Julian Assange's backers ordered to pay up sureties • Hacker News Board

Re: Julian Assange's backers ordered to pay up sureties

#11

Post by spindritf » Mon, Oct 08, 2012, 1:49 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #8

spindritf wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is facing sexual assault charges No, he is not, he's wanted for "questioning", no charges have been filed. And extradition for questioning, on allegations that seem very flimsy, is excessive to the point of making me doubt prosecutors' honesty. All the weird things that happened around TPB trial before (chief investigator getting employed by the plaintiffs, judge being a member of pro-copyright association, anot…

no charges have been filed That's just an artifact of the terminology used by the Swedish legal system. Charges cannot be filed in absentia in Sweden. The act of formally charging someone comes after questioning and must be done with the person present.

That is true but they could've questioned him in England, or even in the Ecuadorian embassy. They have questioned people outside of Sweden in other cases. It's the prosecutors "opinion" that he needs to be present in Sweden.

Re: Julian Assange's backers ordered to pay up sureties

#12

Post by barrkel » Mon, Oct 08, 2012, 2:17 PM UTC

bobsy wrote: post #5

Why do people still support Assange? 1. He is facing sexual assault charges which he needs to answer. 2. He seems a bit crazed worrying about a massive conspiracy theory. He believes that US is the puppet master behind the Swedish charges. I might be wrong but he seems to think the US has pressured Sweden into getting some sex charges against him so they can then extradite him. This seems strange considering that the…

The UK government is spending millions on a police stakeout of the embassy. While this is nominally about a sex offence, given what has been reported about what happened, is that really a good use of my tax money?

I've had belongings in excess of 5000 GBP stolen. All I got from the Met was a victim support letter, no more than 50p worth of paper, envelope and franking.

So to me there is clearly a political agenda in his persecution; there is a conspiracy against him. In defence of liberty and in opposition to government tyranny, I cannot, in good conscience, not support him, in some way.

PS: He is not a US citizen, and alleged crimes were not committed on US soil. By what right does the US investigate him?

Re: Julian Assange's backers ordered to pay up sureties

#13

Post by mike-cardwell » Mon, Oct 08, 2012, 3:34 PM UTC

objclxt wrote: post #10

mike-cardwell wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming they are unhappy with the situation

...you'd assume so, otherwise they wouldn't have applied to the court to try and get their money back.

Answer this: Why would they apply to get their money back, knowing full well that they wouldn't? What would be a reasonable explanation for this action?

Re: Julian Assange's backers ordered to pay up sureties

#14

Post by dagw » Tue, Oct 09, 2012, 7:36 AM UTC

spindritf wrote: post #11

dagw wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no charges have been filed That's just an artifact of the terminology used by the Swedish legal system. Charges cannot be filed in absentia in Sweden. The act of formally charging someone comes after questioning and must be done with the person present.

That is true but they could've questioned him in England, or even in the Ecuadorian embassy. They have questioned people outside of Sweden in other cases. It's the prosecutors "opinion" that he needs to be present in Sweden.

He isn't wanted simply for questioning in the US sense of the word. He's wanted for arrest and formal charging, it just so happens that in Sweden the step that must happen before that in the standard procedure is called 'questioning'. Do the police from one country even have authority to formally charge and arrest someone on foreign soil, let alone in the embassy of third of a nation while on foreign soil? Can you link to one of these other cases where that is happened?