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

Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 160 posts

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#41

Post by notahacker »

js8 wrote: post #30
untog wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one way of looking at it. Another: a warrant was issued for his arrest in relation to a crime that was accused. He used a foreign embassy to avoid that arrest. Giving up would not be setting a fantastic precedent for future alleged criminals who do not wish to answer questions. (EDIT: changed "committed" to "accused" as per discussion below)

Isn't it right of any government to grant sanctuary, though?

It's the right of any government not to have police enter their embassy without permission, but not their right to retrospectively grant immunity from prosecution under UK or European law to anyone they choose to.

Not setting that precedent is likely one of the main reasons the UK wasted so much money on policing.

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#42

Post by jacquesm »

revelation wrote: post #38
jacquesm wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is that simple. You thumb your nose at a judge at your own peril, regardless of how much merit there was to the original case and regardless of where your sympathies lie with respect to WL and Assange the fact is that there is absolutely no way the UK govt/judicial branch would let a known fugitive skip like this even after the original case was dropped. It is bordering on the farcical how much money…

This isn't even a UK case. What do they care if Sweden wants to drop it?

Loss of face. They put so much money (10M+!) in they would look like idiots if they eventually decided to drop it and Assange gets to make a victory lap on the way to Paddington Station to catch the Express to Heathrow.

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#43

Post by crdoconnor »

gaius wrote: post #27
toyg wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Everyone” is not going to have an embassy aiding and abetting you; and any diplomat or spy worth his/her salt already has procedures to skip the country. The principle is a fig leaf on top of a political issue. This situation will not change until a different party gets in power, carrying a different view of the UK’s relationship with their traditional military allies.

This situation will not change until a different party gets in power, carrying a different view of the UK’s relationship with their traditional military allies. I’m not sure the PM actually has the power to do that. Assange is wanted right now for skipping bail. No government is going to pass an Act declaring that not-a-crime.

The PM could absolutely decide to recognize the diplomatic immunity Ecuador wants to grant him:

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2018/01/11/uk-rejects-ecu...

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#44

Post by leereeves »

gaius wrote: post #39
leereeves wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the penalty for that crime? If extradition to the US was absolutely impossible, Assange might be willing to turn himself in and suffer the penalty in order to regain his freedom.

What's the penalty for that crime Max 12 months in prison. The ONLY way Assange’s actions make sense is if he expects to be found guilty in Sweden.

> The ONLY way Assange’s actions make sense is if he expects to be found guilty in Sweden.

Or in the US, where there was (still is?) an active criminal investigation of Wikileaks for publishing government secrets.

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#45

Post by randcraw »

jacquesm wrote: post #12
randcraw wrote: post #4

The persistence of the British CPS in pursuing Assange shows how tight the militaries are between the US and Commonwealth nations. AFAIK, Britain had no personal stake in Wikileaks / Assange. But because America badly wanted to suppress Wikileaks and its ilk from future revelations, Britain has persisted in its surrogate prosecution of Assange. I wonder, is there no blowback among Brits for the Crown so baldly adopti…

I don't think it is that simple. You thumb your nose at a judge at your own peril, regardless of how much merit there was to the original case and regardless of where your sympathies lie with respect to WL and Assange the fact is that there is absolutely no way the UK govt/judicial branch would let a known fugitive skip like this even after the original case was dropped. It is bordering on the farcical how much money…

I think 'farcical' appeared in the rear-view mirror years ago. The word that springs to my mind more closely resembles 'Dreyfus'.

Another alternative (to a coffin) is the expiration of the statute of limitations on the charges against Assange. Britain may choose to refile/renew them indefinitely, but it now appears that they'll do so alone, without collaboration from Sweden. I think eventually the political odor of this will sufficiently embarrass the Brit electorate and the CPS' charges will finally expire, with more whimper than bang.

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#46

Post by gsnedders »

jacquesm wrote: post #32
gaius wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, Gary McKinnon in 2012.

Both are UK citizens, Assange definitely is not, besides that he was never - as far as we know - on a wanted list of people wanted specifically for any computer related crimes but for an arguably much more serious offense. Also: Assange's fear was not to be extradited from the UK to the USA but from Sweden. Whether that is realistic or not is another matter entirely but there is some precedent.

> Also: Assange's fear was not to be extradited from the UK to the USA but from Sweden. Whether that is realistic or not is another matter entirely but there is some precedent.

If he's extradited from the UK to Sweden, they then they UK consent to a further extradition from Sweden, and he can fight extradition in both the UK and Sweden. (Unless, of course, they go for an "extraordinary" extradition, which seems unlikely in such a high-profile case.)

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#47

Post by guitarbill »

gaius wrote: post #39
leereeves wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the penalty for that crime? If extradition to the US was absolutely impossible, Assange might be willing to turn himself in and suffer the penalty in order to regain his freedom.

What's the penalty for that crime Max 12 months in prison. The ONLY way Assange’s actions make sense is if he expects to be found guilty in Sweden.

Given the eagerness of the CPS to prosecute, seems like paranoia was a good strategy, no? There's some hidden agenda here, and it's hard to believe it's something as mundane as CPS bloke doesn't want a new case before he retires when emails conveniently get "deleted". I think you can expect better from lawyers. But it's especially galling for a lawyer who works for the government, they should have procedures to retain this information.

The only thing that doesn't make sense to me is fleeing to the UK, who's government isn't known for it's integrity.

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#48

Post by lancepioch »

randcraw wrote: post #45
jacquesm wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is that simple. You thumb your nose at a judge at your own peril, regardless of how much merit there was to the original case and regardless of where your sympathies lie with respect to WL and Assange the fact is that there is absolutely no way the UK govt/judicial branch would let a known fugitive skip like this even after the original case was dropped. It is bordering on the farcical how much money…

I think 'farcical' appeared in the rear-view mirror years ago. The word that springs to my mind more closely resembles 'Dreyfus'. Another alternative (to a coffin) is the expiration of the statute of limitations on the charges against Assange. Britain may choose to refile/renew them indefinitely, but it now appears that they'll do so alone, without collaboration from Sweden. I think eventually the political odor of t…

I thought that the statue of limitations requires you to not leave or flee. Since he's in the embassy, isn't he technically on foreign soil?

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#49

Post by test1235 »

jacquesm wrote: post #42
revelation wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't even a UK case. What do they care if Sweden wants to drop it?

Loss of face. They put so much money (10M+!) in they would look like idiots if they eventually decided to drop it and Assange gets to make a victory lap on the way to Paddington Station to catch the Express to Heathrow.

They already look like idiots.

Re: Sweden tried to drop Assange extradition in 2013

#50

Post by alex_hitchins »

revelation wrote: post #38
jacquesm wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is that simple. You thumb your nose at a judge at your own peril, regardless of how much merit there was to the original case and regardless of where your sympathies lie with respect to WL and Assange the fact is that there is absolutely no way the UK govt/judicial branch would let a known fugitive skip like this even after the original case was dropped. It is bordering on the farcical how much money…

This isn't even a UK case. What do they care if Sweden wants to drop it?

Him skipping bail is a UK crime he has committed and is wanted for.
Post reply on HN