Assange, the law of limitation, and the next eight days

Post by hahainternet » Tue, Aug 11, 2015, 1:07 PM UTC

deanCommie wrote: post #3

Regardless of what you think of Assange (personal take: flawed personality but ultimately heroic)... Regardless of what you think of the charges against him (personal take: No way to know for sure, but gut feel is he made poor choices and wound up in the grey area of undesired sexual experiences that our society is currently struggling with how to properly define. In our natural humane desire to protect potential vic…

Post by seren » Tue, Aug 11, 2015, 1:10 PM UTC

deanCommie wrote: post #4

belorn wrote: post #2

This is now a prime example in what happens when politics gets involved with justice. The police interviewed everyone involved, including Assange. The district chief prosecutor looked at it and concluded to drop it. Almost a month later, even through there had been no new information available, the political assigned director of Public Prosecution decided to reopen the case and immediately issues a international arre…

I completely agree with your point in the specific case, but completely disagree in general. Justice IS political. Justices either run for office as political public figures or are appointed by political public figures. The justice system is an attempt to apply a subset of morality for the betterment of society, which is ultimately a subjective political exercise.

Post by gadders » Tue, Aug 11, 2015, 1:13 PM UTC

agd wrote: post #5

Pretty outrageous that the prosecutor hasn't questioned him in London by now. This has been a huge police cost and is a great disservice to the alleged victims who would surely want the case to progress quickly. I haven't seen any plausible reason why the prosecutor couldn't question him in London, especially given the exceptional circumstances of the case. edit: Yes, I have seen the reasons put forward by the SPA me…

Post by agd » Tue, Aug 11, 2015, 1:20 PM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #12

agd wrote: post #5

Pretty outrageous that the prosecutor hasn't questioned him in London by now. This has been a huge police cost and is a great disservice to the alleged victims who would surely want the case to progress quickly. I haven't seen any plausible reason why the prosecutor couldn't question him in London, especially given the exceptional circumstances of the case. edit: Yes, I have seen the reasons put forward by the SPA me…

Did you read the article? It's not normally acceptable to demand to be questioned in another country, and when the prosecutor agreed to make an exception, a new (and impossible) condition was added. This is what the author of the article called "calling the bluff".

Post by agd » Tue, Aug 11, 2015, 1:22 PM UTC

elemeno wrote: post #9

agd wrote: post #5

Pretty outrageous that the prosecutor hasn't questioned him in London by now. This has been a huge police cost and is a great disservice to the alleged victims who would surely want the case to progress quickly. I haven't seen any plausible reason why the prosecutor couldn't question him in London, especially given the exceptional circumstances of the case. edit: Yes, I have seen the reasons put forward by the SPA me…

The article covered that about half way down - the short version is that the Swedish authorities tried to interview him in London but Ecuador wouldn't let him be interviewed by the Swedish authorities unless Sweden agreed on a pre-condition that they couldn't lawfully agree to. > In March 2015, however, the SPA changed its position and requested to interview Assange in London. A spokesperson for Assange welcomed the…