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

USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

judiciary.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 646 posts

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#531

Post by arcticbull »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #493
arcticbull wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relatedly, Canada has struck down America's status as a safe third country for refugees as "U.S. immigration detention violates their human rights." [1] "Nedira Jemal Mustefa, among the refugees turned back and on whose behalf a challenge was launched, described her time in solitary confinement in the United States as 'a terrifying, isolating and psychologically traumatic experience,' according to the court ruling."…

That court ruling is not yet final and is on hold during appeals: https://www.immigration.ca/decision-to-strike-down-safe-thir...

Ah I see that happened in late October, I must have missed it.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#533

Post by Blikkentrekker »

ardy42 wrote: post #393
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,…

> 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. And isn't that actually done on a fairly regular basis? IIRC, the US has pledged not to pursue the death…

In many cases.

Virtually any jurisdiction that knows no capital punishment refuses to extradite if it be possible the extraditee face it.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#534

Post by cmehdy »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #500
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…

Wow, I had no idea recidivism in Norway was that high. I expected something like 5%. Basically 1 in 5 ex convicts return to crime.

Worth noting that rates don't necessarily tell the whole story. In some countries you will avoid prison entirely for a whole range of offences including even some "heavy" things. It's not impossible that in countries like Norway or Denmark, people who are in prison are already statistically part of the people less likely to be rehabilitated.

On the other hand, prisons entirely create problems they're supposedly there to solve. Just ask people who've gone through juvenile detention if it's not a breeding ground to make some contacts and learn the ropes..

You'd almost need a compound unit like (reconviction rate at x years) * (prison population/total population) in order to figure out what is going on, with the idea that you'd want both reconvictions and proportion of population in prison to be low numbers.

For reference, the US has 655 prisoners per 100k, Norway has 60 per 100k.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#535

Post by bboston7 »

PostOnce wrote: post #516
Talanes wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is horrible. Wasting tax dollars spying on schools.

Does Lincoln Lab count as MIT? Is it really a "school" per se? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Lincoln_Laboratory It'd be pretty surprising if no one was attempting to spy on such organizations I don't know what Tsinghua does but I can imagine a top school doing similar government-funded work anywhere

> It'd be pretty surprising if no one was attempting to spy on such organizations

Just last year a professor and two Chinese nationals at Harvard were indicted for something similar: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/harvard-university-professor-...

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#536

Post by [deleted] »

rlt wrote: post #528
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…

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

[deleted]

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#537

Post by spyder »

rlt wrote: post #528
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…

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

You’re comparing Norway’s 2 year recidivism Reconviction rate with the US’s 2 year Reimprisonment rate. The US’s 2 year Reconviction rate is 36%.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#538

Post by Wowfunhappy »

pmiller2 wrote: post #521
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?

> What if they then put him in solitary anyway?

Nothing, but now you've potentially damaged diplomatic relations with an ally. Countries generally (!) try to keep their promises to each other, or they won't be considered reliable in the future. Just like individuals.

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#539

Post by toyg »

widforss wrote: post #159
toyg wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Do you know what happens if a penalty doesn't exist in France? E.g. Sweden cannot sentence people to a 40 years prison sentence. Could a German court sentence me to something like that and send me home to Sweden for 40 years?

I’ve not read the whole treaty, but according to Wikipedia only the Dutch enjoy a system where the sentence has to match what an equivalent Dutch sentence should be. So I would assume that yes, Germany could convict you and send you to Swedish jail for 40+ years. But to be fair there are a number of grey areas, depending on the details of each case. It’s difficult to harmonize 27 criminal systems...

Re: USA vs. Julian Assange Judgment

#540

Post by sanp »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #538
pmiller2 wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> What if they then put him in solitary anyway? Nothing, but now you've potentially damaged diplomatic relations with an ally. Countries generally (!) try to keep their promises to each other, or they won't be considered reliable in the future. Just like individuals.

With the new administration, perhaps. Not sure this would have been true with the current admin.
Post reply on HN