Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court

[anonymous-user]

Family life could in principle affect an extradition, but in general it would not do so, as the right to family life would be displaced by the public interest in international comity and the detection of crime. In the Assange case, the expedient of having a child would not work. It would look like an obvious dodge, and the court would say that the parties to the relationship could have no reasonable expectation of family life given the status of Assange as a fugitive from justice.

[WhereamI]

MOTORVATOR said:

I'm not arguing for or against, they are just facts. He is being extradited without a charge having been made, purely on an arrest warrant for further questioning which flies in the face of your statement that you cannot be extradited without a charge.

He is being extradited having followed due process, the process varies according to the location of the countries involved. UK to Sweden is an extradition that is within the EU, Sweden to the US is not - these things make a difference.

The basic point remains that the US has made no effort to try and extradite him from anywhere, the rules of the UK to US extradition treaty are arguably much more favourable to the US that their agreement with Sweden. As we have seen recently it is quite possible for the US to extradite British citizens from Britain to face charges in the US, let alone a non-British national like Asange.

MOTORVATOR said:

As for the Swedes we are experiencing building costs purely on the basis that Marianne Nye states that she will not question here "because of circumstances of the investigation" and refuses to expand on that. I fail to see what the difference is between an interview here or there and if it saves us a few bob then perhaps she should get on with it?

My understanding is that whilst this is termed 'questioning' the process is really 'arrest'. They want to arrest him and to do that they need him in Sweden. Whatever the truth of that one thing is clear - if this is some conspiracy to get him to face the authorities in the States it's a truly bizarre way of doing it, they could have done it so much simpler if that was what they wanted to achieve.

[MOTORVATOR]

WhereamI said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I'm not arguing for or against, they are just facts. He is being extradited without a charge having been made, purely on an arrest warrant for further questioning which flies in the face of your statement that you cannot be extradited without a charge.

He is being extradited having followed due process, the process varies according to the location of the countries involved. UK to Sweden is an extradition that is within the EU, Sweden to the US is not - these things make a difference.

The basic point remains that the US has made no effort to try and extradite him from anywhere, the rules of the UK to US extradition treaty are arguably much more favourable to the US that their agreement with Sweden. As we have seen recently it is quite possible for the US to extradite British citizens from Britain to face charges in the US, let alone a non-British national like Asange.

MOTORVATOR said:

As for the Swedes we are experiencing building costs purely on the basis that Marianne Nye states that she will not question here "because of circumstances of the investigation" and refuses to expand on that. I fail to see what the difference is between an interview here or there and if it saves us a few bob then perhaps she should get on with it?

My understanding is that whilst this is termed 'questioning' the process is really 'arrest'. They want to arrest him and to do that they need him in Sweden. Whatever the truth of that one thing is clear - if this is some conspiracy to get him to face the authorities in the States it's a truly bizarre way of doing it, they could have done it so much simpler if that was what they wanted to achieve.

I'm not sure without trawling back over it all again but I thought the US had actually stated that they want him for questioning. So I do think he has reason to be concerned whether the request comes while he is here or back in Sweden.

This questioning bit is what doesn't sit comfortably with me. If as you say the process is complicated because it is an arrest then why doesn't she just come out and say that? Sweden have in the past questioned elsewhere and taken it to court in absentia so why can they not do it now? Instead she is using obscure statements about the particular circumstances of this case.

Of course the suspiciousness of political ends isn't helped by the fact that he was cleared by the first prosecutor only for it to be called in by her and the decision reversed. My understanding being that it wasn't due to a request from the two girls.

[WhereamI]

What I'd suggest is rather than asking questions that could have all sorts of answers, ask yourself - why?

We know that Assange wanted to live in Sweden, he only left because his application to stay permanently was rejected. The assumption is that he wanted to be there because it's where he felt he was safest, even if that wasn't the case it can't have been a place he felt threatened.

Meanwhile we know that the UK has a really lax extradition treaty with the US, there are a number of examples of British nationals being extradited.

So with this background why would three Governments conspire to come up with this really crazy alleged situation where a rape charge is trumped up to try and get him from the UK to Sweden so the US can have him?

It makes no sense. If the US wants him then him being in the UK is probably the best place to get him from. It makes no sense to try and get him to Sweden and absolutely no sense to do it in such a crazy way.

[Riff Raff]

WhereamI said:

What I'd suggest is rather than asking questions that could have all sorts of answers, ask yourself - why?

We know that Assange wanted to live in Sweden, he only left because his application to stay permanently was rejected. The assumption is that he wanted to be there because it's where he felt he was safest, even if that wasn't the case it can't have been a place he felt threatened.

Meanwhile we know that the UK has a really lax extradition treaty with the US, there are a number of examples of British nationals being extradited.

So with this background why would three Governments conspire to come up with this really crazy alleged situation where a rape charge is trumped up to try and get him from the UK to Sweden so the US can have him?

It makes no sense. If the US wants him then him being in the UK is probably the best place to get him from. It makes no sense to try and get him to Sweden and absolutely no sense to do it in such a crazy way.

The thing you have to remember is that you can't pull the wool over the Assangist's eyes.

It gets stuck on the Tinfoil.

[Finlandia]

Riff Raff said:

WhereamI said:

What I'd suggest is rather than asking questions that could have all sorts of answers, ask yourself - why?

We know that Assange wanted to live in Sweden, he only left because his application to stay permanently was rejected. The assumption is that he wanted to be there because it's where he felt he was safest, even if that wasn't the case it can't have been a place he felt threatened.

Meanwhile we know that the UK has a really lax extradition treaty with the US, there are a number of examples of British nationals being extradited.

So with this background why would three Governments conspire to come up with this really crazy alleged situation where a rape charge is trumped up to try and get him from the UK to Sweden so the US can have him?

It makes no sense. If the US wants him then him being in the UK is probably the best place to get him from. It makes no sense to try and get him to Sweden and absolutely no sense to do it in such a crazy way.

The thing you have to remember is that you can't pull the wool over the Assangist's eyes.

It gets stuck on the Tinfoil.

Who is apologising?
I can't help but being sceptical towards most governments, especially after all lies we have been fed recently. This is just the kind of botched up op that I would expect from a government trying to outsmart the less suspecting.

[WhereamI]

Finlandia said:

Who is apologising?
I can't help but being sceptical towards most governments, especially after all lies we have been fed recently. This is just the kind of botched up op that I would expect from a government trying to outsmart the less suspecting.

Right, so instead of doing something really simple that would work you expect a government to do something really stupid, illegal and convoluted that might not. The cynic in me says you might be right but the realist says you aren't.

[Finlandia]

WhereamI said:

Finlandia said:

Who is apologising?
I can't help but being sceptical towards most governments, especially after all lies we have been fed recently. This is just the kind of botched up op that I would expect from a government trying to outsmart the less suspecting.

Right, so instead of doing something really simple that would work you expect a government to do something really stupid, illegal and convoluted that might not. The cynic in me says you might be right but the realist says you aren't.

I'm definitely in the cynical camp.

[BlackLabel]

"Julian Assange could be considering leaving the Ecuadorian embassy and handing himself in to police, Sky News understands.

After spending two years holed up inside the central London building, the Australian is holding a news conference this morning - when he is expected to spell out his next move.

Widespread reports suggest the WikiLeaks website founder needs hospital treatment for heart and lung problems."

http://news.sky.com/story/1320421/julian-assange-c...

[Foppo]

The rape charge is a set up in my opinion always has been.The Americans want him for treason.Bizarre case.

[Borghetto]

Foppo said:

The rape charge is a set up in my opinion always has been.The Americans want him for treason.Bizarre case.

I've heard this argument used repeatedly, although nobody has ever explained why it might be easier to extradite him from Sweden than the UK.

[0000]

Borghetto said:

I've heard this argument used repeatedly, although nobody has ever explained why it might be easier to extradite him from Sweden than the UK.

I've heard a lot of explanations, there's a few here.

[carinaman]

Just get the police that went into Damian Green's offices for leaking embarrassing immigration figures to barge in there and get Assange. Easy.

[SamHH]

Foppo said:

The rape charge is a set up in my opinion always has been.

Why do you think that?

[Borghetto]

0000 said:

I've heard a lot of explanations, there's a few here.

Thank you for that. I'm still unconvinced that that he is greater danger of extradition in Sweden than the UK.

[fido]

Do you think the 'health' reasons are being used an excuse to prepare for a possible exit? Clearly being holed up in a building isn't that fun but unless it's excessively dusty or lacking in exercise facilities it does seem like they are taking the opportunity to get rid of him.

Edited:
The Mash offers another explanation for his health condition .. http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/celebrity/assan...

Edited by fido on Monday 18th August 12:17

[Riff Raff]

fido said:

The Mash offers another explanation for his health condition .. http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/celebrity/assan...

Can't help feeling that if he'd confined himself to that, he wouldn't be in the pickle he's in now.........

[anonymous-user]

Assange will always have his supporters amongst those who believe everything they read on the internet, but the reality is that he has had due process in the UK and is evading due process in Sweden, and the idea that this is all a convoluted scheme for the US to grab him is fanciful.

[Beati Dogu]

The Daily Mash is quite believable. The guy is clearly in love with himself.

[Foppo]

The Swedes will send him to the States as soon he sets foot there.

About him being in love with himself,don't know couldn't care less.

Spend some time in Sweden, no need to rape a women there.