question...

Let´s forget the horror for feminism for a moment and move to what has happened to a male context - the bi & homosexual men.

In the gay world prevention of virus is very important - in particular in case of one night stands. For the two Swedish women the true life situation was simialar.

Let´s ask the gay men about this:

Do you think it should be legal to trick or force anyone to unprotected sexual intercourse - even when your partner demands a condom actively - by words and by taking action to use a condom?

Do you think it should be legal to penetetrate a sleeping person without a condom - when you know that your partner demands a condom?

Permalänk | Anmäl #5 Gunnel Gomér, 2011-02-13, 12:45