USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment • Hacker News Board

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#521

Post by pmiller2 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 12:50 AM UTC

lol768 wrote: post #11

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…

Regarding your comment about how the entire ruling centers on this one point, would this mean all the US would have to do to get it overturned is pinky promise they won't throw Assange in solitary? What if they then put him in solitary anyway?

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#522

Post by refurb » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 12:50 AM UTC

ohthehugemanate wrote: post #141

dalbasal wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you take an absolutist, principled or binary view, then most imprisonment is a torture of some sort. It causes severe psychological distress. That's what a prison is. The differences are in the nuance, and you might call those subjective. This was an extradition hearing, not a trial. This seems to have given the judge room to justify a nuanced conclusion that doesn't extend far past this case. IDK if there's much…

> it causes severe psychological distress. That's what prison is. Depends. Some penal systems are there for "retribution" or punishment, and those match your definition. Other concepts available are rehabilitation and simply separating proven dangerous elements from society at large. Apart from the loss of freedom of movement (which I would not describe as "severe psychological distress"), there is no hard requiremen…

Having your freedom restricted for years is not "severe psychological distress"?

Have to disagree there.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#523

Post by LatteLazy » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 12:54 AM UTC

Mvandenbergh wrote: post #71

I actually don't think this is such great news for him. Extradition was specifically blocked on the grounds of a particular regime he might be subjected to (to be fair, probably the only legal grounds on which he had any chance of succeeding). That leaves the US with a way out if they want to proceed with the extradition - guarantee a different set of circumstances. If the judge had found on more substantive grounds,…

Agreed. The k ly thing I would say is that extradition from the UK to the US is almost always granted, so even a delay and appeal is a better result than expected...

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#524

Post by pmiller2 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 12:57 AM UTC

young_unixer wrote: post #397

If there's anything to learn from Assange and Snowden: 1. Our western "liberal" democracies stop being liberal when the government gets angry at you at a personal level. 2. With enough propaganda, you can make people believe anything, even that Snowden is a "traitor" to the US. 3. Politically vociferous people (the mob) don't give a shit about you unless you're instrumental to support the cause du jour

Back when Snowden initially did what he did, I had a conversation with some coworkers about whether he was a hero or a traitor for releasing that information. I, personally, concluded that he was a bit of both, but, on balance, I considered him more heroic than traitorous. These days, I've shifted my opinion even more toward "heroic."

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#525

Post by __s » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 1:10 AM UTC

baud147258 wrote: post #240

k1m wrote: post #3

Kevin Gosztola: "The United States government's mass incarceration system just lost them their case against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange" - https://twitter.com/kgosztola/status/1346048531249958914 Matt Kennard, investigative journalist: "Brilliant news, but be in no doubt. This ruling is utterly chilling for investigative journalism. Baraitser sided with US prosecutors on pretty much all of their arguments. It wa…

Are you really calling what Assange did "investigative journalism"?

Doesn't matter whether we agree on whether he's an investigative journalist, this'll still be cited as precedent in the future against investigative journalists

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#526

Post by Analemma_ » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 1:13 AM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #490

dalbasal wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you take an absolutist, principled or binary view, then most imprisonment is a torture of some sort. It causes severe psychological distress. That's what a prison is. The differences are in the nuance, and you might call those subjective. This was an extradition hearing, not a trial. This seems to have given the judge room to justify a nuanced conclusion that doesn't extend far past this case. IDK if there's much…

> If you take an absolutist, principled or binary view, then most imprisonment is a torture of some sort. It causes severe psychological distress. That's what a prison is. The differences are in the nuance, and you might call those subjective. That's what prison in America is, but that's not what prison either has to be, or is everywhere else in the world. If your goal is to torture people, America's system is very e…

> Recidivism in the US is 55% after 5 years, as compared to Norway's 20%. Apparently not treating people inhumanely is a great way of getting them not to commit more crimes. [1] Who would have thought?

Your mistake is in not realizing that this is considered a feature, not a bug. The US incarceration system is very much designed so that "certain people" stay in prison for the majority of cradle to grave. It is not in the interest of this design that recidivism be reduced.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#527

Post by arcticbull » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 1:15 AM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #526

arcticbull wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you take an absolutist, principled or binary view, then most imprisonment is a torture of some sort. It causes severe psychological distress. That's what a prison is. The differences are in the nuance, and you might call those subjective. That's what prison in America is, but that's not what prison either has to be, or is everywhere else in the world. If your goal is to torture people, America's system is very e…

> Recidivism in the US is 55% after 5 years, as compared to Norway's 20%. Apparently not treating people inhumanely is a great way of getting them not to commit more crimes. [1] Who would have thought? Your mistake is in not realizing that this is considered a feature, not a bug. The US incarceration system is very much designed so that "certain people" stay in prison for the majority of cradle to grave. It is not in…

Certainly feels that way with the minimum prison occupancy contracts states sign with private prisons. [1]

[1] http://www.aublr.org/2017/11/private-prison-contracts-minimu...

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#528

Post by rlt » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 1:21 AM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #490

dalbasal wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you take an absolutist, principled or binary view, then most imprisonment is a torture of some sort. It causes severe psychological distress. That's what a prison is. The differences are in the nuance, and you might call those subjective. This was an extradition hearing, not a trial. This seems to have given the judge room to justify a nuanced conclusion that doesn't extend far past this case. IDK if there's much…

> If you take an absolutist, principled or binary view, then most imprisonment is a torture of some sort. It causes severe psychological distress. That's what a prison is. The differences are in the nuance, and you might call those subjective. That's what prison in America is, but that's not what prison either has to be, or is everywhere else in the world. If your goal is to torture people, America's system is very e…

You’re comparing Norway’s 2 year recidivism rate with the US’s 5 year rate. The US’s 2 year rate is 29%.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#529

Post by dang » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 1:28 AM UTC

sampo wrote: post #437

dang wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't post unsubstantive comments.

While cynical and snarky towards US government, the comment is substantive if you're familiar with the term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot

It's a cliché. That is one reason the GP comment was unsubstantive.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#530

Post by Joakal » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 1:38 AM UTC

nix23 wrote: post #33

vidarh wrote: post #24

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…

I really don't get it why the UK is even allowed to extradite a citizen of Australia to the US. Shame on Australia too for not protecting it's citizens.

Australian governments would easily send their own citizens to foreign countries they never been to, for non violence offences like copyright infringement.

UK is way better than Australia in terms of bill of rights, etc.