Monday, December 06, 2010

Regular programming resumes shortly

I'll be back on board and updating the site in a few days. Currently chasing down multiple work deadlines.

16 comments:

  1. I will be looking forward to your next post. Meanwhile, good luck!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, good luck, Mr. Richardson. I'm looking forward to the next installment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mark, have you seen what has been going on in the Manosphere, lately? FB outed Assange's Swedish chicks.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The Swedish chicks thing is particularly weak. Deciding you were raped after he doesn't return your calls, and at the time you departed amicably? C'mon.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I read the link and I can't say I'm happy to see people's details exposed. It reminds me of the Wikileaks hackers who are attacking everyone who has been critical of Assange.

    The thing is look, these women are not necessarily liars. They may have been raped in the technical sense which means the withdrawal of consent at any time. Consequently its primarily the law that's at fault. This case will go nowhere, but that is also the nature of rape cases where there is little evidence. There was sex, it was consensual at some time and the people's conduct was consistent with that, you can't then convict beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Ultimately you can't just have it off with anybody. And if you do you have to be careful. Can I ask what's wrong with that? I have no doubt that Assange probably did push over their wishes at some stage during the night. Its not a conspiracy against men to be circumspect with who you sleep with. Does that mean the rape laws aren't questionable or difficult to apply? If he was convicted I would say yes, but there's no way he will be. Does that mean that this isn’t a big hassle for the guy? Of course it is. But if this is rape then soon nobody will care about rape and it won’t have the same significance. The big victims then will be genuine rape victims.

    ReplyDelete
  6. There might be an argument for saying that the accused's details shouldn't be released to the public. This has been our tradition though to do this. The protecting of the accusers details must have been a recent addition.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not sure I know what the problem with "consent at every stage" is? Provided that its reasonably communicated. Basically its given once and then implied to continue unless something is reasonably said or done to overrule it.

    Nonetheless this is an incredibly weak case by the look of it and it indicates a pussy whipped prosecution office for taking it up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm not sure I know what the problem with "consent at every stage" is?

    Too difficult to prove in court, either way, and both parties are easily confused by it.

    They're prosecuting him on the US Government's behalf, to keep him in custody long enough for the US to trump up something to charge hm with (they're investigating treason). Now, they've sent Ardin off to Palestine, to delay the hearing further. Killing time.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm not sure its quite that cloak and dagger. I can certainly believe the Swedes doing this on their own behalf. Also if they were detaining Assange for extradition that wouldn't worry me, I think he deserves what he gets.

    ReplyDelete
  10. There are a lot of Jesses around. There's one at TTH and another showed up at FB's today. Are they all you? Are the other two the same one, but not you. Are you this one and another one?

    I'm discombobulated.

    ReplyDelete
  11. That's a relief! You're way cooler than they are. I was always thinking, "Geez Jesse. You sound like an old fart." But it wasn't you.

    Phew! I've been meaning to ask that for a while now, but I was afraid of the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hehe. I post on The Australian comments section as "Jesse" but otherwise its Jesse_7.

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.