•The Sordid and Suspicious Story
The Daily Mail's Richard Pendlebury investigates what he says is the entire story of what happened in Sweden, which he says reveals "several puzzling flaws in the prosecution case." Pendlebury even includes blurred photos of the two accusers. A key moment comes when "the female [Swedish police] interviewing officer, presumably because of allegations of a sabotaged condom in one case and a refusal to wear one in the *second, concluded that both women were victims: that *Jessica had been raped, and Sarah subject to sexual molestation."
Pendlebury concludes:
The Stockholm police want to question [Assange] regarding the possible rape of a woman and separate allegations from another Swedish admirer, with whom he was having a concurrent fling. But there remains a huge question mark over the evidence. Many people believe that the 39-year-old *Australian-born whistleblower is the victim of a U.S. government dirty tricks campaign. They argue that the whole squalid affair is a sexfalla, which translates loosely from the Swedish as a 'honeytrap'.
•It's More Complicated--And Could Be Rape
Feministe's Jill Filipovic, a lawyer, says it could be considered "withdrawal of consent," which is a form of sexual assault, if the sex became non-consensual during the act. In the first case, when his condom broke, Assange refused his partner's request to stop, which made his act assault. In the second case, "condom use was negotiated for and Assange agreed to wear a condom but didn’t, and the woman didn’t realize it until after they had sex." Filipovic says "withdrawal of consent" is often considered rape in Sweden, but is often not in the U.S., which may be why U.S. observers seem not to believe the charges.