csteele:

This sounds like a bit of a fairy-tale or at best it has more twists and turns and conspiracy theories than any of the Swedish novelist
Stieg Larsson's novels. I feel that it's something that will simply fade away eventually. Neither of the women seemed to have had any difficulty in having sex with Assange (condom or no condom), and complaining later that a condom had split - is not something that even in Sweden is a chargeable offence. It's bizarre that the prosecutors don't want to meet Assange or question him. Storm in a teacup.

Benk:“None of that disproves that his behaviour wasn't way out of line.”

I read the complaints as put out there by The Guardian (I think), those women are way out of line and do a real disservice to a law probably meant to protect people. People who day say “no” clearly and get ignored.

We’ll have Sex contracts soon before entering into... umm... yeah intercourse.

Yabby it will be a disaster if the prostitutes become mandatory reporters of sex crimes wont it - if we have stupid laws about someone being liable for not taking responsibility for the condom remaining intact?

Who bought it and should it really be a consumer complaint about product failure?

The jury is still out on the Assange case so the legal system will no doubt do its job.

Yabby, surely a prostitute or even a client has the same right to cease the 'business transaction' should health be put at risk through a faulty condom or a mishap during intercourse. I would be surprised if either client or prostitute would agree to take that risk. In other industries many workers down tools (so to speak) when OH&S is breached - it is not only to protect the individual but all who come after.

Any other business that puts at risk a life during the course of their business is covered by insurance but not sure about the sex industry in relation to exposure to potentially life threatening diseases.

csteele,
What seems harsh is that this yet untested and unless the woman did a rape kit at the hospital after the act unprovable allegation is worthy of an extradition involving large legal bills. His name is now tainted no matter the outcome of the case which will surely be "he said she said" evidence. Why could they have not simply awaited his return to the country and questioned him then. I do not wish to excuse rape or inappropriate sexual acts but do feel the case is a bit political.
Having read through the posts i still ask, Why is no such a hard thing to understand?

*but then, the charges in question only carry a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment*

Only two years Benk? Frankly I think being locked up in a klink
for two years, is a frigging long time!

The thing is, these women only complained, once they realised that
he had knocked them both off, within a short time.

One would think that if a woman has been raped, she would know
about it there and then. Sending somebody to jail for two whole
years, because somebody is flipflopping her opinion, much later
after the event, after finding out that he's moved on and she admits
to being vindictive, is hardly fair and is just the Swedish
feminists running riot with their laws.

Lemmings should note that the progressive position on wilful HIV infection has progressed:

"UN and Planned Parenthood seek to decriminalize willful HIV infection"
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/un-and-planned-parenthood-sponsor-campaign-to-decriminalize-willful-hiv-inf

Don't you know that revealing one's HIV status might stigmatise the carrier?

"Sharing your HIV status is called
disclosure. Your decision about whether to
disclose may change with different people
and situations. You have the right to
decide if, when, and how to disclose your
HIV status."
http://www.ippf.org/NR/rdonlyres/B4462DDE-487D-4194-B0E0-193A04095819/0/HappyHealthyHot.pdf

I mean, how can you stay "happy, healthy and hot" if you have to disclose your HIV status to anyone you sleep with?