171–180 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
America could have just as easily extradited him from the UK as from Sweden.
He wasn't in the UK.
Nasty way to diss on fellow leakers, in my opinion. I wonder if Mr. Assange feels he himself deserves what’s now coming to him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_War_documents_leak#Info...
This mean that the single most expensive police case in the history of UK will have an end. It will be interesting to see the final price tag in respect to the final verdict.
I wonder if the expense was solely borne by the UK taxpayer or if foreign interests helped finance it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> to a country in which they would be in likely danger of persecution based on "race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion" Which, precisely, of these categories do you think he fits under here?
membership of a particular social group or political opinion
It will be interesting to see if the US tries to extradite him. It's actually not 100% clear that he's broken any US laws in any ways that they aren't also routinely broken by newspapers. There's a few avenues: 1) Publishing classified information. Easy to show that he did this but a very difficult path to go down when American newspapers do this all the time. 2) Conspiracy to commit espionage. Probably the most like…
America could have just as easily extradited him from the UK as from Sweden.
(Some people at the time felt that this was not fair as the US test is arguably a tougher one but arguably that just reflects the country's domestic arrest policies being different. In any case, the UK refuses far more US extradition requests than vice versa. If you want to read 400 pages on this, the Baker Extradition review which also covers the European Arrest Warrant and the Prima Facie test is available online.)
He looked very ill on the Daily Mail photos, I hope he'll survive the next couple of weeks... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6911187/Wikileaks-f...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh come on. The fact that he has done some good doesn't mean that he is above the law.
"Seeking asylum" is not tbe same as "above the law" as the BBC would have you think. Lets see if he ends up in the states.
He's been arrested for jumping bail. He was on bail facing extradition for rape and sexual molestation charges. He sought asylum the moment he knew he would have to face those charges.
So you're correct. Seeking asylum isn't the same as being above the law. It's the same as avoiding being subject to the law. I can't say I see the distinction as being especially material.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What law, exactly?
I will refer you to reading TFA. Also: rape.
He is alleged to have had consensual sex with somebody, but without her knowledge removed the condom, which she only noticed later. While this is a consent issue and should be criminal, it's not the same as what I would think of when I hear "rape".
Also, the charges, had been dropped and he was free to leave Sweden, then the case was reopened for no apparent legal reason, and eventually the charges have been dropped again.
So, to claim he is wanted for "rape" is just false. He isn't wanted for any crime except skipping bail and possibly contempt of court.
Now he is UK custody, there is speculation that the US will bring charges and a warrant for his arrest regarding espionage and whatever else they can muster, as was kind of confirmed when the one DA accidentally leaked the secret grand jury investigation against Assange in an unrelated filing.
People still defend Snowden but if he ever releases information seen as politically damaging to one side, all that adulation is out the window.
That’s to say all this support isn’t actually principled support but rather political.
So basically he's been arrested for not complying with UK court orders, right? And the question now is whether the U.S. will seek extradition. Or did they already?