The Guardian's been outreporting US outlets, as one would expect. Their news blog just posted the following from their legal correspondent Afua Hirsch:

The decision to deny Assange bail is less surprising than many might think. Rape is a notoriously difficult offence for which to get bail in criminal proceedings. In many cases this is because of the risk of reoffending or danger to the victim.

But in Assange's case – as is often an issue with extradition proceedings – the problem is the lack of a permanent address in the UK, the difficulty of setting clear bail conditions that would persuade prosecutors that his whereabouts could be guaranteed, and the risk of his absconding.

In many cases those risks are regarded as sufficiently high that large amounts of security - a deposit paid into court and forfeited in the event of the suspect absconding – do not persuade magistrates that a person should be released on bail.

Although Assange will now be detained in prison, he will be kept in more relaxed conditions than those for prisoners who have been sentenced, including not having to wear prison uniform and having frequent access to visits and phone calls.

But his lawyers will be keen to speed up the coming extradition proceedings in light of his detention. In most cases where a suspect is kept in custody, a full extradition hearing is held within the legal time limit of 21 days.

It's a great thread they've got there, please check it out: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2010…

When can we get the password to the insurance file? I would assume not yet since that would basically clear the way to assassinate him.

From gloomy gus's Guardian link:

Gemma Lindfield, for the Swedish authorities, told the court Assange was wanted in connection with four allegations.

She said the first complainant, Miss A, said she was victim of "unlawful coercion" on the night of 14 August in Stockholm.

The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.

The second charge alleged Assange "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.

The third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on 18 August "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".

The fourth charge accused Assange of having sex with a second woman, Miss W, on 17 August without a condom while she was asleep at her Stockholm home.

If Cheney ever sets foot in Britain, I want Nigeria to be extraditing him.

@1, thanks, Gus. I've been trying to keep an eye on this, but even the NY Times is busy failing at it. The Guardian is on top of things.

Number 3
You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it.

Know your rights
These are your rights
All three of 'em
It has been suggested
In some quarters that this is not enough!
Well..............................

Get off the streets
Get off the streets
Run

Close, Max, but that's not exactly it. More like "you have the right to free speech, as long as you don't say anything bad about the United States government."

Wikileaks isn't the WTO of this moment.

People cared about the WTO.

Most of us could give two shits about this guy. And I still say he looks like a rapist.

People doubted the brilliance of trumping up rape allegations. "Why not just whack him" they ask.

Look to comments like #7's above. Nothing splits the knee-jerk left like screaming "Rapist!" at somebody. Well. Except for screaming "Racist!" But you can't lock a dude up for being a racist.

Kudo's, CIA. Well played.

I suppose it's entirely possible he's guilty... of... whatever that very confused "Sex by Surprise" Swedish indictment actually accuses him of. I suppose.

But he for sure is a frigg'n hero for releasing those leaks. Yes. Even though people will get killed as a result. Innocent people sure as shit are getting killed either way. So I'm gonna go ahead and support Assange. He may not be perfect. Perfect isn't necessary. We certainly don't seem to care about perfect from our so-called elected officials.

If he raped Miss A why was she still hanging around his ass four days later? Why did she agree to have sex with him the second time and leave herself open banging him again (I assume that is what they mean) in a way that violated her sexual integrity the third time? What does that even mean?

I did learn a new Swedish term today: sexfalla which means honeytrap