Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Denied Bail

By - Source: The Guardian | B 60 comments

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been denied bail and will remain in custody.

Whether its Anon's latest efforts to fight back against those refusing to have anything to do with the whistleblowing site, or the site itself asking its community to make mirrors to protect the material it has published, there's certainly been no shortage of WikiLeaks news these past few days. However, it's not WikiLeaks-related events that have landed founder Julian Assange in a jail cell.

Julian Assange was yesterday arrested on suspicion of rape. His arrest took place in the UK on behalf of the Swedish authorities. Assange presented himself at a London police station after news emerged that Swedish police last week charged him with rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. The Guardian reports that Assange has said he will fight extradition to Sweden. He has been denied bail and will remain in custody until December 14.

The Daily Mail reports that Sweden's charges of rape, sexual molestation and coercion stem from events that occurred in August of this year when Assange was on a trip to Sweden. Reporter Richard Pendlebury traveled to Stockholm to investigate the story and has posted what he says are the events that led to the charges against Assange.

Pendlebury writes that having been asked to speak at an event in Stockholm, Assange ended up staying with one of the event's organizers. The night before his seminar, Assange and the woman are said to have had sex. The woman claims that while they were having sex, the condom broke. Despite this, the two remained on good terms and the woman is said to have thrown a party for Assange at her apartment the following night.

A few days later, Julian Assange reportedly engaged in sexual relations with a second woman. Also in attendance at the seminar, this woman claims that she and Assange took a train to her home in Enkoping where they had sex twice. Mr. Assange did not wear a condom the second time, and refused when she asked him to. The two went for breakfast the following morning and when Assange did leave Enkoping, the woman paid for his train ticket home.

It wasn't until later that week that the second woman is said to have phoned the first woman (whom she had also met at the seminar) to air concerns about the unprotected sex she had had with Assange. The first woman admitted that she too had had sex with the WikiLeaks founder and the two went to a police station in Stockholm to inquire as to whether or not it was possible to force Assange to have an HIV test. Though the first woman said she was only there to support the second, she also gave police an account of her relationship with Assange.

According to Pendlebury, somewhere during this interview with police, authorities concluded that the second woman had been raped (because of Assanges refusal to wear a condom) and the first had been subject to sexual molestation (Pendlebury writes that this may have been because of an allegation that Assange sabotaged the condom).

Right now, it's unclear as to what exactly happened. Assange is denying any wrong-doing, insisting that the sex with both women was consensual. On this point, the women agree. However, woman #1 is cited in the Daily Mail report as telling one newspaper, "In both cases, the sex had been consensual from the start but had eventually turned into abuse."

Despite this, supporters of Assange are claiming that the whole thing could have been a trap set up by the U.S. government. Woman #1 claims that it is nothing of the sort.

"The accusations were not set up by the Pentagon or anybody else. The responsibility for what happened to me and the other girl lies with a man with a twisted view of women, who has a problem accepting the word “no”."

The full story of how Julian Assange reportedly met and had came to sleep with each of the women is available on the Daily Mail.

Display 60 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 14 Hide
    reprotected , December 9, 2010 2:57 AM
    I don't remember court involving in suspicions. Everything is based on facts, and that is Julian Assange. It's not rape unless they don't accept it, and did both of them say no to sex? No. Thats like if I went to a restaurant, order some food, chef got the order wrong and I complained, the waiter/waitress said they won't replace it, I accept the fact and eat it, then complain on how I won't pay. If I didn't eat the food, I can just leave, but if I ate it, I have to pay. Assange's condom broke, Women 1 didn't like it, but still had sex, and enjoyed it. Women 2 didn't like how Assange isn't going to wear a condom, but accepted it and still had sex with him, then declare rape? There is a difference between seduction and rape. :) 
  • 13 Hide
    tipoo , December 9, 2010 2:28 AM
    Adding to that, I really wish the Swedish court didn't withhold her real name. Even if he is found innocent, his name is smeared forever as is always the case when people (especially men) are charged with sexual crimes. The woman, on the other hand, gets away with it with her name unmentioned even if its found she lied about the whole thing, which seems very likely to me. What are the odds that she makes a blog post like that, has an extremist feminist background, and got sexually assaulted by him so close to the date of the newest cable releases? BS, I say.
Other Comments
  • 9 Hide
    tipoo , December 9, 2010 2:24 AM
    "... You might think it strange that Sarah would want to throw a party in honour of the man about whom she would later make a complaint to police concerning their liaison the night before. This is only one of several puzzling flaws in the prosecution case. A few hours after that party, Sarah apparently Tweeted: ‘Sitting outside ... nearly freezing, with the world’s coolest people. It’s pretty amazing!’ She was later to try to erase this message..." "...Earlier this year, Sarah is reported to have posted a telling entry on her website, which she has since removed. But a copy has been retrieved and widely circulated on the internet. Entitled ‘7 Steps to Legal Revenge’, it explains how women can use courts to get their own back on unfaithful lovers. Step 7 says: ‘Go to it and keep your goal in sight. Make sure your victim suffers just as you did.’ (The highlighting of text is Sarah’s own.)..."
    -From the Daily Mail

    Sounds alot like a BS charge to me.
  • 6 Hide
    dinga911 , December 9, 2010 2:25 AM
    The 'west' is awarding nobel prize to someone fighting for democracy in china and jailing the one who revealed the 'secrets' to the people,don't people need to know that american soldiers are fighting so called terrorists funded by 'saudi arabia' (an ally of the usa!) nd then they call this man terrorist.
  • 13 Hide
    tipoo , December 9, 2010 2:28 AM
    Adding to that, I really wish the Swedish court didn't withhold her real name. Even if he is found innocent, his name is smeared forever as is always the case when people (especially men) are charged with sexual crimes. The woman, on the other hand, gets away with it with her name unmentioned even if its found she lied about the whole thing, which seems very likely to me. What are the odds that she makes a blog post like that, has an extremist feminist background, and got sexually assaulted by him so close to the date of the newest cable releases? BS, I say.
  • 14 Hide
    reprotected , December 9, 2010 2:57 AM
    I don't remember court involving in suspicions. Everything is based on facts, and that is Julian Assange. It's not rape unless they don't accept it, and did both of them say no to sex? No. Thats like if I went to a restaurant, order some food, chef got the order wrong and I complained, the waiter/waitress said they won't replace it, I accept the fact and eat it, then complain on how I won't pay. If I didn't eat the food, I can just leave, but if I ate it, I have to pay. Assange's condom broke, Women 1 didn't like it, but still had sex, and enjoyed it. Women 2 didn't like how Assange isn't going to wear a condom, but accepted it and still had sex with him, then declare rape? There is a difference between seduction and rape. :) 
  • 3 Hide
    slofat1 , December 9, 2010 3:12 AM
    Big Brother is Watching
  • 2 Hide
    dogman_1234 , December 9, 2010 3:22 AM
    Is this kind of stuff gonna be like 1984 and the Apocalypse of John,( a.k.a. Revelation)...where everything is gonna be cool then...wham!...next thing we know we are bulldozing the whole internet infrastructure.
  • 4 Hide
    cashews , December 9, 2010 3:25 AM
    Although the guy looks like a weirdo, he most definately has been set up here. As someone who supports free speech, I hope that he doesn't get shipped off to the US, because he will certainly face the rest of his life behind bars.
  • 4 Hide
    keczapifrytki , December 9, 2010 3:52 AM
    Oh my god. And i thought America was bad with everyone suing everyone... This is ridiculous.
  • 7 Hide
    micr0be , December 9, 2010 3:52 AM
    i say counter sue them for having sex without a lubricant ! just tell the court it was too rough and that you asked to use a lube but they refused ......... be creative Assange common step it up.
  • 6 Hide
    cp8427 , December 9, 2010 4:07 AM
    Talk about propaganda... I mean rape charges... c'mon America... Is that the best OUR government can do? Hardly convincing IMO.
  • 4 Hide
    slofat1 , December 9, 2010 4:08 AM
    This reads just like 1984. This guy has been 100% setup by the gov't. People nod their heads like this junk is true and actually think these charges could be real. Rape charges, come on this is unreal insane bogus. People have the right to free press.. this is gov't trying to be in control, they're not.. we are. I was riding on Bart in the bay area this morning thinking how its not true, big brother isn't watching me, and then it hit me there were 2 cameras in there watching everyone from every angle. What has the world come to, the have access to every message sent. I worked at a cell phone company and they had 5-6 people working full time to go through all the legal docs regarding giving the gov't wire taps to everyone's cell phone calls. Fight back against this or soon you'll notice then your in North Korea in a giant stadium raising cards for a fat man known simply as big brother.
  • 4 Hide
    functionofx , December 9, 2010 4:19 AM
    I'm not sure how legit this article is, but apparently someone took some screenshots of posts this alleged rape victim made on twitter (which have since been taken down) AFTER the supposed rape took place. She talks about plans for attending a party with Julian in one, and how much fun she's having in the other. Doesn't sound like someone who had just been raped to me.

  • 2 Hide
    functionofx , December 9, 2010 4:20 AM
    The link to the article didn't post for some reason. Here it is: http://radsoft.net/news/20101001,01.shtml
  • -6 Hide
    saturnus , December 9, 2010 4:31 AM
    If he's innocent why did he flee the country, refuse to talk with the prosecutors about the changes at any point, and not appear on any of 4 scheduled court dates in Sweden forcing them to issue an international arrest warrant?
  • 2 Hide
    functionofx , December 9, 2010 4:46 AM
    I did a quick search to try to find sources for the information you gave, but didn't have any luck. All I could find was that he was charged, then the charges were cleared, and then later the investigation was reopened. It seems it was never actually rape anyway, but consensual sex without a condom, and I guess in Sweden that's a sex crime.
  • 3 Hide
    formin , December 9, 2010 4:54 AM
    women who lie about being raped should be raped.
    a women sending a man to jail for a rape he didnt commit is pretty much on the same level as a man raping a women in my books.
  • 4 Hide
    xrodney , December 9, 2010 5:08 AM
    You have to be kidding me.
    If you refuse to wear condom it your right, but also girl have right to refuse to have sex with you if you don't. But then she evidently didn't so this is hardly rape.
  • 2 Hide
    DjEaZy , December 9, 2010 5:43 AM
    ... this is all fabricated...
  • -1 Hide
    aofjax , December 9, 2010 6:31 AM
    To be honest, this is the best thing the government can do to set up someone. For one, they can't simply use murder since it would involve way too much effort, especially overseas, and it would seem too obvious. Rape would be the next best thing, because as someone said, even if a man was proven innocent in a rape case, his reputation is smeared forever, giving the government more leverage to down play any involvement. Also, whether proven guilty or not, he more than likely will have to register as a sex offender whenever he goes now, so tracking him would be easier. This would be a great way to show other "Wikileakers" as well not to release any more sensitive docs, otherwise, you would have the same fate.
Display more comments
Tom’s guide in the world
  • Germany
  • France
  • Italy
  • Ireland
  • UK
Follow Tom’s guide
Subscribe to our newsletter