No charges ever pressed: Assange marks three years of UK detention

[sabrina 1]

170. Why? I don't think I've ever presented myself as someone who does not believe

in evidence in cases where only allegations have been made with zero evidence presented before convicting people.

In fact I have consistently insisted on the accused having a fair trial, SEEING THE ACTUAL ALLEGATIONS made against them, and the EVIDENCE and then being CONVICTED before deciding if someone is guilty or not.

I find it very odd that ANY democrat would simply convict someone especially when all there are, are allegations by a prosecutor who refuses to file formal charges. Who also refuses to conduct the interview necessary before filing those charges going on four years now.

If she files charges, which she needs to do as more and more people now believe the Karl Rove puppets in Sweden simply fabricated, then we will see whatever evidence she has. Which is why she will not file those charges.

So far, we have seen that one piece of that evidence, a condom presented by one of the women, had no dna from Assange on it, despite that woman's claim that she retrieved it herself. That was pretty devastating for the prosecutors. And just example of lies told in order to silence Assange.

The other woman denies any 'rape' or fear of Assange. Not much of a case there, but pretending there is has accomplished part of the goal to try to silence Wikileaks who has never been accused of lying, unlike the enemies of a free and open press.

Show me the evidence and I will join you in convicting an actual criminal.

And btw, there were never even allegations of rape in this case. Interesting how careless people on our side of the aisle have been with the facts of this case especially considering that Assange revealed Bush War Crimes and the corruption of Big Banks (see Iceland eg)

Why are people on the left trying to protect the Big Banks and Bush/Cheney?