dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
18

Ian1
Premium Member
join:2002-06-18
ON

Ian1 to Frodo

Premium Member

to Frodo

Re: Assange makes 1st public appearance in 2 months

said by Frodo:

said by StuartMW:

He is, what is known in some parts, as a gutless wonder.

I don't think he's a gutless wonder. Why should he face US justice? If I published Iranian, Russian, Chinese, or Saudi Arabia classified information, I wouldn't want to extradited there either.

Assange is charged with raping a couple women in Sweden, and is not currently on the run from US justice, rather Swedish justice. See the distinction?
Frodo
join:2006-05-05

Frodo

Member

said by Ian1:

Assange is charged with raping a couple women in Sweden, and is not currently on the run from US justice, rather Swedish justice. See the distinction?

I'm aware of the distinction. Have you been following the thread? Or read the position of the Ecuadorian president?

Nobody has a problem with Assange facing Swedish authorities, so long as it isn't a ruse to put Assange in a jurisdiction with a favorable extradition arrangement with the US.
PrntRhd
Premium Member
join:2004-11-03
Fairfield, CA

4 edits

1 recommendation

PrntRhd

Premium Member

said by Frodo:

said by Ian1:

Assange is charged with raping a couple women in Sweden, and is not currently on the run from US justice, rather Swedish justice. See the distinction?

I'm aware of the distinction. Have you been following the thread? Or read the position of the Ecuadorian president?

Nobody has a problem with Assange facing Swedish authorities, so long as it isn't a ruse to put Assange in a jurisdiction with a favorable extradition arrangement with the US.

If he did not commit a crime in Sweden, where extradition is possible, he would not be at risk now, so it is his own fault if he is in legal jeopardy now.
Again, as several already posted, he has not been charged with any offense in the US. If he is charged he would face extradition just like anyone else would and it would be up to the courts in the country where he was located after a trial (Sweden) to decide if the extradition would go forward or if he would be deported to his own country (Australia).

Assange would not face treason charges in the US in any case because he is a citizen of Australia.
Possession of stolen diplomatic cables, maybe espionage, but not treason. Australia would only consider treason if he published Australian military or diplomatic secrets.

Ian1
Premium Member
join:2002-06-18
ON

Ian1 to Frodo

Premium Member

to Frodo
said by Frodo:

Nobody has a problem with Assange facing Swedish authorities, so long as it isn't a ruse to put Assange in a jurisdiction with a favorable extradition arrangement with the US.

Actually it sounds like Julian Assange has a problem with facing Swedish authorities on his rape charges. So much so, that he screwed his friends and supporters over, causing them to lose half a million US$ in bail money.

norwegian
Premium Member
join:2005-02-15
Outback

norwegian to Ian1

Premium Member

to Ian1
said by Ian1:

Assange is charged with raping a couple women in Sweden, and is not currently on the run from US justice, rather Swedish justice. See the distinction?

Again, there is no charges at present, and it is only 1 case of rape. Please read up.
norwegian

norwegian to Ian1

Premium Member

to Ian1
said by Ian1:

Actually it sounds like Julian Assange has a problem with facing Swedish authorities on his rape charges. So much so, that he screwed his friends and supporters over, causing them to lose half a million US$ in bail money.

Also, there has been requests for the Swedish Govt to sit in a room and discuss the needs of the case with Julian, which is normal and standard procedure when it tracks across 2 countries territories.

To date they have refused to deal with standard process. They (all) want him in the open, it makes an easier target. Thumbs up for the president of Ecuador for doing this. His govt is splitting on how to deal with this due to the US wanting to place an Embargo (reads: they don't pay taxes for their exports and now there is a timed notion that this tax free policy be changed) on his country to pressure them into releasing him.

goalieskates
Premium Member
join:2004-09-12
land of big

1 edit

1 recommendation

goalieskates to Frodo

Premium Member

to Frodo
said by Frodo:

Nobody has a problem with Assange facing Swedish authorities, so long as it isn't a ruse to put Assange in a jurisdiction with a favorable extradition arrangement with the US.

That's hair-splitting and ridiculous.

The charges he's avoiding are from Sweden. No third country can demand assurances for what "might" happen beyond those charges and no third country can give them just in case, but for sure he is under indictment for a specific crime and needs to answer it.

It seems to me you're buying into his effort to throw up a smokescreen and avoid a legal proceeding by throwing out a complete red herring. If the US brings charges and files for extradition you can debate the legality of that, but until they do this is a case of one guy thumbing his nose at the law. And that's pure and utter bs.

You don't get an out-of-jail-free card on rape just because you also leaked some documents. Rape is not a victimless crime. The one doesn't absolve responsibility for the other.
Frodo
join:2006-05-05

Frodo to Ian1

Member

to Ian1
said by Ian1:

Actually it sounds like Julian Assange has a problem with facing Swedish authorities on his rape charges.

If that's the problem, then Assange is out of luck. According to Ecuador's president, Ecuador agrees that Assange should answer to the Swedish allegations. All they want is guarantees that if Assange is extradited to Sweden, that there won't be a subsequent extradition to a 3rd country.

So, if one supports having the Swedish allegations resolved, then one would have to support the guarantees.

Ecuador has called the Swedish and British bluff. There is absolutely no reason to not issue the guarantees if the Swedish allegations are the true reason for extraditing Assange to Sweden. Once the Swedish allegations are resolved, and if applicable, Assange has served his sentence, then he could be returned to the Ecuadorian embassy. At least that way one of the issues would be resolved as opposed to zero issues resolved.

And as far as the alleged Swedish crime victims are concerned, they don't need to have their justice coupled to a Wikileaks case in the US. That's not fair to them. The guarantees need to be issued and the Swedish case needs to be decoupled with any other prosecution in a 3rd country.

Ian1
Premium Member
join:2002-06-18
ON

Ian1

Premium Member

said by Frodo:

All they want is guarantees that if Assange is extradited to Sweden, that there won't be a subsequent extradition to a 3rd country.

So, if one supports having the Swedish allegations resolved, then one would have to support the guarantees.

No, you're still missing the point. It would be extraordinary (I'm no lawyer, but possibly even unprecedented) for any nation to promise not to extradite somebody about hypothetical charges made by some other hypothetical nation. That's just not how it works.
Frodo
join:2006-05-05

Frodo

Member

said by Ian1:

No, you're still missing the point. It would be extraordinary (I'm no lawyer, but possibly even unprecedented) for any nation to promise not to extradite somebody about hypothetical charges made by some other hypothetical nation. That's just not how it works.

I'm no lawyer either. But if it didn't work this way, take the following scenario. Saudi Arabia charges me with murder, and they have an extradition treaty with the US. I'm delivered to Saudi Arabia, whereupon the murder charge is dropped and I'm off to Yemen on a blasphemy charge.

Something has to prevent scenarios like that or extradition treaties would be a joke. But, to be sure, I am interested in reading a legal analysis on Ecuador's proposal. But, my inkling is that Ecuador is within its rights.

Ian1
Premium Member
join:2002-06-18
ON

Ian1

Premium Member

said by Frodo:

I'm no lawyer either. But if it didn't work this way, take the following scenario. Saudi Arabia charges me with murder, and they have an extradition treaty with the US. I'm delivered to Saudi Arabia, whereupon the murder charge is dropped and I'm off to Yemen on a blasphemy charge.

So you foresee your government backing you up and only agreeing to extradite you on murder charges to a foreign country that they have an extradition treaty with, if, and only if, that country promises to NEVER extradite you elsewhere, regardless of whatever those hypothetical charges might be?

Hope you're never in that situation, because I assure you, you'll be disappointed. Because, again, that's simply not how these things work.