this is more than a soap opera, even given his vanity and his rabid supporters. it is a cruel codification of systemic inequality for women, and it is time that british media stop its collusion with sexist political and governmental structures which reinforce second class status for women.
the outcomes of bullying can be severe.
many many reporters are bullied on this case. i have witnessed even too the bullying endured by james ball from assange supporters. this is no reason to give in and relent and relax your core principles of human rights for all humans.
teh victims may experience secondary victimization as the systemic social, media, and justice, and diplomatic systems enforce injustice and fail to protect them.
i am shocked that issues of rape shield law are not more discussed in england regarding this case beyond the good work of david allen green, who is also bullied by assange supporters.
deliberate attacks on humans who support women's rights and rape victims rights will stop the advancement of profound legal theory to assist true equality.
when rape victims are bullied online, there is a reduction of desire of rape victims to report crims.
this deliberate participation in making a world safe for rape to occur is very dangerous.
in america a civil lawsuit would proceed agaisnt mr. assange fo r all his linking to bloggers which attack his victims. it would be considered infliction of emotional distress, violation of rape shield law, a deliberate attempt to prejudicie judiciaries, and malicious character attacks in retaliation for reporting a crims.
retaliation for reporting a crime, is a separate criminal act which seeks to obstruct justice, and systematically deprive victims of their rights to justice.
the medieval character attacks on the victims and ethnic slurs waged against sweden pain assange in a horrible light.
he has attacked domestic violence advocates in sweden, a huge insult to swedish women who face domestic violence even up unto the point of death.
his willingness to ignore all the statistical research in crime statistics showing crime against women easily accessible at bra.se is a crime of re-writing history for the flavor of his case.
he consulted brita sundberg who was not an expert at rape law. instead, she with FSI painted a grotesque caricature of feminism in sweden which obsures the fact that womne in sweden do nort have equal pay, equal representation in boardrooms, in leadership, in executive positions, or in physical and sexual safety at bare minimum.
this deliberate misinformation against swedish women is hurtful to their needs for true equality, and an insult to all the hard work that has brought them from a place where forced sterilization and child rape by governmental ministers was the norm in the 1970s.
our international law systems fail women, in england, in sweden, in the UK, in sudan, in ethiopia, in china, in russia.
more attention to the international comparative law aspects of sexual harassment on the jon, bullying of rape victims, and rape law norms, and how every country in the world enforces archaic gender norms, it is time for the guardian to embrace true equality for women, in your reporting and your political allegiances.
rape of women was permissible in england under the guise of "marriage" until england sets its brutal record straight on forced marriage and marital rape, the emmerson defense, which relied on centuries old hale's idea that a man could not rape his wife, for she hath giver her consent for life, would not then be applicable to the assange standard, of having de facto pro tem rapable wife, as per one instance of conditional consent. sadly assange's lawyer emmerson seemed mal-adept at english rape law when faced with montgomery's superior understanding of marital rape custom as emmerson attempted to apply it to assange a year ago. it is time the entire world makes marital rape illegal and forced marriage a crime and stops deifying all the polanskis of the world.
marital rape was made illegal in sweden in 1965.
assange's defamatory defense website which cited tony olsson a mass murderer and neo-nazi is more dangerous commonly understood.
advocation of neo-nazi ideology should make amy goodman and glenn greenwald wince, at least. they don't bat an eye. and assange's website tells me to shut up about it. a gag. from wikileaks. fancy that. sounds like a rape gag from halliburton KBR, but no, rape gags from wikileaks and the liberal left leave women desolate and berieved.
attacking rape victims, to enhance the future of rape gags for future rape is what i call wikileaks shariah.
digital stoning of rape victims, so no future victims come forward.
assange attacks gudrun schyman whose work to end human trafficking in domestic and sex slaves in europe is one of sweden's greatest glories. i informed her on twitter he was attacking her. an attack on her is an attack on women trafficked for sex slavery.
for the record, my removed comments were not offensive but for the content in spanish and swedish, translations of the original comment.
there is such immediate necessity to alert communities involved in this case of serious problems with rape shield violation waged by assange's defense.
here are the links
http://www.scribd.com/doc/98059871/Spanish-Comment-for-Nick-Cohen-on-Paranoia-Assange
http://www.scribd.com/doc/98059085/Svensk-Comment-for-Nick-Cohen-Paranoia-Assange-6-23-12
published here for easy access to people of sweden or ecuador who may be concerned about this international conspiracy of jurisdictions to protect rape and delay rape investigation.
spanish
http://bambuser.com/v/2775376
swedish
http://bambuser.com/v/2775390
*not be advised (critical)
the extensive decline of wikileaks in the last six months has notable moments in the crumbling abilities to maintain composure.
even if one cared for assange's defense, the expression of weakness has has shown through victim-bashing on his website, creates a rather unsympathetic scenario.
as a matter of law, any defendant is entitled to a defense.
why have assange's lawyers not protected him from deliberate abrogation of Human Rights in respect to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) or treating Rape as a serious Matter under International Law?
what i do not understand is the blindness of his alleged supporters who have allowed him to furiously campaign against rape victims, swedish women, swedish men, and islamic men, and human rights activists on twitter.
the culture of cyberbullying in violation of International Rape Shield Law Norms, to promote the denigration of the women complainants has exceeded my expectations for cruelty.
this to me indicates a pro-rape activism, in effect, if not intent.
to actively discourage rape reporting by unchecked Cyber War against Rape Victims is an Outrage upon all Humanity.
attacks on their character, on "feminist gynecology" and the existence of PTSD in rape victim refugees have been waged by a figure frequently promoted by wikileaks who also attacks the study of honor killing as a part of the feminist conspiracy against assange.
i am startled by his defense's unwillingness to cite more professional works than regurgitations of the saudia arabia of feminism approach. this bungling of assange's defense should be advised from all sides of any bias.
it is bad for assange.
it is bad for the women in sweden who have made these claims.
it is bad for the media because it keeps the discourse at a legally illiterate level.
the promotion of the sleazy book by bahnhoff's oscar swartz redefining rape as "free love" for the benefit of assange, i see as absolutely pivotal in the utter fall of wikileaks.
the application of rape shield law standard applicable to assange under jurisdiction in Australia or America would counterindicate the promotion of a media war against the women of sweden or rape victims in particular.
it would induce suit for Civil Damages and infliction of Psychological torture, a secondary assault to the alleged original offenses.
that assange continues to cite bloggers who stalk, humiliate, name, and attack the victims via twitter---gives him only a flimsy degree of separation from direct stalking of his victims.
that they face daily threats and verabal abuse by his cyberbully supporters, is a tragedy.
that he promotes this is a tragedy and a crime against them--- inflicting emotional distress compounding a secondary victimization phase induced by this campaign of obstruction of justice, delay, and @wikileaks personal attacks and defamation of the women for making the complaints.
as the digital culture merges with law, i would like to ask the learned figures here, of their sense of a lawyer's duty to assist in digital transmissions during the case.
anyone who has studied assange's defense websites would find numerous problems designed to prejudice the media, which also destroy his credibility.
what level of media management might protect a client from making a defense website which paints a xenophobic attitude for sweden, a violation of rape shield law, or attacks on other unrelated women, which are defamatory and sexist? a website which attacks the primary service provider for domestic violence victims in sweden, and domestic violence activists in sweden as a part of an alleged conspiracy.
i enjoyed very much dinah rose's comportment and calm, but i am at a loss why the english legal community is not pointing out the fact that assange's legal team has allowed him to imperil himself further through disastrous sexist sloganeering on his defense site, and then through derivative fan blogging which is both vicious, rapeshield violating, and attacking of miscellaneous women.
i wonder too, how it is that this has escaped gareth peirce's notice and jennifer robinson's.
the mistakes have been vast including the citation of a neo-nazi mass murderer's opinion about the legal system, as well as blogger's who regularly violate rape shield law. the effect will discourage future rape reporting.
i have conceived it as legal malpractice in a digital sense, and an attempt to prejudice the justices and courts.
the net effect to me has been to the detriment of assange's case, and i am at a loss whether many people have noticed it, as have i, and what your opinions are about managing client's mis-statements and defamation campaigns online, when it may have adverse effects on the client's safety and presumption of innocence.
please note i mary rose lenore eng who tweet from @braingarbage and have extensively researched assange case, have been blocked by greenwald on twitter, to silence my concerns regarding assange promoting the legal blog of tony olsson a neonazi party founder and cop killer who writes from sweden.
this was uncovered by rape law blogger goran rudling who noted how strange it was that assange was citing one of sweden's most notorious criminals for a legal expert on justice4assange.com or swedenversusassange.com. the email correspondence on this can be found at sweden versus assange leaks on scribd channel maryeng1.
getting censored by greenwald to whitewash assange's poor research and reliance on rixstep whoi continues to work for assange, cyberbully the rape victims, and promote the neonazi law blogger-cop killer----makes me wonder why guardian gives a feree speech podium to someone so prone to censor valid research