From what i've read, from people FROM Sweden (hence the link) it isn't broader in Sweden... at all.

Also, that it wouldn't be a crime to initaite sex with an unconsious woman... is just distubring.

Well I'll just post what I've been reading

http://www.straight.com/article-363969/vancouver/gwynne-dyer-accusations-against-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange

Hmm... not loading for me.

Having sex with a sleeping woman... I would HOPE is rape everywhere.

I would check the article's sources though... as the Lawyers have before said some pretty outlandish stuff.  They may be refrencing the whole "He's accused of just sex by surprise!" thing... which clearly isn't the case.

For the record too, the people who beleive in conspiracy theores... it would actually be easier for the US to extradite him from the UK to Sweden.

To extradite him from Sweden the US would need the UK's agreement as well.

So in otherwords, this "massive rape plot's" endgame would be that the US needs two extradiction hearings instead of one.

Brilliant move that would be.

Ok, finally got it to open...

yeah... that's... just not right. 

Actual definition of rape in Sweden.

Section 1 (rape)

A person who by violence or threat which involves, or appears to
the threatened person to involve an imminent danger, forces another
person to have sexual intercourse or to engage in a comparable
sexual act, that having regard to the nature of the violation and the
circumstances in general, is comparable to enforced sexual
intercourse, shall be sentenced for rape to imprisonment for at least
two and at most six years. Causing helplessness or a similar state of
incapacitation shall be regarded as equivalent to violence.
If having regard to the nature of the violence or the threat and
the circumstances in general, the crime is considered less serious, a
sentence to imprisonment for at most four years shall be imposed.
If the crime is gross, a sentence to imprisonment for at least four
and at most ten years shall be imposed for gross rape. In assessing
whether the crime is gross, special consideration shall be given to
whether the violence involved a danger to life or whether the
perpetrator caused serious injury or serious illness or, having regard
to the method used or the victim's youth or other circumstances,
exhibited particular ruthlessness or brutality. (Law 1998:393)

Section 2 (Aka Sexual Coercian)
A person who, under circumstances other than those defined in
Section 1, makes someone engage in a sexual act by unlawful
coercion shall be sentenced for sexual coercion to imprisonment for
at most two years.
If the person who committed the act exhibited particular
ruthlessness or if the crime is otherwise considered gross, a sentence
of at least six months and at most four years shall be imposed for
gross sexual coercion. (Law 1992:147)

He's charged with 1 of Section 1, and 2 of section 2, along with 2 counts of molestation.  Does any of the above sound like anything that WOULDN'T be rape in the UK?  Or... anywhere?

Heck... Amnesty international just blasted Denmark, Sweeden, Finland and Norway for being too lax when it comes to rapists!

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ACT77/001/2010/en

The report is helpful in that it explains rape in sweden as well.

Also worth noting

"In Denmark, Norway and Sweden the police are obliged to investigate any suspicion of rape, even
when the victim no longer wishes to participate in or objects to further investigation. People
other than the victim can report a rape. A prosecution is carried out by the public prosecutor on
behalf of society. The prosecutor has an absolute duty to institute legal proceedings if she/he
makes the assessment that the evidence is sufficient. In Finland, only two of the three
categories of rape – rape and aggravated rape – are subject to public prosecution. The socalled
“lesser degree of rape”, coercion into sexual intercourse, is a complainant offence, which
means in practice that the victim herself has to demand prosecution, and only then will the
police start an investigation."

I'm sure people will defy common sense though and try and claim this is now proof he is innocent without knowing anything about well, anything with the case because Sweden sucks so badly at it.

He has been finally granted bail in the UK BUT but the British  Crown Prosecution Service are appealing against the decision. Not the Swedes! This just stinks of politics. Rumour has it the US prosecution has made an indicment against him.

Personally I trust the Swedish court system not to fuck it up, so I guess we will find out if he gets extradited. Don't get me wrong, if he did rape somebody he deserves jail, I'm just not sure he did yet.

Edit: I didn't completely read the Amnesty report but gave it a pretty thorough skim. It seemed to almost entirely be ripping on Norway and Finland.

It rips on Sweden quite a bit too... just not as much as Finland.

As for the Swedish system not to fuck up....

the conviction rate in Sweden is 8%.

So, they aren't going to find him guilty without cause in anycase.  That much that article you read they do have right.  (Though what people don't tell you is that pretty much EVERYWHERE rape conviction rates are that low.  I'd be surprised if there was anything higher then 18% anywhere in the world.)

Oh, and I'm also angry at the guy for having "Information that's too damaging that will change world history!" that he's using as insurance.

I mean, that's EXACTLY the kind of shit that should be leaked first if you really have it!