![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The (alleged) rapist's little friend
Aug. 22nd, 2012 06:07 pmMP George Galloway: "Even taken at its worst, if the allegations made by these two women were true, 100% true, and even if a camera in the room captured them, they don't constitute rape. At least not rape as anyone with any sense can possibly recognise it... Woman A [SW] ... had consensual sex with him, claims that she woke up to him having sex with her again. This is something which can happen, you know. I mean, not everybody needs to be asked prior to each insertion."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/20/george-galloway-julian-assange-rape
UK Magistrate's Court: "... what is alleged here is that Mr Assange 'deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state'. In this country that would amount to rape."
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2011/5.html
UK High Court: "It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her... the allegation that he had sexual intercourse with her without a condom would amount to an allegation of rape in England and Wales... As it is alleged SW was asleep, then she is to be taken not to have consented to sexual intercourse."
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
Sexual Offences Act 2003: "... the complainant is to be taken not to have consented [if] the complainant was asleep or otherwise unconscious at the time of the relevant act"
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/75
MP George Galloway: "No never means yes and non-consensual sex is rape. There's no doubt about it and that has always been my position... What occurred is not rape as most people understand it."
http://www.votegeorgegalloway.com/2012/08/statement-on-assange-controversy.html
UK High Court: [The Swedish warrant alleges that] "On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting."
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
I'd rather think that Galloway is ignorant of the law, or of the allegations, or both, than that he believes he can fuck who he likes, how he likes, when he likes - whether they like it or not.
(What pisses me off the most about this whole situation is that, IMHO, Assange's fear of being tortured and/or disappeared by the US is well-founded - placing yet another hurdle between his alleged victims and justice.)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/aug/20/george-galloway-julian-assange-rape
UK Magistrate's Court: "... what is alleged here is that Mr Assange 'deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state'. In this country that would amount to rape."
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2011/5.html
UK High Court: "It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her... the allegation that he had sexual intercourse with her without a condom would amount to an allegation of rape in England and Wales... As it is alleged SW was asleep, then she is to be taken not to have consented to sexual intercourse."
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
Sexual Offences Act 2003: "... the complainant is to be taken not to have consented [if] the complainant was asleep or otherwise unconscious at the time of the relevant act"
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/75
MP George Galloway: "No never means yes and non-consensual sex is rape. There's no doubt about it and that has always been my position... What occurred is not rape as most people understand it."
http://www.votegeorgegalloway.com/2012/08/statement-on-assange-controversy.html
UK High Court: [The Swedish warrant alleges that] "On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party's arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting."
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
I'd rather think that Galloway is ignorant of the law, or of the allegations, or both, than that he believes he can fuck who he likes, how he likes, when he likes - whether they like it or not.
(What pisses me off the most about this whole situation is that, IMHO, Assange's fear of being tortured and/or disappeared by the US is well-founded - placing yet another hurdle between his alleged victims and justice.)
