To be precise, he didn't force anyone to have sex - the issue was whether consensual sex was had with or without a condom.
I'm not saying that's ok, just pointing out it's different to what saying someone is a rapist generally brings to mind.
Careful here Pete, I know what you're saying but it's generally best to avoid categorising rape! The gritty details are irrelevant and there's nothing to say we have them all, anyway.
quote:
(However, if he is guilty, why - when the case was initially brought - were the charges dropped? What new evidence caused it to be re-opened?)
For me, the issue is one of governments being bullies/playing with people.
As I said, the prosecutor went to court and argued for them to reopened. I'm not sure what, if any, new evidence there was but legal due process was followed.
quote:
If he's not at risk of being extradited to the US, there's no reason for them not to say so.
Also, the only reason we're hearing about this is because he's making a fuss. If it was a normal person it wouldn't be in the news.
There IS a reason for them not to say so, and the reason is that they simply can't make that kind of guarantee. If the US DO request extradition through legal channels, Sweden can not simply turn around and go "Nah, dude - we said he was cool with us. Soz".
Or rather, they probably could, but it takes us down one hell of a road. The worlds far from perfect, but at least we've reached a stage where the major players work together and abide by some common laws and goals. When one country starts ignoring that, it fucks the whole thing up.
Ecuador probably doesn't have an extradition treaty with the US, so it's fine for them to play by whatever rules they decide. But Sweden definitely does, and Sweden also need to play by EU rules.
EDITED: 19 Aug 2012 18:04 by HERMAND