General Discussion

struggle4progress

(126,191 posts)

66. Did ever you happen to read any of the many UK court documents from the extradition case?

Tue Dec 10, 2013, 04:49 AM

Dec 2013

Sweden went to court in the UK to ask that Assange be extradited to Sweden so that Sweden could prosecute him for rape. The UK courts determined that Sweden was indeed seeking Assange in order to prosecute him for rape and determined that extradition request was proper

The issue here is not some desire of Swedish authorities to have a little conversation with Assange, whether by video-link or over tea and crumpets. Sweden intends to take Assange into custody in order to proceed with prosecution, and there is accordingly a Swedish arrest warrant, judicially-sanctioned by a proper Swedish court, for that purpose

Under the extradition treaty governing extraditions between the UK and Sweden, Sweden cannot forward extradite Assange to a third country without the consent of the UK, once the UK has extradited him to Sweden: this means that Assange would be able to fight such a forward extradition request in both the Swedish and the UK courts. Moreover, one of Assange's own witnesses in the UK case testified that forward extradition from Sweden to the US in this case would be a practical impossibility. For these and other reasons, extradition to the US directly from the UK would be much easier than extradition from the UK to Sweden followed by forward extradition from Sweden to the US. And, in any case, no charges against Assange have been filed to date in the US

Unlike Manning, Assange is not subject to UCMJ, and were the US to decide to file charges against Assange, those charges could not be the charges filed against Manning. No prisoner has been brought to Guatanamo Bay since the Bush era, and Mr Obama would have closed the facility by now, were it not for Congressional obstruction of his stated intent to do so

The scenarios pushed by Assange and his lawyers are either just cynical bullshizz or evidence of paranoid mental defect

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

157 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I Have No Words... The Rape Threads Meet The Authoritarian Threads... [View all] WillyT Dec 2013 OP

And if it turns out he is a douche that assaults women Egnever Dec 2013 #1

If That Is True... I Would Support His Prosecution, However... WillyT Dec 2013 #4

Only if Assange promises to let the Swedish authorities arrest him in the embassy hack89 Dec 2013 #70

actually i wouldn't want Assange's promise Bodhi BloodWave Dec 2013 #141

Considering that one of the two women is outraged over being used in this political game and has sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #31

^^^this. exactly. nt magical thyme Dec 2013 #83

Thank you, sabrina 1 tosh Dec 2013 #90

You're welcome. Facts are inconvenient apparently to those who want to protect War Criminals sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #129

Her account is entirely fabricated BainsBane Dec 2013 #134

+1 Matariki Dec 2013 #116

Pure fabrication. Assange has hidden out for three years BainsBane Dec 2013 #132

No need for a trial then. You have it all figured out. Nine Dec 2013 #135

And he was! And still is. AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #93

You think the .1% are COVERING for Assange and not trying to ruin his life? EOTE Dec 2013 #107

I had to chuckle at that. They've got a lot of us fooled, big time. AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #108

Yes, they certainly do. EOTE Dec 2013 #109

He kinda is, to a certain extent. AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #110

The fact that they're playing nice with him while he still has PLENTY of goods on him does NOT mean EOTE Dec 2013 #112

"The cause of victims of rape will be set back again... for years." AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #2

Then Why Didn't The Swedes Come To The Equadorian Embassy To Depose Him ??? WillyT Dec 2013 #3

Incompetency? Bribes? Maybe outright corruption, even? AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #5

he is being accused of a criminal act. who is he to dictate the terms of engagement? first. seabeyond Dec 2013 #7

You Make My Argument... WillyT Dec 2013 #13

no. i did not make your argument. not even close. how we dismiss rape today wont matter an iota seabeyond Dec 2013 #18

Because that's how asylum works Recursion Dec 2013 #54

Why the hell should they? TorchTheWitch Dec 2013 #80

Great informative post. Really glad that so many of you are posting the FACTS surrounding this Number23 Dec 2013 #122

Because they aren't there to 'depose' him but arrest him. Which they cannot do, given msanthrope Dec 2013 #96

Um no. Nothing has been proven. Luminous Animal Dec 2013 #11

Except she didn't testify that she was "willing". Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #20

Exactly! What is so hard about this? AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #111

one of these "poor women" says he didn't rape her and she has no fear of him. The other is a proven magical thyme Dec 2013 #85

Unfortunately, rape victims will often have a hard time saying how they really feel..... AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #88

thank you for instructing me on how rape victims feel. magical thyme Dec 2013 #91

I'm sorry, but I really *wasn't* trying to tell you how you were "supposed" to feel. AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #92

Please stop denigrating women this way. It is disgustign to read comments like this as if sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #117

You may wish to read my reply to magical thyme, btw. AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #118

wow that's rich backwoodsbob Dec 2013 #123

She wasn't tricked, she was deceived. So you agree that women are not capable of thinking for sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #127

The allegation is that he initiated intercourse with her while she was asleep and unable to consent. Nine Dec 2013 #147

Why? treestar Dec 2013 #6

International banking information Aerows Dec 2013 #10

They never will be found to be made-up Aerows Dec 2013 #8

"The cause of rape victims". Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #9

And yet Aerows Dec 2013 #12

Because he's wanted for ARREST. Not for questioning. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #21

It is when he isn't in custody. Aerows Dec 2013 #25

Not really, it isn't. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #26

I did, and am Aerows Dec 2013 #27

No, he can't, you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #30

Did you read the same document that I did? Aerows Dec 2013 #39

And? Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #47

it's right there at the end Aerows Dec 2013 #48

Except they can't guarantee that if there's no such request. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #52

There are no charges of espionage. The sentence you are quoting is indicative of the judicial msanthrope Dec 2013 #53

Did ever you happen to read any of the many UK court documents from the extradition case? struggle4progress Dec 2013 #66

Actually, her police report was that she had gone Luminous Animal Dec 2013 #15

No. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #23

Grounding a plane in Austria Aerows Dec 2013 #33

And doesn't have anything to do with Assange being charged with rape and sexual assault. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #38

Nor does allowing him to stand trial in Sweden Aerows Dec 2013 #40

Except Sweden can't make that guarantee Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #41

Oh, there is a bunch of willful ignorance Aerows Dec 2013 #44

Interesting how these things always seem to come back to Ecuador Recursion Dec 2013 #56

That was alleged of the Bolivian president's plane, not the Ecuadorian president's plane struggle4progress Dec 2013 #63

D'oh. Had my republics mixed up Recursion Dec 2013 #64

one more to the list BainsBane Dec 2013 #137

You don't find it just a LITTLE bit interesting how this question never quite seems to be resolved? sibelian Dec 2013 #101

What question? Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #106

Mm-hm. sibelian Dec 2013 #113

Except apparently he was. Spider Jerusalem Dec 2013 #115

Facts mean nothing to these people BainsBane Dec 2013 #138

How? It's his choice to evade prosecution BainsBane Dec 2013 #14

Assange would be given a lesser sentence most likely Aerows Dec 2013 #16

Nonsense BainsBane Dec 2013 #43

"No one should be above the law." WillyT Dec 2013 #45

He's been locked up in the ecuadorian embassy Aerows Dec 2013 #46

He's been in the Ecuadoran embassy for ~ 17 months...nt SidDithers Dec 2013 #68

Nah. Greenwald comes and goes as he pleases, and the US has said Assange isn't wanted Recursion Dec 2013 #57

I appreciate your point that if he is a rapist he needs to answer for that. Vattel Dec 2013 #17

His guilt or innocence can only be determined by going to Sweden BainsBane Dec 2013 #34

You are not understanding me. Vattel Dec 2013 #73

You could apply the same argument to Roman Polanski cemaphonic Dec 2013 #121

You are still not understanding me. Vattel Dec 2013 #126

Guilty or innocent, anyone accused would avoid the risks/expenses of a trial if it were up to them. cemaphonic Dec 2013 #130

I give up Vattel Dec 2013 #142

"Innocent people have no obligation to stand trial"??? Recursion Dec 2013 #145

An innocent person has no obligation to expose themselves to a risk of wrongful conviction. Vattel Dec 2013 #151

No, it's an absolutely horrible principle Recursion Dec 2013 #152

My principle is not Vattel Dec 2013 #153

That's a meaningless difference Recursion Dec 2013 #154

I disagree. Vattel Dec 2013 #155

Yes, you absolutely have a moral obligation to stand trial Recursion Dec 2013 #156

Most people charged with a serious crime Vattel Dec 2013 #157

Because he is an accused person under Swedish law BainsBane Dec 2013 #139

If he is guilty, then I agree that he should return to Sweden. Vattel Dec 2013 #143

The question here is what will you do BainsBane Dec 2013 #146

Because I don't know whether Assange is innocent or not, Vattel Dec 2013 #150

So What You Are Saying... Is That If Julian Assange Goes To Sweden, And Is Absolved Of These Charges WillyT Dec 2013 #19

He will never go free Aerows Dec 2013 #22

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! WillyT Dec 2013 #24

This is the correct answer. woo me with science Dec 2013 #32

I don't know, nor do I see that as the relevant issue BainsBane Dec 2013 #29

Wow... Simple Question... Just In Case You Get Proved Wrong... WillyT Dec 2013 #35

That is NOT the question you asked BainsBane Dec 2013 #58

I Care That You Asnwer That Particular Quiestion... WillyT Dec 2013 #59

Which question is it now? BainsBane Dec 2013 #61

It is the most cynical, dishonest, and revolting argument yet by the authoritarians in power. woo me with science Dec 2013 #28

Again... + 1,000,000,000 What You Said !!! - Thank You !!! WillyT Dec 2013 #36

Re: "The propaganda machine has shown many times that it is beneath shame" AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #37

Guilty Until Proven Innocent, Eh ??? - How "American Of You." WillyT Dec 2013 #42

According to some people, you should have to prove innocence when it comes to rape davidn3600 Dec 2013 #51

Hilarious. This is the second time I have seen this talking point today. woo me with science Dec 2013 #55

Hey woo...you've been ignoring my questions...which count of the EAW is a misdemeanor subject to a msanthrope Dec 2013 #60

I don't think any answers will be forthcoming from this crew. Just cries of "propaganda!1' and Number23 Dec 2013 #124

And Stasi!!! nt msanthrope Dec 2013 #131

Rape is a misdemeanor charge that would amount to a fine? You might wish to msanthrope Dec 2013 #50

You will know them by their posts bobduca Dec 2013 #71

:) woo me with science Dec 2013 #74

I agree with you, bobduca. Feral Child Dec 2013 #125

Absolutely! polly7 Dec 2013 #77

I'll ask you the question the rape apologists seem to be evading...I posted the warrant, msanthrope Dec 2013 #79

msanthrope, with all due respect .... polly7 Dec 2013 #81

Do you have any proof that these women set him up? Did you even read the msanthrope Dec 2013 #82

YES I read the warrant. polly7 Dec 2013 #84

Which allegation do you think is bullshit? Assange conceded to the acts described...I mean, you msanthrope Dec 2013 #87

The man seems to have had sex with two different women within the space of several days and seems struggle4progress Dec 2013 #49

Yeah, I haven't trusted him for a while either. AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #119

UGH, that's a real thing, too MisterP Dec 2013 #62

That thread went downhill in a hurry. NaturalHigh Dec 2013 #65

Assange's defenders are the Todd Akins of the left. Donald Ian Rankin Dec 2013 #67

oh look, "one who really make me sick" bobduca Dec 2013 #69

Post removed Post removed Dec 2013 #76

Oh look someone I had to take off ignore to reply to! bobduca Dec 2013 #86

Yes, yes, labels and adjectives. sibelian Dec 2013 #103

What is that 'evidence' exactly? Major Nikon Dec 2013 #140

Ah, yes, Sweden, that dictatorial hell-hole Recursion Dec 2013 #144

Do you actually have a contradiction to offer? Major Nikon Dec 2013 #148

Do you think charging people with rape is authoritarianism? gollygee Dec 2013 #72

You "have no words"? Really? Sheldon Cooper Dec 2013 #75

They Assange apologists disgust me BainsBane Dec 2013 #133

The usual suspects doing their usual depraved thing whatchamacallit Dec 2013 #78

Which, sadly, is exactly what the Assange supporters are doing....even if they don't realize it! nt AverageJoe90 Dec 2013 #94

Empire? Assange is an empire? BainsBane Dec 2013 #136

Congratulations! whatchamacallit Dec 2013 #149

... SidDithers Dec 2013 #89

I think conflating two wholly separate issues will set the cause of rational thought back again... LanternWaste Dec 2013 #95

Sigh. Does the trash ever get full? ismnotwasm Dec 2013 #97

The one thing the authoritarians are regretting right now... backscatter712 Dec 2013 #98

^^This^^. Yes. nt Zorra Dec 2013 #100

Their flubbering was hilarious and utterly transparent. Their only weapon was sheer volume. sibelian Dec 2013 #104

Yep. Vashta Nerada Dec 2013 #105

Try not to take the MIC authoritarian propagandist trolls too seriously, WillyT. Zorra Dec 2013 #99

Oh... I Don't... WillyT Dec 2013 #102

+lots whatchamacallit Dec 2013 #114

I don't know if Assange mstinamotorcity2 Dec 2013 #120

Ridiculous conclusion. Squinch Dec 2013 #128