Hacker News Reader

Comment by citricsquid | Hacker News Reader

What do you mean by "their side of the story"? The claims they made are their side of the story, what more is there that they could say? I believe their identities are not released because that's Swedish law.

Julian Assange always seemed quite paranoid to me -- maybe rightfully -- so it seems strange that he would have sex with 2 women he met at a conference (I think that's what happened, I'm not 100% sure of the case details as I can't find a detailed summary) if he believed there would be attempts to set him up for crimes, it seems more the behaviour of someone that lives care free.

View on HN

Their identities are public and have been publicly reported in international media:

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-12-09/us/28...

"The claims they made are their side of the story, what more is there that they could say?"

Then what's the point of having them witness in a trial? They've already gave "their side of the story" right? Wrong.

I'll rephrase:

What more can they say that will change what people will think; sure they can clarify details and what led up to events (what they would do as a witness at trial) but none of that really matters to the public. Their "side of the story" is: we were sexually assaulted by Julian Assange. minor details are of little consequence in public opinion.

"What more can they say that will change what people will think; sure they can clarify details and what led up to events (what they would do as a witness at trial) but none of that really matters to the public. Their "side of the story" is: we were sexually assaulted by Julian Assange. minor details are of little consequence in public opinion."

Your cynicism here is way overboard and borders on intellectual laziness. There have been many instances in the past of details coming out and changing public perception of a sexual assault case. The supposed Duke rape case a few years back is a prime example. Initially everybody and their dog just "knew" those boys were guilty of raping that stripper. But as details began to trickle out and she changed her story multiple times, the whole thing ultimately culminated in the disbarment of the prosecuting attorney Mike Nifong and subsequent jail time (albeit 1 day). Obviously that was a judicial decision but to pretend that the "minor details" didn't adjust public perception is absolutely untrue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com