He said, she said, he denied and as was the case, avoided extradition by criminally jumping bail and seeking refuge inside a, hostile to the USA, Ecuadorian embassy. Hardly the actions of an entirely innocent "man" with no case to answer!

But for the absurd and unexplainable reluctance of prosecutors and politicians to acquire and deploy covert, unbeatable, space-age lie detection. This case could have been resolved, in days of the accusations! And or by Assange going voluntarily to face his accusers and supply a DNA sample.

Which incidentally seems never ever to have been offered? Arguably the very first thing an entirely innocent man would have voluntarily supplied, you'd think?

This seemingly Nassistic self-governed, above the law and normal standards of evidential inquiry, criminal, seems to think his freedom was taken by someone given his seven or so years of entirely voluntary self-imposed incarceration in the embassy!

He is not and never was an accredited Journalist, just a notorious hacker trying to score big time with the illegal release of classified for a purpose, information.

And where nobody's privacy or rights were ever in the slightest, sacrosanct! Except the criminal Assange's!

His defence seems to have included, shovelled by the shipload, BS? And whining rallies/supporters, trying to sell more of it?
And sure to come out in force trying to represent this accused and never ever proven innocent even in the pub test, rapist and criminal hacker?

I hope he is extradited, goes to the States and face a grand jury then a trial for some of the crimes he is, I believe, inducibly guilty of. And then spends the rest of his days inside a prison facility. Where his access to any electronic equipment is limited to a rationed landline telephone, a radio and a television and maybe a library computer?

Which, if allowed, has some of the usual features locked to prevent clever hackers like the criminal Assange from using it for that purpose and revenge against those who dare to hold him to account for HIS actions!
Alan B.

Assange is a ridiculous and boring figure who should be handed over to America to be dealt with then forgotten.

That Kavanagh person raped me at a time I can't remember, in a place I can't remember, at a party I can't remember, attended by people who also can't remember it.

Well since women don't lie about such things, it must be true. Lynch the bastard.
_______________________________________________________________

That Assange person raped me at a time I can remember, in a place I can remember, in a way I can remember.

Well we all know women lie about this all the time. The nice Mr Assange would never have done this. Also the women are being used by the US deep state (which exists or doesn't exist depending on our whims) to get at this poor victim.

There's nothing like consistency of standards.

And this is nothing like consistency of standards.

They voluntarily went to bed with him. So how could it be rape ?
Any other Swedish definition is invalid for extradition in other administrations.

That is the start and end of it.
As far as the US is concerned, can US laws be applied in other countries ?
Moslem Sharia Police Patrol Cars have been seen in US and there was a
suggestion that one was seen in Australia.
So don't be surprised if you are pulled over by the California Highway
Patrol for driving on the wrong side of the road.

Any other Swedish definition is invalid for extradition in other administrations.

Maybe not invalid because of EU rules. Another reason for BREXIT.

Sex includes informed enthusiastic consent. Both here and Sweden. Not saying no is not consent. They went to bed with him, so what, if they were suitably lubricated they could have and apparently did agree to one only penetration sexually with a condom! Repeat for the benefit of the knuckle-dragging neanderthals' Once only and with a condom! Is that clear enough? One time only, wearing a condom. And given he the criminal Assange agreed, then after they were well and truly asleep proceeded to penetrate the ladies minus a condom. Now for the knuckle draggers who seem to think that this is ok!?

At no time does anyone have an entitlement to help themselves twice to a women's body when the consent is given for, one time only, unless and until further permission is sort and given and that consent needs to be informed and accompanied by at the very least, an audible YES!

Even where the couple are married to each other!

Understand yet knuckle dragger!? The word is YES! Not JFC, WTF do you think you are doing R sole.

"Just because I allowed you to sleep over never ever gave you or any other R sole unlimited conjugal rights"

This is now the law here and has been for some time in Sweden. I believe Sweden has been leaned on to oblige them to drop their action, so there remains no impediment to the extradition to the states. Enough with the whining BS already!
Alan B.