Latest Breaking News

muriel_volestrangler

(106,242 posts)

3. Would you be in favour of letting people off criminal allegations because they say they're political

Wed May 29, 2013, 09:02 AM

May 2013

That's what's happened here; an allegation that British courts have considered at length, and have established that the undoubted law of the land is that Sweden's extradition request must be satisfied. To let him go to Ecuador would be to break British law, and the European agreements it has signed. But Assange, and Ecuador, want the law and agreement to be broken, because he says he's a political enemy of the United States.

There are, of course, the human rights of Assange's accusers to consider, as well.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

55 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ecuador says UK violating human rights of WikiLeaks' Assange [View all] Zorro May 2013 OP

The British government has never been fond of granting anybody human rights. bemildred May 2013 #1

Would you be in favour of letting people off criminal allegations because they say they're political muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #3

LOL. Yes, I crush puppies for fun too. bemildred May 2013 #4

You support what he did with the women, even according to their accounts? muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #5

I don't believe that is what this is about. bemildred May 2013 #6

Thank you pmorlan1 May 2013 #10

Wouldn't he be more likely to be extradited from ENGLAND? telclaven May 2013 #15

He was extradited from Britain, that's why he is in the embassy. nt bemildred May 2013 #16

He hasnt been extradited until he is out of the country and hiding inside an embassy doesnt count. cstanleytech May 2013 #17

He hasn't been extradited because he is hiding in the embassy. nt bemildred May 2013 #19

Yes and I said as much. nt cstanleytech May 2013 #22

Right, so whether he might be extradited from Britain (post #15) is a moot point? bemildred May 2013 #23

Assuming your speculation is correct that the US wants to keep him penned up, silenced cstanleytech May 2013 #24

I think lots of people want to keep him penned up etc. Not just the US. bemildred May 2013 #25

To SWEDEN telclaven May 2013 #18

Right. nt bemildred May 2013 #20

So you do think the political situation takes precedence over the criminal one muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #21

"stick to international agreements, and extradite him to Sweden, for their judicial process to work" cstanleytech May 2013 #26

Just like the US tried to extradite him from the UK? brooklynite May 2013 #35

When did the US file to extradite him? I know Sweden filed due to a sexual assault accusation cstanleytech May 2013 #40

That's my point... brooklynite May 2013 #41

But the law is what will be applied treestar May 2013 #28

Probably would not be the first time the UK refused to extradite someone. JDPriestly May 2013 #30

And Pinochet should have been extradited to Spain muriel_volestrangler May 2013 #38

The moment Assange stops trying to avoid Sweden... randome May 2013 #2

The UK, along with most of the world, does not recognize diplomatic asylum hack89 May 2013 #7

England delayed extraditing Pinochet giving him many years to JDPriestly May 2013 #31

Pinochet did not claim asylum. hack89 May 2013 #36

But it wasn't. JDPriestly May 2013 #47

They made one poor choice. No reason to repeat the mistake. hack89 May 2013 #49

Its an interesting argument though isn't it? Bodhi BloodWave May 2013 #55

They've probably had enough of an unshaven, unwashed Assange hanging out at their embassy. Nye Bevan May 2013 #8

That's quite an imagination you've got there. bitchkitty May 2013 #9

They might be getting sick of him there. hrmjustin May 2013 #12

And they might not. bitchkitty May 2013 #13

Fair enough! So what do you think will happen in the end? hrmjustin May 2013 #14

Some sort of settlement. bitchkitty May 2013 #42

And they may be proudly standing up for free speech and JDPriestly May 2013 #32

Do you think they will give him up in the end? hrmjustin May 2013 #33

I have no idea. What do you think? JDPriestly May 2013 #48

Eventually an agreement will have to be made. hrmjustin May 2013 #52

And not flushing the toilet, apparently....nt msanthrope May 2013 #27

Your ongoing slagging of humane governments in Latin America isn't going to persuade Peace Patriot May 2013 #11

"...pioneering work of investigative reporting..." Are you kidding? randome May 2013 #29

You mean like the AP and Fox News? JDPriestly May 2013 #34

Which is probably why the U.S. does not want him. He published 'old news' that changed nothing. randome May 2013 #37

Why do conservatives hate whistle-blowers? nm rhett o rick May 2013 #39

You should find one to ask! randome May 2013 #43

What kind of evidence could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt JDPriestly May 2013 #46

I have no idea. But Assange could clear the entire matter up by going to Sweden. randome May 2013 #50

If it is his word against hers and the politics of his situation makes him feel JDPriestly May 2013 #53

Again, I have no idea. But in a 'he said/she said' situation, why automatically side with Assange? randome May 2013 #54

That's why countries have laws, legal systems and trials hack89 May 2013 #51

Not everyone swoons over those drama queens Assange and Correa Zorro May 2013 #45

This message was self-deleted by its author randome May 2013 #44