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

UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 287 posts

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#241

Post by rbanffy »

philwelch wrote: post #220
vidarh wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the prosecutor has no case, though, Assange has nothing to fear going to Sweden. Even if the US could extradite him, they could do it from the UK just as easily as from Sweden I disagree. If the prosecutor has no case, Assange has - rightfully or not - every reason to wonder why they are pursuing him in this manner, and every reason to then worry about what the underlying motivation is. He might be more paranoid…

In Assange's own mind, yes, he probably is the victim of a massive international conspiracy whether or not he committed rape. It's a little disappointing to see so many people on HN take those delusions of grandeur at face value.

Don't you think it's a little bit strange that the Ecuadorian offer to have Assange interviewed by the Swedish prosecutors was refused?

What's the priority? Question him to find out what happened or bring him to Sweden?

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#242

Post by thebigshane »

vidarh wrote: post #228
objclxt wrote: post #115

I strongly advise anyone who isn't familiar with English law (so, you know, most people here) to actually read what lawyers have to say about the matter. There is a very good legal analysis here: http://www.headoflegal.com/2012/08/15/julian-assange-can-the... Whenever I see a story here about Julian Assange I just sigh. I don't understand how on the one hand people can be absolutely appalled when stories about sexism…

For starters, the women did not make these accusations. A prosecutor have. This distinction is worth making. At no point did these women go to the police and claim that Assange had raped them - not even the Swedish prosecution has made the claim they did. They did go to the police and ask questions that someone at the police then decided to interpret as indicating that a crime might have taken place, and start an inv…

You seem to bringing up a lot of new information about this case that I didn't know, so I have to ask: citations?

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#243

Post by vidarh »

philwelch wrote: post #234
vidarh wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of this weirdness preceded his decision to hide in the Ecuadorian embassy. In fact, the vast majority of it took place even before the arrest warrant was issued, and by the time of the initial extradition decision the prosecutor had continued to make it worse by refusing even more offers of interviewing Assange while making excuses for why she can't that are directly contradicted by Swedish authorit…

Evidently, they have to formally question Assange before filing charges. They'd rather have him in custody in Sweden before they do that. Isn't it pretty well established by Assange's own actions that Assange would be a massive flight risk? The Swedish aren't the ones acting irrationally.

First of all, you can be charged in absentia in Sweden. If they interviewed him, and he still refused to return, then that would be a textbook case of a justification for having him charged in absentia.

Secondly, he claims that he will be extradited to the US if he is brought to Sweden. How exactly would he suddenly become more likely to try to flee if they decide to charge him? He is already claiming that going to Sweden means a risk of facing the death penalty in the US.

In that context it seems ludicrous to think that interviewing him and then charging him would somehow increase his resolve try to avoid extradition, or that this has been the case for a very long time.

It is not like he would have considered voluntarily setting foot on Swedish soil from any point over the past year or more. A charge would not have made that more or less likely.

Meanwhile, a formal charge would remove at least some reason to question the motivations of the Swedish prosecutor, and it would make it much harder for Ecuador to justify asylum given that they have publicly used this as part of their process for determining whether or not to give asylum.

As for that. At the moment he is holed up in a small embassy, while the Metropolitan police is outside, waiting for a chance to grab him.

Yet the Swedish police still refuse to interview him, while making up bogus excuses for why they don't. They could have stated the reason you suggest: That if they make the decision to charge him, they want to be able to take him into custody immediately under the circumstances. That reason is still a poor excuse, but they've not even tried to use even that.

If he is a flight risk in his current location, he is a flight risk whether or not they interview or charge him - his only realistic means of escape is if he gets asylum from Ecuador and Ecuador finds a way of getting him on a plane, whether smuggling him in an oversized diplomatic pouch or convincing the UK to give him free passage. Either way, this doesn't become any harder or easier depending on whether or not Swedish authorities interview him.

The Swedish might not be the only ones acting irrationally. But if they're not acting irrationally, it would imply they have a hidden agenda. If their agenda is what they claim it is, then yes, they are acting irrationally. Either alternative is pretty bad.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#244

Post by shrughes »

philwelch wrote: post #107
mkramlich wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there are no rape charges. rape != sexual assault. and one could argue that "sex without a condom" with a naked woman already in bed with you by her own will is not rape, certainly. also there are no charges. merely an accusation. and they merely want to "question" him, which of course they could do easily without forcing him to go to Sweden. The whole thing is a pretty blatant sham, a masquerade for some other goal…

> and one could argue that "sex without a condom" with a naked woman already in bed with you by her own will is not rape, certainly If one was a misogynist who thought women lost their basic human rights as soon as their clothes were off, one could certainly argue that.

You can make statements about non-explicitly authorized "wake-up sex" in either gender direction. The fact that we're talking about one particular direction does not make one a misogynist.

You seem quite eager to call people misogynists. It sounds to me like you enjoy it.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#245

Post by kika »

1gor wrote: post #227
rdtsc wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is if the world treated US as a reasonable actor bound by laws and respecting human rights etc. (all the propaganda that it like to spew about itself). Its actions have shown in the last 10+ years that is not the case. It has detained, tortured and killed people extra-judicially. Even its own citizens. Making any appeals to the the quality of it judicial process is a bit silly at the moment. So in other words it…

There is little doubt it was the Russians There is a lot of doubt. The most obvious suspect is oligarch Boris Berezovsky, a London refugee from Russia, accused of embezzlement at home, who is waging a fierce propaganda war with the current Russian government. http://www.rt.com/news/berezovsky-litvinenko-murder-allegati...

a link to an official Russian propaganda TV channel is kinda silly.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#247

Post by AngrySkillzz »

tokenadult wrote: post #87

How rapidly people forget their history. Britain has a specific law on the subject because of an incident that occurred in Britain within my memory, a shooting of a police officer from within the grounds of the Libyan embassy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Yvonne_Fletcher No, harboring Julian Assange is not just like shooting at police officers outside the embassy, but preventing the host country from contin…

Lest we forget, Bradley Manning was not given his right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment. Though the federal government hasn't imposed capital punishment for espionage/treason officially, who's to say solitary confinement isn't just as bad (or worse)?

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#248

Post by AngrySkillzz »

barking wrote: post #114
AngrySkillzz wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

General opinion seems to think that he'll be questioned in Sweden and then extradited to the US, likely to sit in solitary confinement a la Bradley Manning. Now I'm not saying one way or the other, but it is definitely a possibility.

Why would Sweden be more likely to extradite to the USA than the UK? Sweden is neutral whereas the UK is a USA ally.

I agree that it isn't sensible necessarily, but I also don't blame him for believing it may happen. The US has taken a surprisingly cavalier attitude to the rights of citizens and foreign nationals as of late.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#249

Post by orangecat »

philwelch wrote: post #14
billswift wrote: post #4

If the UK really is threatening that, then that is more evidence that the Swedish charges are politically motivated rather than being from an actual crime.

It could always be both. Assange is probably persona non grata to the British authorities, but even if you wanted to manufacture some cause to imprison him, you wouldn't go for fabricating a rape charge in Sweden. At most, the British authorities are reacting opportunistically to an otherwise valid, legitimate charge.

even if you wanted to manufacture some cause to imprison him, you wouldn't go for fabricating a rape charge in Sweden

I would absolutely go for something like that, if I were clever enough to think of it. Look at how effectively it's split his support on the left by pitting civil libertarians against feminists, even on this thread.

Re: UK threaten to enter Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Julian Assange

#250

Post by philwelch »

danenania wrote: post #239
philwelch wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm amused by the notion that Assange has to somehow be extradited to Sweden if the CIA is going to rendition him. The CIA renditions people by kidnapping them off the street. They can do that in London just as well as anywhere else in the world. If the CIA wanted to rendition Assange, Assange would have been renditioned by now. The whole Sweden business would only get in the way of a rendition, not facilitate it.

Perhaps they treat cases at the center of an international media spotlight a bit differently.

Yes, obviously they'd create as much publicity as possible around the issue, that way the disappearance would be as suspicious as possible.
Post reply on HN