In December 2010, Guardian columnist Suzanne Moore commented on Julian Assange in the Mail on Sunday:
âIndeed itâs difficult to get a clear picture of the complaints by two women he had sex with in Sweden in August⦠The sex appears to have been consensual, though his refusal to use condoms was not. His behaviour looks bad rather than illegal but who really knows? The Swedish prosecutors themselves say they believe these womenâs stories but donât believe these are crimes.â
âWho really knows?â The answer, of course, was and is that, in the absence of a trial, nobody except the people directly involved knows what really happened.
If Moore was somewhat reasonable in 2010, her stance had changed by June 2012, when Assange sought political asylum in Ecuadorâs London embassy â a time when, still, nobody really knew what had happened. She tweeted:
âSeems like Assangeâs supporters did not expect him to skip bail? Really? Who has this guy not let down?â
She added: âI bet Assange is stuffing himself full of flattened guinea pigs. He really is the most massive turd.â
As discussed in Part 1, the nub of this âmainstreamâ scorn was the belief that Assangeâs concerns about extradition were a cowardly excuse for fleeing possible sex crimes â fears of extradition were a nerdish, paranoid fantasy. Moore wrote in 2011:
âThe extradition hearing last week involved massive showboating on both sides. Assange supporters were gathered outside the…