The main reason for this post is to discuss the probability that there is a sealed indictment with Julian Assange's name on it in Alexandria, Virginia. I want the unaware to understand how the system truly works in the US and what is unique about Alexandria and the Eastern District of Virginia. However, the allegations in Sweden must be addressed first to understand the implications.
The Allegations in Sweden
I will summarize the allegations in Sweden with the following statement, quoted from an article in The Guardian dated 17 December 2010:
"By Friday 20 August, Miss W had texted Miss A looking for help in finding Assange. The two women met and compared stories."
Take that simple, but important, statement and the understanding that Assange was seen in public with each of these women after the alleged acts occurred. There may indeed have been a broken condom - this happens sometimes when adults have sex and could not possibly be considered to be the fault of either person. I have no knowledge of Swedish laws, but I do know that when two alleged witnesses meet and compare stories, no good can come of it, especially when both were smitten with the target.
Each most likely believed that she was special in his eyes and had started a blossoming relationship, though in reality, he was a man that just had sex and nothing more. Each felt wronged and here we are. I can sympathize with the women for being tossed aside by him; however, have no sympathy for either making a police report about it. Yes, he used you - just move on and get beyond it.
What happens in Alexandria stays in Alexandria
The first case and prosecution out of Alexandria, Virginia that comes to mind is the malicious pursuit of Dr. Sami Al-Arian. A plea deal made by the DOJ in the Middle District of Florida that included the agreement and understanding that Al-Arian would not be a witness in other cases was violated by the government in attempt to force him to testify in a case in Alexandria, Virginia. As far as I am aware, he is still on house arrest as a result of his refusal to testify. The stated defense from prosecutors is that this plea deal was made in a different district. So that means a plea deal in one district is worthless in another even though in both it is a DOJ prosecution.
We can't forget Jennifer Churchill, the photoshop lady, from the Classy DC Escorts case. She was charged with a racketeering count in the Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria). What did she do? She edited photos of escorts that were sent to her in email by the owner of Classy DC. She then returned the edited photos to him. She lives in California and otherwise had nothing to do with this business. When the government agents raided her home, they took everything electronic - smartphones, Mac, PC etc... There was so much so-called evidence to sift through that it took the feds months.
What did Churchill make for editing photos for Classy DC? She was paid under $500 via PayPal over the course of longer than a year. For this, these fucking idiots confiscated her property and dragged her from her California home in front of a judge in Alexandria. Yes, eventually she made the deal of a lifetime, but only because of her attorney, and it was not voluntary on the government's part. They had little choice. She was ready and willing to go to trial.
Of course we cannot omit the Kim Dotcom et al. prosecution in the Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria). Defendant Megaupload recently filed a Motion to Dismiss in the case and a Memorandum of Law. The DOJ filed an opposition Memorandum of Law on 3 August 2012. Included in this opposition motion are various documents from a FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) prosecution and in fact, these documents begin on page 6 and end on page 21, at the end of the motion. This document is currently posted on my website, mainly because it shocked me:
Realize that the government is using the model of a terrorist prosecution to go after Kim Dotcom, Megaupload, and the various other defendants. I have no clue if FARC is actually any sort of terrorist organization or not as there are too many conflicting reports, but according to the US government, it is.
While I think that most readers of this blog know that I do not appreciate intellectual property theft or distribution of the intellectual property of another without permission, I also feel that the criminal case is absurd. Let's face it: This prosecution has nothing at all to do with anything except demands by the MPAA and RIAA. They do not give a rat's ass about the independent or the little guy. I also seriously doubt that the artists represented by either organization sanction this criminal prosecution, at least not the majority. The case is a joke and at the least, the criminal prosecution should be dismissed.
Back to Julian Assange
The guy is a journalist and Wikileaks is a whistleblower website, no matter how you attempt to paint the picture. Bradley Manning is accused of uploading documents to the whistleblower website. Because of this, the stupid majority in the US want to see Julian Assange executed on a street or tried in an Alexandria, Virginia courtroom or lost in a US black site prison camp somewhere in the world. If brought to the US, Assange would never make it to trial.
A Close Look at Alexandria
What sort of person sits on a grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia? Some are retired military with lucrative jobs in the defense sector. Some are US government contractors. Some are in one branch or another of the US military. The great majority are bought and paid for by the US government.
What entity was most offended by the Wikileaks documents published? The answer, of course, is the US government. Agents and actors of the government have done anything possible to suppress the circulation of these documents. Is there anyone out there that actually believes that Anti Leaks is a bunch of script kiddies or renegade hackers in support of the government? Well, considering that the Anti Leaks Twitter account had a mere 48 tweets the last time I looked and a couple stated, "Semper Fi" and "tango down," you'd have a hard time supporting that argument.
In conclusion, there are baseless unspecific allegations against Assange and no actual charges, yet officials in Sweden refuse any sort of compromise in their quest to interview Julian Assange. I'd say that he has a hell of a sealed indictment awaiting him. There are certainly people that are aware of this indictment by the grand jury convened to investigate Wikileaks specifically.
Besides, anyone with any knowledge of legal proceedings in the US, is well-aware that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich. Grand juries always err in favor of prosecutors and defense attorneys have no representation or ability to speak in such proceedings. It's a gathering of pro-prosecution people that have no issue with indicting someone that edits photos using photoshop for an adult business. What do you really think was done in Assange's situation?
Would they indict the photoshop lady and not Julian Assange?