251–260 of 646 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did Julian Assange commit his alleged crimes while in the US? This scenario is more like person who's never left B gets shipped off to C because he said something C didn't like.
Bin Laden did not go to the USA to commit his crimes.
So you can stop with the "justice angle" on that one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some countries (France at least I think) have a constitutional bar on extradition of citizens from their own territory and instead allow citizens to be prosecuted domestically for crimes committed abroad (but according to the standards of domestic law). This is a logical alternative I think although it typically doesn't extend to a bar on the extradition of foreigners to either their home country or third countries s…
This is not the case with the European Arrest Warrant anymore. France only retained the right for the accused to spend the eventual sentence in France.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW Edward Snowden is slightly guilty of fishing in a way. He didn't just collect relevant documents, he collected a massive cache of documents and instead of vetting them himself (someone who is at least vaguely cleared to read the documents) he turned all of it over to the press to review instead.
I wish Snowden didn't flee the country. I'd have a completely different opinion if he stood trial.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And they weed you out of the jury pool if you admit to knowing of its existence. And of course you can't lie when asked, as that's perjury.
You lie, if they accuse you of perjury then you say "I googled it after I was asked".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And they weed you out of the jury pool if you admit to knowing of its existence. And of course you can't lie when asked, as that's perjury.
But if you don’t know what it is then are you not made aware of it merely by their asking? How exactly do they weed people out without making them aware of it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, the fact that the extradition wasn't rejected on press freedom grounds makes me think maybe it's just a way for the judge to shake it off so that it's not HER who goes down in history books as to have made the decision to extradite. But having sided with the U.S. on pretty much all of the counts concerning press freedom, an appeals court may well 'find' that the heath condition is not enough. I REALLY hope am wr…
There is no real right to appeal in the UK. It's very unlikely there would be an appeal. UK also doesn't really have freedom of speech or press in any meaningful way. I'm not surprised it failed on those grounds.
Later in the same thread it says they have 14 days to do so and already announced they will.
Reading the judgement the key points are on pages 116 onwards and the extradition is denied under section 91(3) of the EA 2003 which reads: > The condition is that the physical or mental condition of the person is such that it would be unjust or oppressive to extradite him. The judge states: > it is my judgment that there is a real risk that he will be kept in the near isolated conditions imposed by the harshest SAMs…
I have never come across the use of satisfied for "persuaded by argument or evidence" before. (yes, I had to look it up, not a native speaker) Is this usage common or just some kind of legalese?
"You have satisfied the requirements of a degree and have been granted the award of BSc Physics"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I would prefer that Assange not be extradited to the USA on the specific circumstances of that case, extradition treaties in general seem reasonable? If a citizen of A commits murder in B and there is credible evidence, but the person has fled to C, should C not be able to extradite the person to B under any circumstances? Barring civil rights problems, corruption, etc (e.g., some very specific exceptions), it…
It depends on what type of crime you're talking about. For common criminals, then sure, but for example, most Western countries have laws or constitutional provisions against extradition for political offences.
A lot of things are political in nature.
But extraditions are mostly issues of diplomacy, not justice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they haven’t investigated and written in search of the truth, they are not journalists. Just as I wasn’t an engineer until I started designing and making things.
Interesting to see how programmers have turned into "engineers" the last decade or so. Do you have an engineering degree? Used to be that you'd have to be registered as a professional engineer before calling yourself one.
Are you agreeing with my point? Not everyone who calls themself something is that thing. Assange is certainly not a journalist.