Assange’s Lawyer Complains About Leaked Documents from His Rape Case
Get out your hankies. This is a sad one:
In a move that surprised many of Mr Assange’s closest supporters on Saturday, The Guardian newspaper published previously unseen police documents that accused Mr Assange in graphic detail of sexually assaulting two Swedish women. One witness is said to have stated: “Not only had it been the world’s worst screw, it had also been violent.”
Bjorn Hurtig, Mr Assange’s Swedish lawyer, said he would lodge a formal complaint to the authorities and ask them to investigate how such sensitive police material leaked into the public domain.
Awwwww.
“It is with great concern that I hear about this because it puts Julian and his defence in a bad position,” he told a colleague.
“I do not like the idea that Julian may be forced into a trial in the media. And I feel especially concerned that he will be presented with the evidence in his own language for the first time when reading the newspaper. I do not know who has given these documents to the media, but the purpose can only be one thing – trying to make Julian look bad.”
Awwwww.
Thanks to Hot Air Headlines.
Ain’t karma a bitch? 🙂
The esteemed Mr Assange just might get off on the sex charges in Sweden, but he’ll never get off on the “worst sex ever” charge.
The Dana who doesn't really believe in karma, but sure can be amused when it happens (bd7e62) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:14 pmI lost my tiny violin so I can’t demonstrate my sympathy.
Mike K (568408) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:17 pmMr K, that’s just so sad. Here are some replacements.
The always helpful Dana (bd7e62) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:19 pmMy irony-meter exploded.
JD (07faa1) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:27 pmoh. I thought swedish womens liked it rough.
I saw it in a movie.
happyfeet (fd4f3b) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:29 pmTo paraphrase Sheldon: “Karma, thou art a heartless bitch.”
Kevin M (298030) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:32 pmIt’s all so sordid.
The girls that kicked the hornet’s nest indeed.
MayBee (081489) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:46 pmIt’s only unfair and wrong when you do it to other people, not when it is done to you, eh Mr. Assange?
Newtons.Bit (27fb9b) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:46 pmThis is the most hilarious thing I’ve heard all day.
Assange shrugs when he notes his leaks killed hundreds of people, and he’s upset that his rape is being discussed.
Sorry you shills, but it’s the information age, and you were only pretending to be on the side of open-ness. Here’s Assange’s first true test of his principles, and he has failed spectacularly. He should divulge all the information he has, and all privileged communication, just to remain consistent.
IF he believes there is a valuable need for secrets, then he should apologize to the dead.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:47 pmI’d love to know who the well-known American journalist was.
MayBee (081489) — 12/19/2010 @ 12:53 pmLife imitates the Onion. The demanding advocate of total openness, spiller of others private and secret documents, discovers the true value of privacy and secrecy. Karma can be such a bitch.
htom (412a17) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:12 pmI also can’t believe Jemima Khan was one of the people who bailed out Assange. Her ex-husband is Imran Khan, who instigated the Newsweek-fed “Koran in a toilet” riots in Pakistan.
MayBee (081489) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:18 pmThe khan’s are true patriots, Maybee.
JD (07faa1) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:23 pmThis would be relevant if Assange had leaked any documents. He publicized them, not leaked them. The difference is important in American society, it seems reasonable to think it’s important in others.
roy (f572a6) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:27 pmWOW that is some great hair splitting you’re up to.
So Assange is opposed to leaks, but supports publicizing leaks.
So he doesn’t mind if I publicize leaks about his rape case? Oh wait… he does, you’re wrong, and this is pathetic.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:45 pm“This would be relevant if Assange had leaked any documents. He publicized them, not leaked them.”
roy – The information Assange publicized or published was not in the public domain before he took action. Even if he did not illegally obtain the information first hand from it’s original source and was a secondary tippee, how is what he did not equivalent to leaking it to the public, not an unimportant distinction?
daleyrocks (c07dfa) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:49 pmAsk the Supreme Court.
roy (f572a6) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:50 pmRoy eats boogers.
JD (07faa1) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:51 pmSpell it out for uss stoopid peeepull rooy. Assange iz aginst leeks, or publisizing leeks? Bowth? Neether?
JD (07faa1) — 12/19/2010 @ 1:54 pmTsk, tsk.
TSK – Tough Shit, Kid
mojo (4e4a98) — 12/19/2010 @ 2:03 pmSo, Roy, if I hand you the US nuclear launch codes, but give them to no one else, and you give them to the Russians or Chinese, only I am guilty and you walk?
Kevin M (298030) — 12/19/2010 @ 2:07 pmHmmm … seems like that’s exactly what the Rosenbergs did. The Supremes had no problem with that.
Kevin M (298030) — 12/19/2010 @ 2:09 pmOf course, what Roy really means is that the rules are different for people like Assange. Some will play these hair splitting games for ever, just to keep things murky and pretend the argument hasn’t ended.
You see Eric Boehlert doing this to defend the Media Matters connection to the school board shooter, a connection similar to what he’s been using against others.
The shills don’t really want a different set of rules… that’s just dressing. In reality, they simply don’t care about rules or consistency. they just care about the left.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 12/19/2010 @ 2:15 pmWe can always count on apologists like Roy to pop up like so many Wack – a – Moles in order to protect their meme. So Roy, if Patterico decides to publish your real name and e – mail address, that’s fine and dandy with you, right? I say let’s put your feeble scruples to the test.
How ’bout it?
Dmac (498ece) — 12/19/2010 @ 2:18 pmBTW, where do you live, Roy? Can we google your street address? Where do you work? Can we have your work e – mail as well?
Roy?
Dmac (498ece) — 12/19/2010 @ 2:19 pmNo one said it better than Shakespeare:
Hamlet, act III, scene 4, lines 206 and 207
Bored Lawyer (5f203c) — 12/19/2010 @ 3:22 pmPetard and Hoist. Self-Assembly required.
SGT Ted (5d10ae) — 12/19/2010 @ 3:29 pmdang you beat me to it.
SGT Ted (5d10ae) — 12/19/2010 @ 3:32 pmI don’t know why I bother to comment here, I just end up defending statements I never made. Your strawmen are your problem, not mine.
American society does treat leaking differently from publicizing leaks. The Pentagon Papers case illustrates why. So there’s no hypocrisy — and if the original writeup means anything at all it’s an accusation of hypocrisy — in condemning one and not the other.
None of this means that publicizing leaks is right. A particular act of publicizing leaks is right or wrong on its own merits, not just because the information was leaked. Publicizing nuclear arming codes? Wrong because it leads to WWIII. Publicizing the Pentagon Papers? Right because it significantly educated the people about government without causing significant harm.
But isn’t it hypocritical to advocate punishment of Bradley Manning (as I do) and not advocate punishment for whoever leaked the police reports?
roy (f572a6) — 12/19/2010 @ 3:43 pmBut isn’t it hypocritical to advocate punishment of Bradley Manning (as I do) and not advocate punishment for whoever leaked the police reports?
Sure, let’s punish them both. Let’s, however, keep proportionality in mind.
MayBee (081489) — 12/19/2010 @ 3:59 pmLOL
Assange admitted his publication killed hundreds of people Roy.
No, it isn’t hypocritical at all to say Assange crossed a threshold of evil that the person talking about his raping did not even approach.
Like Maybee, I’m fine with the law being applied to them both. But this more than a legal issue. Assange is a clear and present danger, and I’m not being hyperbolic. He needs to be ended.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 12/19/2010 @ 4:02 pmLeaked? Did I hear the word “leaked”? This is just so unfair. And what did he do to deserve this? This is wrong wrong wrong, so wrong!!!
The Emperor (e8a19b) — 12/19/2010 @ 4:06 pmEwe stoopid wangnutz r two dum two reckogneyez hao mooch smarterer roi iz then ewe.
JD (07faa1) — 12/19/2010 @ 4:11 pmHe needs to be ended.
Comment by Dustin — 12/19/2010 @ 4:02 pm
The Emperor (e8a19b) — 12/19/2010 @ 4:22 pmHmmm… end him now!
I don’t want a show of it, and I don’t want some kind of suffering. I just want to protect innocent people from this guy.
Ideally, just leak whatever we have on Putin, and threaten to leak more, anonymously, until Assange gets cancer mysteriously.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 12/19/2010 @ 4:26 pmMy POV is that we have people in combat right now, as we speak. A lot of it is incredibly hostile and difficult. We’re losing a lot of Marines and Soldiers.
I worry that some people are so insulated from that reality that they sarcastically mock the notion of shooting back at our enemies.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 12/19/2010 @ 4:29 pm“American society does treat leaking differently from publicizing leaks.”
roy – You need to make it clear that you are referring to the technical legal definition of leaking if you are citing Supreme Court precedent. Also, what the heck does publicizing mean? Everyone understands publishing. All the straw men are yours. Are you claiming Assange is a journalist?
daleyrocks (c07dfa) — 12/19/2010 @ 4:41 pmHa ha. Ha ha ha. Ha ha ha ha ha.
Blacque Jacques Shellacque (e09322) — 12/19/2010 @ 5:01 pmThis is ironic in a number of ways;
http://weaselzippers.us/2010/12/19/huffpo-evil-karl-rove-behind-swedens-political-persecution-of-assange/
narciso (6075d0) — 12/19/2010 @ 5:04 pmIn irony so thick you could cut it with a knife, then stack it with a fork, Mr. Assange has an issue with “private secrets” being leaked to the public?
IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (9eeb86) — 12/19/2010 @ 5:48 pmHasn’t anyone “knee-capped” this POS yet?
AD-RtR/OS! (87fdcb) — 12/19/2010 @ 5:50 pmOh, stop trying to confuse the issue with logic and consistency. The point is that Amerikkkkkkkka should look bad, not Assssssssange.
IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (9eeb86) — 12/19/2010 @ 5:54 pmDid she bring a ruler to the party? I mean, we already know she forgot the umbrella.
Ronald Reagan (15521c) — 12/19/2010 @ 7:26 pm“American society does treat leaking differently from publicizing leaks. The Pentagon Papers case illustrates why.”
It sure does. Daniel Ellsberg (a tool of the Dems, ironically one they used to fight the commies in Vietnam when they thought going over to Vietnam and fighting commies was a swell idea), was engaging in treason and espionage against the United States and he was doing it in collusion with leading members of the Democrat Party and their mouthpieces in the media, like the boys at the NYT.
Not surpsisingly, the Democrats aren’t going to have themselves and their pals and henchmen executed for treason or espionage, and they have the clout to make sure nobody does to them what they did to the Rosenbergs. All it takes is a majority in Congress, a few friendly judges, an inside man in the FBI (like Mark Felt, for example)…and off you go. You can get away with pretty much anything if you have enough connections and power.
Dave Surls (936361) — 12/19/2010 @ 8:04 pmIt’s ironic about Felt, if he hadn’t blabbed to Woodward, over being passed over by Hoover as successor, his ‘black bag jobs’ wouldn’t have come to light, in part leading to Ayers acquittal, he wouldn’t have been tried for misconduct and ultimately pardoned by Reagan.
As for Ellsberg, he was one of Landsdale’s wunderkinds who hung around with French gangster mols, had a nervous breakdown, and chose to leak everything he knew, including the SIOP target list, that was why Nixon ultimately sent the Plumbers after him.
narciso (6075d0) — 12/19/2010 @ 8:15 pmI guess someone can warn Assange that if his people leak more government secrets, then more information about him will get leaked.
You’ve all said it already, so much for principle when the goose and the gander share the same fate.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 12/19/2010 @ 9:16 pmMr. Ass. would probably say that he published government documents that did not invade anyone’s personal life.
kishnevi (f26f5d) — 12/19/2010 @ 9:43 pmTo which the proper answer is: the publication of those documents certainly invaded the private lives of various people. And a police investigation is a government document, after all. So this is a government document, as much as any of the ones he leaked.
And finally, if the rape charges really are a government set up, why would he object to the true facts being published so the general population can determine for themselves that he is innocent?
Despite what his lawyers may say, Assange is getting exactly what he wanted — a brief blip in the passage of time.
He’s not a great sage, nor a render of truth. He’s something akin to Robespierre with the same bravery of conceit. His minions bask in reflected glory.
He is a small, smart man without even knowing why. However, as with all small, smart men, he wants and desires the recognition of his fleeting glory.
The problem, though, is smart doesn’t make you big. Realizing what gives you the potential to being big or great, despite all the smarts in the world, is what separates the great from the all the others that count for two points on a test.
Ag80 (ed728d) — 12/19/2010 @ 9:43 pmHere’s how it works: If you spy on the Democrats, you’re going to swing for it like the Rosenbergs, If you spy for the Democrats, like Daniel Ellsberg, then you’re going to walk.
Simple really.
Dave Surls (936361) — 12/19/2010 @ 10:01 pmAs for Assange, the rape complaint against him is a total joke. But, it’s nice to see him getting screwed by the system. He’ll walk, I’m sure, but in the meantime, he’s being put to all kinds of inconvenience, and that’s better than nothing.
Sometimes injustice is a good thing.
Dave Surls (936361) — 12/19/2010 @ 10:05 pmThe whole thing is a comedy of errors involving leaking this and leaking that.
Mike Myers (0e06a9) — 12/19/2010 @ 11:18 pmWeinerLeaks
Icy Texan (296157) — 12/20/2010 @ 12:10 amThe Weiner The World Awaited.
daleyrocks (c07dfa) — 12/20/2010 @ 5:21 amThis is pretty much true throughout all of human history, in all societies.
America is actually one of the few nations that attempts to deny the rich and connected this privilege. That it fails more often than not is hardly surprising, given its inherent nature as an uphill battle.
IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (9eeb86) — 12/20/2010 @ 6:48 amMalignant Narcissism, Assange is thy name.
SGT Ted (5d10ae) — 12/20/2010 @ 6:57 amHmmm. Not clear from the above exactly who you’re complaining about — us here or Assange’s people.
I certainly object to such information being “rampantly” accessible — in both cases.
However, I find it singularly hypocritical for Assange — and others who side with him about the government documents — suddenly deciding that they don’t believe in such openness when it comes to their own peccadilloes.
It demonstrates a rather blatant lack of integrity and principle, while showing their duplicity and bias.
They only believe in openness when it targets things they are against.
They clearly don’t believe in it when that same light gets shined on them. Such is the basis at the heart of petty tyrants all through history:
“Rules for thee, but not for me”
I disagree with “openness in all cases”. But if it’s right for the one, it’s right for all… that’s what “all cases” means.
IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (9eeb86) — 12/20/2010 @ 6:57 am.
Leaking information about people you are accusing of leaking information looks stupid and hypocritical.
Chris Hooten (40360f) — 12/20/2010 @ 10:27 pmChris
Or like they are giving sauce for the gander. as in, maybe they normally wouldn’t but said f— it, if he thinks there should be no secrets…
Aaron Worthing (b8e056) — 12/20/2010 @ 10:38 pm#57
Great point, only he’s being charged with rape, not leaking information.
As usual, a lefty swings wildly and fails to connect.
Dave Surls (f9cacf) — 12/20/2010 @ 11:29 pmHey! When it comes to looking stupid and hypocritical, nobody knows like Hooten knows.
Icy Texan (2a60b2) — 12/21/2010 @ 3:10 am