 norwegian
Premium Member
join:2005-02-15
Outback |
to Name Game
Re: Assange makes 1st public appearance in 2 monthssaid by Name Game:I do know that the laws in Sweden he might face including the proof of. crime are far different that what we have in the US. Right now that's who wants to see him under their jurisdiction. I believe everyone wants him to face those charges. The overall discussion and defense is of human rights and not specific to Sweden's requests. We are allowed to be innocent until proven guilty? Is that not correct? |
|
 Name Game
Premium Member
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI |
read an article not to long ago with a side by side comparision between US and Sweden of what constitutes rape and/or molestation ect..was very surprised. Human rights ???? Do you think his rights have been violated ??? Damn call the UN and get him some help. |
|
norwegian
Premium Member
join:2005-02-15
Outback |
Do you have that link? |
|
Name Game
Premium Member
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI |
For you anything..have a great day..stick by your guns until the vegemite runs out.  » www.bbc.co.uk/news/magaz ··· 19333439 |
|
norwegian
Premium Member
join:2005-02-15
Outback |
Have good one yourself and thanks. Will have a read later on when I have time for some Vegemite on toast.  |
|
 Ian1
Premium Member
join:2002-06-18
ON |
to norwegian
said by norwegian:We are allowed to be innocent until proven guilty? Is that not correct?
Uh huh....And the way that's determined is charges (if deemed appropriate), and a trial. Assange is skipping out on his bail and hiding out in an Embassy to duck that process. Very simple. |
|
| |
FF4m3
Anon
2012-Sep-7 5:01 am
said by Ian1:said by norwegian:We are allowed to be innocent until proven guilty? Is that not correct?
Uh huh....And the way that's determined is charges (if deemed appropriate), and a trial. Assange is skipping out on his bail and hiding out in an Embassy to duck that process. Very simple. Very simple, if you can't handle all the previously presented events and information. But that's ok. |
|
Name Game
Premium Member
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI |
to norwegian
I guess a good point for discussion would be...if anyone can "confirm whether or not they think that the US - Sweden Extradition treaty forms part of Swedish domestic law. If it does not then it is clear that the Swedish supreme court cannot rule on it because it's jurisdiction is domestic." Someone has presented what they call "a detailed and accurate time-line of the legal procedures in this case at the website of the Swedish Prosecutors office" further stating " unfortunately I can't post the link (it triggers the spam-filter). Here's the full copy instead:" It is too long for a posting so I have attached it in a text file. also this might answer some questions... A Typo in the Constitution» gregcallus.tumblr.com/po ··· nder-eaw |
|
norwegian
Premium Member
join:2005-02-15
Outback |
I'm getting through it all, but considering how hard you lads hit me with correctness of publication earlier, I can't help but laugh at this statement: quote:
There was at one stage a suggestion that Mr Assange could be extradited to the USA (possibly to Guantanamo Bay or to execution as a traitor). The only live evidence on the point came from the defence witness Mr Alhem who said it couldn’t happen.
Almost voids the whole discussion, let alone if Assange ends up with England, Sweden, the US and finally Australia all after him.......what a theory that would be. The general public would class him guilty too.....back to "The Fugitive" anyone? LOL |
|
| norwegian |
to Name Game
On this point, thought it worth adding some of the views from Sweden. » palwrange.blogspot.se/20 ··· rom.htmlFour days ago, I resolved to turn my attention to issues other than Juluan Assange. However, I have been called again and again by journalists, including from Spain and Australia. And then I learned that a blog post from my colleague Mark Klamberg had been invoked by the Guardian to prove a point that was incorrect (not Mark’s fault, though). I have therefore translated and edited a couple of my earlier submissionss (17 and 20 August) for an international audience. I will focus on the extradition issue, but in order to be comprehensive, I will add a few words on diplomatic immunity and diplomatic asylum. (My apologies for any mistakes in the text; it is late at night.) » klamberg.blogspot.com.au ··· ent.htmlIn my previous post I described how the Swedish extradition procedure works and its sequence. I explained that prior to the evaluation and decision of the Government the law provides that 1) the Prosecutor-General shall deliver a statement of opinion on the matter and 2) the Supreme Court shall rule on the matter. I wrote that the Government is the final body to approve an extradition request and it may deny a request even if it has been approved by the Supreme Court, but I did not go into the question of the discretion of the Government when there is an extradition agreement. Glenn Greenwald cited parts of my post on the Guardian website on this matter. There seems to be just as much discussion on what can and cannot be there too. Quite amazing. |
|
