You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
The Swedish allegations are another issue. I’m not familiar with the detail – is it the same as here?
NO - what he is accused of is not a crime here. It was sex that was consensual at the time but after the act the complainant retrospectively withdrew consent - IIRC on the grounds he was also boffing someone else so had tricked her into having sex with him
this may be a useful addition to law - but what he is accused of in Sweden would not be a crime at all in the UK
and as I said the charge has been picked already…
I know one (fairly weak) charge has been announced - completely consistent with my view on the kind of politically doable, shortish sentence thing they'll try to get him on to avoid giving him credibility and martyr hood.
However have the US requested extradition yet? Was that the charge written on it? If so are there rules to prevent them extraditing on one charge and then changing or adding charges?
If it really is set in stone as that one charge with a weak case and a worst sentence of 5 years he'd be better off in the USA than Sweden IMHO.
Assange is a slimebag no doubt at all BTW - and IIRC there was a second allegation from the other woman which again would not be a crime under UK law.
Perhaps these things should be crimes under UK law
However have the US requested extradition yet? Was that the charge written on it? If so are there rules to prevent them extraditing on one charge and then changing or adding charges?
Yep he is due back in court on that one, and yes once the charges for extradition are written they cannot be changed or added to.
completely consistent with my view on the kind of politically doable, shortish sentence thing they’ll try to get him on to avoid giving him credibility and martyr hood.
That and espionage charges fall under a political category that means there are more grounds to refuse the extradition - we don't extradite for politically motivated prosecutions - so it's been picked for a few reasons.
If it really is set in stone as that one charge with a weak case and a worst sentence of 5 years he’d be better off in the USA than Sweden IMHO.
At that point things were very different though, once he went in he was not coming out of his own free will unless something changed.
However have the US requested extradition yet?
Yeah, the moment he was in custody the US unsealed a secret indictment they had in place since 2012 and requested his extradition.
Frankly, the man is a knob, no doubt about it. But make no mistake, as he claimed all along, the US Government want him and were always going to demand his extradition without giving much of a shit about the Swedish Charges, given our current predicament and May's desperate need for a US trade agreement, he may find himself in US soil pretty quickly.
But make no mistake, as he claimed all along, the US Government want him and were always going to demand his extradition
I'm sure he was talking about the death penalty or *very* long sentences. Not a maximum of 5 years. I'd also like to see the timeline for this. Who requested him and at what stage. Surely Sweden must have been first. He could already have been in the Embassy when the 2012 charge was issued.
At that point things were very different though, once he went in he was not coming out of his own free will unless something changed.
I'm talking about now, according to this thread Sweden can still ask for him.
what he is accused of in Sweden would not be a crime at all in the UK
In which case he couldn't be extradited to Sweden at all, but this whole pantomime started when his skipped bail to avoid being extradited to Sweden on the grounds that Sweden would extradite him to the US if he went.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review
"The judge must be satisfied that the conduct described in the warrant amounts to an extradition offence (including, in almost all cases, the requirement that the conduct would amount to a criminal offence were it to have occurred in the UK,"
Who requested him and at what stage. Surely Sweden must have been first. He could already have been in the Embassy when the 2012 charge was issued.
It's all in the article from the ABC I posted, in the event of 2 extraditions date does not matter the UK gets to choose.
I’m sure he was talking about the death penalty or *very* long sentences. Not a maximum of 5 years.
If he went to Sweden then they could resubmit a different charge
It was 2018, not 2012.
NO – what he is accused of is not a crime here. It was sex that was consensual at the time but after the act the complainant retrospectively withdrew consent
tjagain I think you have got some facts wrong there.
"Mr Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a pre-requisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consomethinged unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge"
Mr Assange “by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight prevented her from moving or shifting”
Mr Assange “deliberately consomethinged sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state”
For all of these if the conduct had occurred in England and Wales it would amount to sexual assault.
All of the above are from
OK
I remeber rather more to it than that that puts that account somewhat in doubt but I didn't look it up to check as you clearly have done
There was the rather strange blog post by one of the accusers (before she was in a relationship with Assange) laying out how she would get revenge on an ex, by accusing him of rape by such means, and then the fact that the accusers appear to have colluded.
It is all rather murky, the Swedish justice system had also dropped the case, then appeared to re-open it due to political pressure.
There was the rather strange blog post by one of the accusers (before she was in a relationship with Assange) laying out how she would get revenge on an ex, by accusing him of rape by such means, and then the fact that the accusers appear to have colluded.
In which case he should have gone to Sweden and cleared his name. As people said at the time, and as has been shown by events, it's just as easy for the USA to get him in the UK as it is in Sweden so it was the Rape accusations he was running from not the USA charges.
Feels to me like the USA charge and the Sweden charge are both pretty weak, if he hadn't hidden he might have got off scot free and if guilty he wouldn't have got much more than the 7 years he spent in hiding.
OK
Poor choice of words in my post above.
I don't mean to cast doubt on the complainent
Spot on oob.
In which case he should have gone to Sweden and cleared his name.
The events of the last few days have proven that the moment he was arrested in any country, the US would have unsealed it's secret indictment and applied for his extradition, which is what he claimed at the time.
What's likely to happen now is he'll spend months, if not years in a UK prison fighting extradition to the US, which he'll eventually lose. The US will likely only charge him with a relatively minor offence which doesn't carry a death penalty to avoid one of rules on extradition.
What's not going to happen is him going to Sweden to face dropped charges.
So what has he gained by spending 7 years in the Ecuadorean embassy?
So what has he gained by spending 7 years in the Ecuadorean embassy?
Not much, but then it's not really how the thought process went was it.
What’s likely to happen now is he’ll spend months, if not years in a UK prison fighting extradition to the US, which he’ll eventually lose. The US will likely only charge him with a relatively minor offence which doesn’t carry a death penalty to avoid one of rules on extradition.
As I've said above there is another way which is make him Australia's problem and send him back there. As somebody else said he is not going to be boarding a flight anywhere soon.
The events of the last few days have proven that the moment he was arrested in any country, the US would have unsealed it’s secret indictment and applied for his extradition, which is what he claimed at the time.
Except the sealed charges were created in 2018.
What’s likely to happen now is he’ll spend months, if not years in a UK prison fighting extradition to the US, which he’ll eventually lose. The US will likely only charge him with a relatively minor offence which doesn’t carry a death penalty to avoid one of rules on extradition.
We know what the US have charged him for and it carries a Max 5 year sentence and the evidence is weak.
What’s not going to happen is him going to Sweden to face dropped charges.
Nope, according to a source quoted higher up in the thread. Apparently the Swedes have said they can reopen the case.
And it comes back to the question should we be deporting somebody to the US to face political charges? Even if it's being dressed up as a hacking charge.
MSP
It is all rather murky, the Swedish justice system had also dropped the case, then appeared to re-open it due to political pressure.
thats not actually true but its been put about a lot by Assange's supporters
this also covers the lies put out by his lwayer that assange was unaware of the nature of the allegations - he was actually interviewed in sweden by police about them & the oft repeated one that they wouldnt be an offence in the UK, they definately would.
https://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/media/2012/09/legal-mythology-extradition-julian-assange
Except the sealed charges were created in 2018.
I somehow struggle to believe that, I suspect if this happened last year they would have been 'created' in 2017.
We know what the US have charged him for and it carries a Max 5 year sentence and the evidence is weak.
That's what he's charged with now, perhaps I'm just overly cynical when it comes to the deeply flawed US legal system, but I'd bet my nuts they won't charge him with anything too serious until he's on US soil knowing full well it would make extradition harder.
won’t charge him with anything too serious until he’s on US soil knowing full well it would make extradition harder.
I dont think thats the case
what hes charged with now is so flimsy that it makes extardition unlikely
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been sentenced to 50 weeks for skipping bail by a UK Court. The activist also faces a court hearing on potential extradition to Washington where he is accused of “conspiracy to commit computer intrusion
And the chance of getting early release must be zero as he is known to skip his bail conditions! Personally I think that the Swedes should have first go at him and then deport him back to his home country.
Probably better conditions in his open prison than the Eq Embassy 🤣🤷♂️