Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 396 posts

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#121

Post by jacquesm »

matt4077 wrote: post #86
Sephr wrote: post #14

What about the secret US charges? I honestly don't understand how in our democracy there is even such a concept as "secret charges". It just sounds mind-bogglingly corrupt and out of place.

Don't you need to charge someone with a crime for an arrest warrant (except for "material witness" and other shenanigans)? Because, in that case, wouldn't you want to keep that information under wraps in quite a few cases, and completely legitimately? Preparing to arrest a foreign drug dealer when he's expected to come to the US comes to mind. Just because it's "secret" doesn't make an evil conspiracy against democra…

Except that's not how it is used. For instance one person who was arrested, tried and convicted like this operated a UK based betting company that US nationals used to bet.

Instead of going after the betters a secret indictment was passed which was then used to arrest an exec of the company because of course American laws apply to any business done over the internet...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Carruthers

The general view of people in that industry was that it is A-Ok for Americans to gamble, but not ok for them to gamble abroad.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#122

Post by matt4077 »

notahacker wrote: post #102
chx wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about the "Macron leak"?

I think it's less Assange having a specific pro-Russian agenda and more him rather enjoying the opportunity to make trouble for politicians and Russian affiliates being more than happy to assist him with that. The traditional Russian term for political radicals whose agitation tended to serve their state's agenda despite very different ideals is popularly translated as "useful idiot"

Well, at least in that case, I think the Russian translates more literally to "ineffectual fool".

On a more serious note: did Wikileaks actually release the Macron files? I seem to remember they were only cheerleading it. But if they did, it's probably the nail in the coffin for their reputation, considering it was obvious for even casual observers to see that the dump contained altered documents, and that the leakers only had the intention of derailing the democratic process, willing to misinform people on the way.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#123

Post by ionised »

mootothemax wrote: post #46
scandox wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, so is it your contention that the UK would not co-operate in similar fashion? And, if so, why? Genuine sense of political autonomy or PR?

> Ok, so is it your contention that the UK would not co-operate in similar fashion? And, if so, why? Genuine sense of political autonomy or PR? My contention is that the US would not kidnap him from London's streets. Word choice is important; I'm sick to the back teeth of hyperbole backed up with "wouldn't be the first time."

Is it hyperbole when it has actually happened before?

Surely a precedent means the suggestion is not hyperbolic?

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#124

Post by cmdkeen »

toyg wrote: post #116
cmdkeen wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other legal commentators in the thread pointing out that he is still wanted for "failing to surrender" to his bail which can face up to 12 months in prison. This is what the arrest warrant will be for, not some secret US extradition request. Prosecution guidance on the offence: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/bail/#a32

But now the UK government can surrender that right to prosecute him if they want to. The political responsibility is pretty clear at this point.

Why? He had the opportunity to appeal all the way to the UK Supreme Court who ruled that the extradition request was valid. Those who pledged surety over his bail were ordered to pay £93,500 back in 2012. This absolutely should not be about politics but about the rule of law.

There is a serious point as well that bail needs to be enforced otherwise its effectiveness is reduced, which in turn makes it easier for the arguments limiting the right to bail to be made. Assange has made it more likely that future defendants will be denied bail.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#125

Post by ionised »

chx wrote: post #39

Is there a good article -- does even anyone know? -- on how did Wikileaks turn from a whistleblower into a mouthpiece of the Kremlin? Edit: some examples: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/... https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/03/...

You know, I harbour a lot of anti-American sentiment too (US government that is, the American people seem mostly fine) and I frequently speak up about it.

Does that make me a Russian agent/mouthpiece/troll too?

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#126

Post by skrebbel »

sschueller wrote: post #30
Sephr wrote: post #14

What about the secret US charges? I honestly don't understand how in our democracy there is even such a concept as "secret charges". It just sounds mind-bogglingly corrupt and out of place.

There is a "kill list" [1] which is unbelievable on its own so I don't see this as much of a stretch. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix

Oh my god. If Trump would introduce something like that the entire internet would explode.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#128

Post by jacquesm »

rmc wrote: post #58
belorn wrote: post #52

It should be noted that the prosecutor had three options: 1: Drop the charges. 2: Drop the arrest order but continue the investigation. To do so require a plan which would progress the investigation. 3: Charge Assange with rape, arguing that the evidence collected so far is enough for a case. And we got the first option, and thus we can conclude that the prosecutor don't have enough evidence to go to court and have n…

Well if you cannot question the accused, it sort of limits what evidence you can collect...

No, that's not how it works. Showing up for a trial (and being represented) reduces your chances of a conviction. Sweden could have held a trial in absentia leading to a conviction if they believed they had a case to begin with.

I always wondered why they did not do that.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#129

Post by kybernetikos »

catenthusiast wrote: post #18
sschueller wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He still can't leave. The US is just going to kidnap him off the streets of London. Wouldn't be the first time.

He needs to face justice one way or another.

I suspect that he's spent longer in the Embassy than he would have in a Swedish prison if he'd been found guilty of the things he was accused of.

Re: Sweden drops Julian Assange rape investigation

#130

Post by toyg »

cmdkeen wrote: post #124
toyg wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But now the UK government can surrender that right to prosecute him if they want to. The political responsibility is pretty clear at this point.

Why? He had the opportunity to appeal all the way to the UK Supreme Court who ruled that the extradition request was valid. Those who pledged surety over his bail were ordered to pay £93,500 back in 2012. This absolutely should not be about politics but about the rule of law. There is a serious point as well that bail needs to be enforced otherwise its effectiveness is reduced, which in turn makes it easier for the a…

> This absolutely should not be about politics but about the rule of law.

But it is about politics. No other bail-skipper in recent memory was ever granted the attention and resources that the UK police granted to the Assange case. It's also pretty clear by now that the Swedish charges were overblown, with very strong suggestions that it was done for political reasons. Hiding behind procedures will not change that.

A "strong and stable" government, relishing its independence from foreign states, would drop this in a second and reconsider its procedures for future cases, so that other countries cannot abuse UK law to enforce bogus prosecutions. In the context of Brexit and the noise about "security cooperation", this would also be a strong message.

Post reply on HN