> I think Sweden has a general policy of pursuing alleged rapists even when they aren't public figures.
It doesn't even have to be at the government level. Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media. This would still be his publicity playing into it. Also, his publicity make it easy for Swedish authorities to know where he is to pursue him.
> Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media.
If the idea of an HN user saying that the charges are B.S. because a rape victim didn't file them until she found out he was a public figure doesn't fully demonstrate my point about misogyny, I can't imagine what would.
P.S. He was a public figure even before 2010, btw.
"AW", the one who claims' equal a rape offense (#4), says she was initially attracted to him through his being a public figure. From the most detailed account I've come across, including excepts of the summaries of the plaintiffs' statements from the London High Court (warning, they're fairly explicit and his alleged behavior is disgusting: http://jackofkent.com/2012/09/the-detail-of-the-accusations-... ):
"In her statement SW said that she had been captivated by Mr Assange when she had seen him in a TV interview. She had attended a lunch with him and others on 14 August 2010. He had flirted with her over lunch...."
You seem to have misread what I posted. Let's break down what I said:
> That said, I think that Assange's publicity seems like it plays a part into why this is being pursued. There doesn't even need to be nefarious pressure from the USA for that to be true.
(I'm not heavily invested in the Assange situation, and I don't spend hours pouring over all publicly available material on the matter, so forgive me if I'm missing something obvious here.)
I said this because it seemed like a few things could be true:
1. The woman could have come forward due to the extra publicity that Assange was getting at the time [ If I remember correctly, this happened around the time the Wikileaks was publishing the leaked diplomatic communications. ] Note, that this says nothing about whether or not he actually raped her, nor does it say anything about whether or not he should stand trial for said rape.
2. The Swedish government could have been pursuing the case extra hard because he was a public figure. [ Maybe I'm cynical, but I feel like authorities may not pursue a case that hard after the suspect has fled the country. Especially if it's "only rape" rather than something sexy like "terrorism" that will get them a promotion. ]
3. The publicity surrounding Assange makes him easier to find abroad, unlike someone with less of a profile, who might be more difficult to find for extradition.
> It doesn't even have to be at the government level. Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media. This would still be his publicity playing into it. Also, his publicity make it easy for Swedish authorities to know where he is to pursue him.
In response to @notahacker saying:
> think Sweden has a general policy of pursuing alleged rapists even when they aren't public figures.
This plays back to those original 3 points.
How does any of this make me a mysogynist? At no point do I express an opinion on:
- The veracity of the woman's claims
- If Assange should go to Sweden to sort out this issue / stand trial.
Just because a woman doesn't come forward right away does not prove that she was not raped, nor does it prove that she has some nefarious purpose.
It doesn't even have to be at the government level. Maybe he did rape her, but she only came forward after seeing him in the media. This would still be his publicity playing into it. Also, his publicity make it easy for Swedish authorities to know where he is to pursue him.