Hacker News Reader

Comment by pionar | Hacker News Reader

He would get more sympathy by publicly facing the accusations, not hiding out from everyone.

Saying on his site that Sweden is "effectively detaining him without charging him with a crime" when Sweden isn't detaining him anywhere (he's holed himself up in an embassy in London) is the type of misleading nonsense that rubs me the wrong way.

Also claiming that the UK isn't honoring his political asylum granted by another country for purposes other than why he's hiding out (the political asylum was to prevent him from becoming a political prisoner in the US and facing what he calls a "credible risk of torture, inhumane treatment, and unfair trial" here) is also misleading.

He seems to relish in martyrdom.

View on HN

I don't care about him relishing in martyrdom but the rape allegations are serious business in many ways, so yes if those are true then his actions would be hideous.

The problem is that I don't know if they are true and that they essentially don't take away from WikiLeaks mission and Assange's part in it - as horrible as those allegations are.

Who should be given the benefit of the doubt? I would argue the weak.

Who are the most vulnerable and weak in this whole issue? The women Assange allegedly took advantage of against their will? Probably.

A man shedding and successfully marketing the ugly truths of very powerful people? Probably.

It's a complicated world and not only that, it seems as if the game has been rigged from the get go (by all powerful parties) so I don't feel like I could allow myself strong judgement.

The woman Assange allegedly raped is currently refusing to cooperate with the prosecutor and police. She is even refusing to sign her own testimony. The unsigned testmony states however that she was "half-asleep" when Assange initiated sex, which is what the prosecutor is using to charge Assange for lesser degree rape.

Her intention, as far as public statements has been, is quite clear. She wanted him tested for HIV. She had asked him, but he refused, so a few days later she went to the police to ask if they could force him to take a HIV.

I remember reading that she simply felt tricked by the prosecutor/police when the media circus started with the arrest warrant and extraditions. If we want to take her side (which should do), then what would the correct course of actions be?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com