WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange Says to Leave London Embassy 'Soon'

[reorg]

106. Oh yes, I did.

116 If, contrary to our view, it was necessary to consider the law of England and Wales ...

119 For the reasons we have given at paragraphs 68 and 71 as applied to this offence, we do not consider it apposite to take the statement of SW into account.

68 ... the judge in the executing state should scrutinise the terms of the EAW and make the decision to order surrender on the basis of what is contained in the EAW and not have regard to material extraneous to the EAW. ...

71 In our view, it is not apposite to take into account the material in the prosecution file: ... It is for the Prosecutor not the court to set out what is alleged.

72. ... as the material was put before us de bene esse, we will express our view on what difference it would have made if we had taken it into account in determining whether the description of the conduct was fair and accurate.

120 ... as extraneous material was placed before the court de bene esse, we have considered the fairness and accuracy of the description in the light of that material. (and nothing else).


IOW: Based on the language in the European Arrest Warrant and excerpts from the prosecution material, the court found that IF they had to consider the law of England and Wales, they would have found the description of the alleged unlawful acts in the EAW fair and accurate, i.e. one could make similar allegations of unlawful conduct in England and Wales based on the acts described.

Now, since you apparently are an expert on this: Please cite just one single instance where conduct comparable to what Assange is accused of has led to a case. Wherever, in England or Wales or the US or even Sweden. Who was ever prosecuted for not using a condom, under similar circumstances. I have asked all the other legal experts here, some claim to be lawyers, and no one came up with anything, ever.