If it's as alleged, I believe it would constitute at least some kind of sexual assault in the US as well. The allegation is that he had engaged in intercourse without a condom despite the protestations of his (otherwise consenting) partner that she didn't consent to unprotected sex.

But — vitally — means the partner did not consent to the sex that was had. It disgusts me how many people are arguing that non-consensual sex isn't rape if they were willing to do it under different circumstances.

I don't think anyone is suggesting what you are insinuating that they are suggesting.

The traditional definition of rape is "by force and without consent". Not to say this isn't immoral or indeed criminal, but it isn't rape and to call it such is unfair both to him and to rape victims.

That's the traditional definition, but it's neither a good nor a modern one.

The allegation for one of the cases is approximately this: they were going to have consensual sex, but the girl required that he wear a condom. One was not available, and so she refused to allow sex. They stayed in bed together, and fell asleep.

In the morning, she woke up to Assange on top of her having sex with her. She asked if he had obtained a condom and he said no. She told him to get off, and, well, he got off, but not in the way she meant--he kept going, came, and then withdrew.

That would arguably be rape in the US.

He hasn't been charged with anything in any country. Not publicly, anyway.

He's charged with rape and two counts of sexual assault.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_A...

You're misinformed. He has not been charged for anything by any country. Do your reading.

Excuse me, that's not the case except in the most narrow and pedantic sense. Here's the English High Court denying his appeal:

"In England and Wales, a decision to charge is taken at a very early stage; there can be no doubt that if what Mr Assange had done had been done in England and Wales, he would have been charged and thus criminal proceedings would have been commenced. If the commencement of criminal proceedings were to be viewed in this way, it would be to look at Swedish procedure through the narrowest of eyes. On this basis, criminal proceedings have commenced against Mr Assange"

Link in the cousin comment.

Do you know if those charges carry the same connotation in Sweden as in the United States? IIRC, there was some confusion about what he actually is being charged with when the case was originally brought, then dismissed as unsubstantiated, then reopened.

Here's the transcript of the High Court decision that declined his appeal.

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgment...

"Rape - On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enköping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state. It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity."

I would consider that to be rape, but I have no idea whether the US in general or legally would agree.

http://www.google.com/search?q=assange%20half%20asleep Take your pick of articles. Was she asleep? Anyone who had read all of the posts in this thread knows there is something suspect about this whole case. Simply interview the man where he can't be extradited to the US and be done with it.

No he is not. He is accused.