Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

julian assange in private eye

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #26
    I'm not going to pretend that the tiny number of convicted rapists are the only rapists.
    Yeah, because that's exactly what I was suggesting you do.

    Comment


      #27
      https://twitter.com/Jane_Samuels/status/1116317805341741056

      Comment


        #28
        Whatever your opinion of Ecuador's decision, how was this going to end regardless? What was Assange's long-term plan? This situation was clearly untenable. Unless Assange planned to live there for the rest of his life with Ecuador's permissions OR the US decided to just let bygones be bygones, this was going to happen eventually. I can't image the 'third way'.

        Comment


          #29
          We could have charged him with contravening the conditions of his bail (and have hime deal with whatever the result may have been), recognised that Sweden have dropped charges and refused the US request for extradition. We look like fucking puppets again.

          Comment


            #30
            Assange is being charged with conspiracy to hack

            https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1116336550873317377

            Comment


              #31
              At the very least, the UK should not be extraditing people to a country whose record on torture is as dark as the USA's, but even leaving that aside his guilt of any crime is far from certain, unless embarrassing the US govt is a crime.

              What are the chances of Trump pardoning him for services rendered?
              Last edited by Satchmo Distel; 11-04-2019, 13:57.

              Comment


                #32
                Zero

                This isn't great news for Roger Stone

                Comment


                  #33
                  If Sweden were to re-open their investigation and make an extradition request, would their extradition request (from a fellow EU country) receive priority ahead of that of the US?

                  Comment


                    #34
                    Originally posted by Nefertiti2 View Post
                    Love Ash Sarkar

                    confirmation of the extradition. And remember Chelsea Manning is in prison for refusing to co-operate with Assange extradition proceedings

                    https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk/status/1116302894259679233
                    why do people lie on the ground to take the photograph of that sign? I meandered past scotland yard one day and discovered to my utter shock, that that sign isn't a 1960's Vegas sized sign, but is only slightly taller than an average sized person, and the actual sign bit itself is only about 18 inches high. I had a similar feeling when I saw the Mannekin Pis. I didn't realise that all photographs of it in books are life size or bigger.

                    Comment


                      #35
                      Originally posted by ursus arctos View Post
                      Zero

                      This isn't great news for Roger Stone
                      Well, there's that. Which is nice.

                      Comment


                        #36
                        Originally posted by Satchmo Distel View Post
                        At the very least, the UK should not be extraditing people to a country whose record on torture is as dark as the USA's
                        Then you ought not have reciprocal extradition treaties with those countries. But if you have them, you sort of have to abide by them.

                        Comment


                          #37
                          The Swedish government says that they judge every extradition request upon its merits, including those from the USA (who they have a treaty with).

                          I think justice here would be Assange facing trial for the criminal behaviour he is accused of in Sweden, and Sweden subsequently ignoring the bullshit extradition request from the US.

                          Comment


                            #38
                            Is the US still to ratify the extradition treaty with Britain? They were happy enough not abiding by there end for a long old while.

                            Originally posted by anton pulisov View Post
                            If Sweden were to re-open their investigation and make an extradition request, would their extradition request (from a fellow EU country) receive priority ahead of that of the US?
                            The Swedish investigation was ended because it had passed their statute of limitations, hadn't it? If that was the case, there is no potential for it to be reopened.

                            Comment


                              #39
                              I agree with AP.

                              And yes, an extradition treaty doesn't mean that you extradite everybody that the other country asks for - it means that if they present their case and your own country's legal system looks at that case and believes there is a case, then you extradite.

                              In this case in Sweden he is accused of a real crime. He should be extradited there. In the US they have invented some spurious charge which is utter bollocks and hopefully the judge in the UK will throw it out

                              Comment


                                #40
                                Greenwald's 'criminalization of journalism' cry seems farfetched at best.

                                Comment


                                  #41
                                  Originally posted by Janik View Post
                                  The Swedish investigation was ended because it had passed their statute of limitations, hadn't it? If that was the case, there is no potential for it to be reopened.
                                  No I think they just shelved it because it was obvious they weren't going to be able to pursue it

                                  Comment


                                    #42
                                    Originally posted by WOM View Post
                                    Greenwald's 'criminalization of journalism' cry seems farfetched at best.
                                    Why? It seems to be fairly accurate to me

                                    Comment


                                      #43
                                      I dunno. If he truly did conspire with a criminal act or conspire to further a criminal act, I'm not sure that's still in line with 'reporting the facts'. It's more 'stealing the facts so you can report them'.

                                      Comment


                                        #44
                                        Journalists have sources. That's how they operate.

                                        Comment


                                          #45
                                          ad hoc is correct on the statute of limitations point, which is why the original complainant hopes that the Swedish prosecutors will reactivate the case.

                                          The Swedish Prosecution Authority said on Thursday that it had learned of Assange's arrest from media reports.

                                          "This is news to us too, so we have not been able to take a position on the information that is now available. We also do not know why he is under arrest. We are following the developments," said Chief Prosecutor Ingrid Isgren in a statement.

                                          The statement continued: "A preliminary investigation can be resumed as long as the suspected crime is not subject to statute of limitation. In this case, the suspected crime of rape would be subject to statute of limitation in mid-August 2020."
                                          The US indictment can be both a "spurious charge" and in keeping with recent US practice in this area.

                                          Comment


                                            #46
                                            Yeah we shouldn't have an extradition treaty with the US.

                                            Nor with ourselves, for that matter.

                                            Comment


                                              #47
                                              So then after Assange faces justice in Sweden (is acquitted or serves his time there), the US are free to send an extradition request to Sweden. The Swedes have never said how they would respond to such a request, only that they will judge any request once they receive it. But the fact that Sweden is one of the countries that wikileaks servers are located in might give you some insight into how they would handle the request.

                                              Comment


                                                #48
                                                Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
                                                Journalists have sources. That's how they operate.
                                                No, I'm clear on that. Conspiracy to steal military secrets is something a bit larger, I think it's fair to say. Obviously this will have to be proved, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

                                                Comment


                                                  #49
                                                  Originally posted by anton pulisov View Post
                                                  So then after Assange faces justice in Sweden (is acquitted or serves his time there), the US are free to send an extradition request to Sweden.
                                                  The charges from Sweden were dropped once the statute of limitations expired.

                                                  Comment


                                                    #50
                                                    Originally posted by WOM View Post

                                                    No, I'm clear on that. Conspiracy to steal military secrets is something a bit larger, I think it's fair to say. Obviously this will have to be proved, but it's not outside the realm of possibility.

                                                    I dunno, only if the word "conspiracy" has a massively different meaning in US legal speak than it does in actual English

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X