Timeline of Assange’s One-Night Stands Raises Questions in Sex Assault Case

December 8, 2010

(ChattahBox World News)—As Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is held in London and fighting potential extradition to Sweden, details have emerged about what prompted Swedish officials to determine that he should be questioned in a sex crimes case–and these details have caused some readers to question whether an actual assault transpired. Questions of intent and the specifics of Sweden’s rape laws will be central to the case as it moves forward, the UK Daily Mail reports.

Last August, Assange traveled to Stockholm to speak at an event, where he was invited to stay at the apartment of one of the event’s organizers, referred to as “Sarah” in the Daily Mail’s account of the proceedings. Sarah and Assange went to dinner and then sex in her apartment, during which his condom broke.

The next day, he spoke at the conference where he met a woman referred to as “Jessica,” who he took to the movies that day where they were intimate. That night, Assange attended a party thrown by Sarah in his honor, then two days later, he spent the night with Jessica and used a condom during one encounter but not during the second, because Jessica says he refused to do so, the Mail notes.

Shortly thereafter, Jessica called Sarah and said she was concerned she may have caught a sexual disease from Assange, and Sarah told Jessica that she also slept with Assange. Later that week, both women went to a Stockholm police station and asked for advice on how Jessica could get Assange to submit to an HIV test, but the police determined that both women were victims. Depending on how Swedish laws interpret the chain of events, it is unclear whether charges will be filed against Assange, the Mail reports.


Comments

One Response to “Timeline of Assange’s One-Night Stands Raises Questions in Sex Assault Case”

  1. mary atkinson on December 9th, 2010 7:07 am

    Peculiar. Neither woman thought of HIV prior to capturing Assange’s attentions? What set in immediately afterward…sudden shock? Good heavens, this might mean possible transmission of disease or infection, in an age where AIDS has been in the news for years? And what gave either woman serious pause for thought in Assange’s case, condoms or not? If HIV were a real fear, why go anywhere near Assange? And most importantly, have they been tested for HIV since (such as at once), which is what a genuinely anxious person would do; are they waiting till he is tested before being tested themselves? If the women concerned did not go for testing as soon as they could, then forget it. The charge is not genuine. No-one messes about with a sincere terror of infection driving them. Especially not if they have already been to the Police, whose duty would be to ensure the victim saw a doctor and received medical assistance, including for HIV. This case is not a case, one of those that ruin the reputation of true assault cases. People who irresponsibly attempt to manipulate the judiciary, apparently for dramatic effect, ought to be thrown out of court.

Got something to say? **Please Note** - Comments may be edited for clarity or obscenity, and all comments are published at the discretion of ChattahBox.com - Comments are the opinions of the individuals leaving them, and not of ChattahBox.com or its partners. - Please do not spam or submit comments that use copyright materials, hearsay or are based on reports where the supposed fact or quote is not a matter of public knowledge are also not permitted.