-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Julian Assange is going to leave the Ecuador embassy
- Thread starter Mac_Lane
- Start date
- Status
Fudgepuppy
Banned
How are they supposed to have a fair trial, so many years later, considering the allegations?
If he gets back to Sweden, it will be a lot of he said, she said until nothing happens and the US snatches him.
His passport was revoked while he was on the flight segment over Russia.
Spring Drive
Banned
What's Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's stance on the issue?
That's just a fever dream. The bad publicity would far outweigh any potential benefit of "snatching" Assange. There's no real point to grabbing him.
I think Trump basically proves that those in power can get away with any amount of bullshit and all they have to do is put up with the whimpering moans of some while they receive support from others.
No this is what happens when you avoid prosecution and don't make sure you get on the plane first. He really should have gotten some pointers from Roman Polanski.
I keep seeing this but what is the US going to charge him with the Sweden will agree with?
Of course he will be extradited to the US, stupid to think other wise. US extradites low level drug convicts from other countries daily.
For what crime would he be extradited to the US?
Sweden has fairly restrictive extradition policies so Assange cannot be extradited for espionage and I fail to see what other crime (that is extraditable) the US would conceivably prosecute him for.
The ridiculous assertion from Assange and his fans that he would magically be extradited to the US the second he set foot on Swedish soil aren't supported by any type of evidence or by logic. It is harder for him to be extradited from Sweden than the UK.
Read up on extradition law when you get a chance.
The US could try to work around the law and for example charge Assange with theft instead of espionage.
You also have the case in 2002 where Sweden allowed two Egyptian asylum seekers (who were already granted asylum) to be transferred by US agents back to Egypt
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2004/may/12sweden.htm
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
That's BS. He did it to escape the rape charges. He thought it would take him a couple of weeks until Sweden dropped the thing and he could again do whatever he wants. But that didn't happen. Now he has already been imprisoned for four years and counting but if he walks out he will still be imprisoned in Sweden (their laws are such that he commited rape, even if that specific situation would not be rape in the UK or Australia). So really at this point he can't leave. It boils down to facing up to six years in prison in Sweden. For the first five years it may have looked better for him to stay where he was, for the next five years it is the same. Rape accusations are void after ten years in Sweden. He screwed himself. If I were Sweden I wouldn't want to talk to him either because they get a safe 10 year sentence while otherwise they might get two.
And how likely do you feel that is? They would end up with a poor case that would not be actionable. Extradition doesn't happen willy-nilly.
You mean the extremely criticised case that no Swedish government is wanting a repeat of?
And seeing how our current minister of foreign affairs stated that "The US does not decide our policy" (source, in Swedish) when the government came under criticism for recognising Palestinian Statehood. I don't really see how the Swedish government is under the thumb of the US.
edit:
God dammit I hate this falsehood. Multiple courts in the UK have ruled that the crime he is accused of would be considered rape in the UK as well.
are you accusing me of BS? he has said many times it is the US he fears will come for him in Sweden
Would you risk going to Sweden on the hope that they don't want to repeat the case? I wouldn't feel all that safe, even when it's a slim chance.
Note: it is against Swedish law to extradite someone if they may face the death penalty.
Yet again, it is easier to extradite someone to the US from the UK.
MisterFalcon
Member
Strangely enough the word of a suspect and his lawyer don't count as proof. Court cases would be over pretty quickly if this was the case. In the real world there is zero proof or even serious suspicion the US somehow needs Sweden as a route to grab Assange.
The cases aren't even remotely similar, though. The Egyptians were extraditet during the post-9/11 fever, no one was expected to find out about it, they were accused of being Al-Qaida members and it wasn't the extradition as such that was the problem; it was the fact that they were extraditet to be tortured in Egypt. Assange is a rich, high-profile westerner who is considered a political hero by many and haven't even committed any crimes that qualify for extradition under Swedish law.
The suggestion that it's obvious that he would be illegally extraditet anyway is offensive to me as a Swede. We are a nation based on the rule of law and while we may be friendly with the US we are absolutely not an American proxy or puppet. Assange chose to base Wikileaks in Sweden precisely because of these facts. It's convenient how quickly he started singing another tune once he become wanted for rape, to say the least.
so it could be deflection then? just seems weird he would isolate himself for so many years if he honestly felt he would never go to the US
I watched a documentary where they were saying he lost a lot of his support by going into Asylum
Read up on extradition law please.
And definitely read up on what can deserve the death penalty, lol. It's just a nonsense thing his lawyers are talking about, that's all.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
Dunno about Trump, but here's what Clinton said regarding Snowden so take what you will:
COOPER: Secretary Clinton, hero or traitor?
CLINTON: He broke the laws of the United States. He could have been a whistleblower. He could have gotten all of the protections of being a whistleblower. He could have raised all the issues that he has raised. And I think there would have been a positive response to that.
COOPER: Should he do jail time?
ClINTON: In addition in addition, he stole very important information that has unfortunately fallen into a lot of the wrong hands. So I dont think he should be brought home without facing the music.
Brutalitops
Banned
How long was left on the statute of limitations?
Kind of expected him to ride it out, hopefully his health isn't too bad and he can return to Australia without much hassle.
Kind of expected him to ride it out, hopefully his health isn't too bad and he can return to Australia without much hassle.
Yoda
Member
The whistleblower laws have been molded so that the intelligence agencies 'can do no wrong'. If you care about privacy there is NO alternative path to take. If Julian Assange or Edward Snowden 'face the music', they'll get a mock trial at best, and face solitary confinement until they die. Both men have done this planet a public service at the expense of their own freedom.
I'm not saying that it's something that's guaranteed to happen, but there simply is a precedence for what could happen. Something like "Hey were not going to do that again" wouldn't really make me feel 100% safe.
d00d3n
Member
The risk of extradition to the United States is a red herring imo. The real scandal is our politicised justice system here in Sweden over sex crimes. The Swedish police investigation into Assange has leaked (a long time ago) and it is incredibly weak sauce. The first prosecutor handling the matter made the appropriate call to not proceed with legal charges in an "unwinnable case", which was later overturned by her boss.
It is very difficult to prove non-violent sex crimes between adults in any justice system that presumes innocence and tries to adhere to due process. This fact is regularly described as a scandal by our media and our politicians. Because it is so difficult to actually convict anyone, there are several "solutions" to the problem that are being debated. Some people want lower the standards of proof, some want to change the presumption of innocence and some try to target due process.
Yet another "solution" is to make the judicial process itself a form of punishment, irrespective of the outcome. For example, our former minister of justice (similar to US attorney general, but not necessarily a lawyer) seriously proposed that all people accused of sex crimes should receive a starkly colored letter from the government to their home address to alarm their family of the accusation. Sweden is also a world leader in imprisoning people for long stretches before a trial (the UN has criticised us for this) - a form of punishment that likely would have been handed out to Assange if he came here to "face justice".
It is very difficult to prove non-violent sex crimes between adults in any justice system that presumes innocence and tries to adhere to due process. This fact is regularly described as a scandal by our media and our politicians. Because it is so difficult to actually convict anyone, there are several "solutions" to the problem that are being debated. Some people want lower the standards of proof, some want to change the presumption of innocence and some try to target due process.
Yet another "solution" is to make the judicial process itself a form of punishment, irrespective of the outcome. For example, our former minister of justice (similar to US attorney general, but not necessarily a lawyer) seriously proposed that all people accused of sex crimes should receive a starkly colored letter from the government to their home address to alarm their family of the accusation. Sweden is also a world leader in imprisoning people for long stretches before a trial (the UN has criticised us for this) - a form of punishment that likely would have been handed out to Assange if he came here to "face justice".
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
Whoa. She's good at dodging the questions. Not an attack, but typical politician response without a direct answer from a direct question.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
I mean, yeah...I wouldn't trust the US either. If you really think this is about the rape you can't be serious. Dude has been there for four years, it's not like he is living the life on some island. If he wasn't afraid of the US he would have left after a year.
lick your poms julian, lick your poms
Why was he free up until the rape allegations? Why wasn't he extradited before?
Frankfurter
Member
I.e. put him on the chair.
.
She thinks he should go to jail. It may be lack brevity but she's pretty clear and specifically says he should face the music.
MisterFalcon
Member
That's the big gaping hole in Assange's narrative. The US could have had him arrested or covertly grabbed at any time in the months before the rape case. He was even arrested in London before he skipped bail. For Assange's side of the story to be true something needed to have happened around the time the alleged rape took place to make him public enemy number one. I can't come up with anything, by the time this all happened Assange had already become a bit of a joke after losing all his non-backed up data when a disgruntled employee deleted it.
No it wasn't. Snowden's passport was revoked on June 22. He left Hong Kong on June 23 using an unsigned pass from Ecuador that was never going to get him further. That pass was arranged by Assange who has stated publicly that his goal was to get Snowden asylum in Russia and not Latin America
I honestly don't think he has any chance of a fair trial.
This makes no sense.
I don't really understand what people are expecting to have happen here. Before Assange fled to the UK and thence to the Ecuadorian embassy, he was travelling publicly in Sweden and planning to move there permanently. He filed to immigrate!
If Assange was so worried that Sweden would grab him and send him to the United States, why did he hang around there long enough to plan to move there and also rape some people?
Conversely, if Sweden was so interested in picking him up and extraditing him, why didn't they just do that when he was in Sweden, say, at the government building he was presumably in to file for citizenship?
This story does not really hold together in a sensible fashion. Assange has not behaved like somebody with a genuine fear that the US can pressure Sweden to extradite him and murder him. If he had that fear he'd be doing what Snowden did and fleeing to a country that definitely wouldn't extradite him, like Russia, instead of going to Sweden in the first place. He has behaved like somebody who committed a crime and is hiding out to avoid the consequences.
Because assange miscalculated Swedens willingness to cooperate with the us.
Do you have a source for that?
You've got any source for that claim? Or are you just posting conspiracy theories without verifying anything about them?
They're not conspiracy theories, they're from legal documents. It was included in many articles from back when this was news.
Here's an example: (near the end)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-accusers-felt-trapped-prosecutors-claim.html
Regardless, if he's ever extradited to the US then I guess we'll know for sure.
edit: And it looks like the foggy nature of what actually happened here has already been argued earlier in the thread (2 years ago!!!) so I now regret even contributing to this necro-thread.
Lightning Count
Member
The Feds are going to be waiting to immediately arrest him and fly him to the US to be put on trial.
What you posted does not substantiate "the authorities were leading their statements and really pressuring them to press charges". It is a failing in understanding how the Swedish criminal justice system works, the women themselves do not actually need to press charges for an investigation to start. However as the investigation was resumed after first being shut down at the behest of the attorneys of one of the women I think the suggestion that this is happening because the state wants it to is false.
Oh and as far as the extradition talk:
Exactly. Under Swedish criminal procedure laws the prosecutor would commit a crime if he/she was informed that acts which constitute a crime occured and he/she didn't investigate/press charges.
- Status