Centrehalf, In the article you quote in the Telegraph all it says is "He believes the Swedish charges, levied by two women, will be dropped in "months"
This is an outright lie, I pulled a quote directly from the article for you. You have apparently chosen to ignore it. I also don't really care if a fugitive from justice believes the charges will be dropped.
There is no mention of charges made by the government or prosecutor just charges made by some women. I do not necessary support Assange but the fact is that he is only wanted for questioning. The Swedish government can send people to question him in London. His main problem is that he thinks he is too white.
Now you're getting to the meat of the matter. The Swedish justice system works a little differently than other Western nations. Technically you're correct, the phase of the investigation he is wanted for is referred to as questioning, as are other phases. However, this particular phase is roughly equivalent to what's known in the US as a pre-trial conference.
The reason Sweden doesn't need to send investigators to London is because Assange has already been questioned in Sweden. Here is an English language copy of the interviews with Assange and others involved in the case:
http://www.nnn.se/nordic/assange/docs/protocol.pdf
The pdf is a pretty interesting read. My take is that not only will Assange be charged with sexual assault, he should also be charged with witness tampering.
Here's an article for you. It's a British opinion piece but it does have a good bit in here about Swedish law so I'll quote that part for you:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...n-assange-from-these-allegations-8053869.html
Again, his supporters query why Sweden has not charged Assange. But that is not how the Swedish legal system works. Defendants are not charged until very late into proceedings, and just before prosecution. He cannot be charged until he is arrested, which can only take place in Sweden. The country is a democracy with an independent legal system, and it is a signatory to the European Convention of Human Rights.
So, technically you're right about not being charged with rape yet but he's already passed through a phase which in the US is called indictment, not sure what you call it in Austrailia. That is why the quote in my other post was worded the way it was by that paper, UK and American readers would understand Assange's current legal standing as indicted, not as wanted for questioning. For a UK or American paper to list Assanges status as "wanted for questioning" would be misleading and intellectually dishonest given the audience they report to and their understanding of the legal system.
You should also now be a little peeved with Assange because he, his legal team, and his supporters are lying to you. His assertion, in addition to fearing extradition to the US, is that he need not appear in Sweden because no official charges have been filed, yet he and his attorneys know full well that he can't be arrested and officially charged until he sets foot on Swedish soil.
As for no official government documentation; an arrest warrant was issued in Sweden for Assange and the case hasn't been concluded yet. Sweden has asked for his extradition. The assertion that the government hasn't done anything in this case doesn't hold water.
Assange has already been questioned, Sweden wants him for trial.
)
