41–50 of 646 posts
363.I find that the mental condition of Mr. Assange is such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America"
Seems to be the reason why the case is rejected.
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?
Quite surprised by that verdict. Reading the commentary from Craig Murray [1] I thought it likely he would be extradited. Maybe Trump will pardon him and Snowdon on his way out as well. [1] EG: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/10/your-man-in-...
Some of us did try to say that Murray is a fucking idiot and should not be listened to.
She only refused the extradition because of his mental health and likely prison conditions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an awful ruling overall, from what I can tell from skimming it. It's great Assange won, but this ruling is not at all support for freedom of expression. This is the one part the judge agreed with the defense on as far as I can tell: > 363. I find that the mental condition of Mr. Assange is such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America. For anyone not suffering from severe ment…
[deleted]
How would this work in the context of English courts?
I am incredibly happy for this ruling, I really hope it stands after the appeals. Freedom of expression and the right to know what oppresive governments are doing are too important to lose.
It's an awful ruling overall, from what I can tell from skimming it. It's great Assange won, but this ruling is not at all support for freedom of expression. This is the one part the judge agreed with the defense on as far as I can tell: > 363. I find that the mental condition of Mr. Assange is such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America. For anyone not suffering from severe ment…
The UK has other history about journalists hacking (see the phone hacking scandal).
It's one thing to receive the contents of a hack, and quite another to offer active assistance to exploit systems.
Time for Australia to step up and own this one. Take your citizen home.
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastYear&page=0&prefix=fal...
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?
Edit: google ngrams seems to agree.
It feels designed for vengeance and inducing harm rather than for safety for society and rehabilitation.