That's because Sweden allegations are discontinued. Quick time frame of the latest development:
2017-05-19: Suspended investigation, revoked arrest warrant. Statement that the investigation can be resumed if Assange visited Sweden before August 2020.
2019-04-11: Case re-opened following his arrest. In September of this year 7 new witnesses were revealed.
2019-11-19: Investigation discontinued, stating "the evidence is not strong enough to form the basis for filing an indictment", adding that "the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed", but the prosecutor was still confident in the complainant.
I personally believe that he's guilty due to the sheer amount of witnesses, but that circumstances around it will result in the victims never achieving justice.
> I personally believe that he's guilty due to the sheer amount of witnesses
Yeah because the Swedish police is totally credible at this point.
So this is what we know of the first woman who went to the police, according to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer, starting this whole charade:
- There were no rape allegations. She described the sexual intercourse as consensual. Instead she was worried Assange may have HIV and asked whether the police could force him to take a test.
- Instead, and for no apparent reason, police try to pressure her into accusing Assange of rape. She refuses. She also refuses to sign the interrogation transcript created by the police.
- Finally, and emotionally exhausted, she goes home and writes one of her friends a SMS: "I don't want to report him. I just want him to take a test, but police want to get him for rape." and the next day: "Police is fabricating this."
- Then, that very next night, newspaper are already calling Assange a rapist.
Another fun tidbit:
- Some time later Swedish police was ready to come to the UK to interrogate Assange, but was asked not to by the UK.
- Also Swedish police was worried because their highest court wanted them to either charge him or drop the case, and was told by the UK: "Don't get cold feet now."
The ones that were curiously timed with the US wanting him brought to heel for wikileaks?
The ones that were curiously dropped late last year when extradition from Sweden was no longer needed?
I don't know Assange, and don't find him a likeable character from the reports I've read, and don't think much of wikileaks and its lack of filtering, but the whole Assange sexual assault allegations case stinks.
No, there weren't any initial allegations in the first place. The "raped" (not really) women only went to the police to force Assange get an STD test - even they didn't consider themselves victims!
A quick example might be that during his extradition trial in the UK earlier this year, Assange was kept in a locked glass box, unable to communicate effectively with his legal team:
The Armoured Glass Box is an Instrument of Torture
If you are up for a deep (and biased) dive, the rest of Craig Murray's daily blog posts from that trial give many more reasons that his treatment might be considered unjust:
reply