(Democracy Now) Assange attorney: still no charges filed in Sweden

[EFerrari]

(and, apparently, they're getting most of their discovery from the press.)


Attorney: WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange Endangered by Bail Denial in London; Still No Charges Filed in Sweden

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will remain in custody until at least December 14th, when a British court will take up a Swedish request for extradition. Assange hasn’t been charged with a crime but is wanted for questioning in Sweden on allegations of unlawful sexual contact with two women. Assange has maintained his innocence and called the case a political witch-hunt that has intensified with WikiLeaks’ release of secret U.S. diplomatic cables. We speak with his attorney, Jennifer Robinson.



snip

the judge showed great concern for the apparent lack of evidence provided, and indeed he even referred to the weakness of the evidence that underlies this arrest warrant and specifically directed the prosecutor to instruct him on that evidence. So, we are very keen to get to the bottom of this. And we note, too, that demands to the Swedish prosecutor for evidence have been denied. She is out of time on a demand that we put for all of the evidence in this matter, including text messages between the two women after the alleged incidents and before they went to the police. These are critical matters that we need to get to the bottom of, and we are reviewing those and pressing those requests to the prosecutor at present.

snip

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Again, I think many of these calls for his prosecution in the U.S. have been hyperbole, and I await a sensible analysis of what provisions he would be prosecuted under. We are obviously very concerned about what the legal position is in the U.S., particularly with the very outspoken threats of prosecution. We are following it closely. And, of course, we’re very concerned, because we think that there is a very strong chance that any extradition to Sweden would just be a precursor of extradition to the U.S. And given the nature of the statements coming out of public officials in the U.S., we have grave concerns for our client’s right to due process.

snip

AMY GOODMAN: Are you afraid for Julian Assange’s safety?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Yes, of course we are, both in terms of his ability to get a proper defense and his ability to be provided due process, but also his own safety in terms of the numerous threats for assassination, which have been coming both out of the U.S. and elsewhere. So, we do take those concerns very seriously.


http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/8/attorney_for_wikileaks_founder_julian_assange

[Poll_Blind]

1. Amy Goodman is and will always be one of the badasses of American journalism.

She is incredible.

PB

[EFerrari]

3. While the Pentagon was making a big deal of securing Haiti

she was out in the countryside with a camera talking to people.

Amy. :loveya:

[thereismore]

2. I really look forward to Sweden arguing to extradict Assange for a broken condom.

Irony of ironies.

[EFerrari]

4. I know. The Onion writers must be bummed

to be so topped. :)

[hlthe2b]

10. I am cringing over the entire episode...

as I see (understandably) righteous advocates for rape/sexual assault prosecutions using this case as an example. I too fear that once all the facts are out, we may find no "there" there and those who are defending this prosecution may lose considerable credibility towards their cause with the assumptions they have made.

I truly understand that this is a real sensitive issue for some, including a number of DUers. I would just wish that we could withhold either excoriation or martyrdom for Assange on this particular issue, until the facts are out.

[EFerrari]

13. The problem with that is, his rights have clearly been violated already.

Even if he is guilty as sin (which I do not believe), he's still entitled to due process and he is not getting due process.

In this interview, his attorney says that Assange stayed in Sweden for weeks following the opening of this case to deal with it responsibly. Nothing went forward. Even now, Sweden has not brought hard charges and the prosecutor wants him held incommunicado WHILE she slides on discovery.

Clearly, we are watching an unjust proceeding, regardless of guilt or innocent. Due process is not only for the innocent, it's for everyone.

[hlthe2b]

19. I agree...

[EFerrari]

23. In choosing to go this route to get Assange in custody

our government has put a lot of people in harm's way. Those two women, complicit or not, all the governments they have pushed, Visa, MC, Paypal, Amazon, that DNS service provider. The casualties are mounting.

Hang on, my friend. :hi:

[TorchTheWitch]

31. where's the excoriation of Assange?

I haven't seen a single post that claimed he was guilty. Not a single one. But there have been a absolute fucking barrage of posts claiming not only that he's innocent but lambasting the two women, Sweden, the US and now Britain all when NO ONE KNOWS what the hell happened between these two women and Assange.

I've also seen continual posts claiming there's nothing more against him than a broken condom yet there have been a stream of posts negating this perpetual assertion even after the Westminster court made public the true allegations... and there is no question whatsoever that those allegations are the very textbook definition of rape. You can argue all you want that those allegations are not likely true, but for people to still be continuing the utter falsehood that they were never MADE and the issue is nothing more than an issue over a broken condom or the mysterious "sex by surprise" is sickening.

This shouldn't be just a sensitive issue for those of us who have had the colossal misfortune to have suffered through this very same shit it should be a sensitive issue to anyone with an ounce of decency or humanity. Just why is it that anyone can think they know what happened between these two women and Assange when they not only weren't there to witness it but don't even KNOW these people??? Is it any damn wonder why so many women not only aren't willing to prosecute their abuser but even to let anyone know what happened to them when THIS is the kind of reaction from people that profess themselves to be liberals and progressives? It's SHAMEFUL. Utterly fucking SHAMEFUL.

As for your claiming "truly understanding" how sensitive an issue this is for those of us here who have suffered being attacked in this way - if you aren't willing to stand up and loudly shout down the abusive slut-shaming conspiracy theory garbage concerning either of the women and deliberate falsehoods that have been puked all over this site for absolutely no other reason than blind hero worship by people who have absolutely NO damned clue what the hell happened between those two women and Assange then all you're really doing is insulting us... just as it would be insulting to tell someone suffering racial abuse from disgusting bigots at the local bar while you sat there virtually silent and then had the absolute gall to tell that person you "truly understand" how terrible it is.

As for the "facts" in this case, get used to it, there will NEVER be any facts and you will NEVER know what happened in this case because the only facts there can possibly BE are his story and their story of what happened. That's IT. And that is sadly what most rape/sexual assault cases come down to. The only FACTS that REALLY need to be understood here is that not only is there no way for ANY of us to know what happened between these two women and Assange but the FACT that until you HAVE suffered such an assault you CAN'T know who may be capable of something like that until it happens to you, and you CAN'T know how you'll react when it happens or how you'll react afterwards.

[TorchTheWitch]

33. kindly stop peddling that falsehood

It's been known for quite some time that the allegations aren't about a broken condom, and especially after the Westminster court session there shouldn't be a single person here that's interested in this case who doesn't know what the allegations are.

Yet still the deliberate falsehoods keep getting thrown around willy-nilly as if no one will notice.

[rocktivity]

5. The judge showed great concern for the apparent lack of evidence provided,

and indeed he even referred to the weakness of the evidence that underlies this arrest warrant and specifically directed the prosecutor to instruct him on that evidence.

Well, that's encouraging. I understand that at worst, Assange will be subjected to a fine if found guilty of sexual misconduct.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[EFerrari]

11. It is encouraging to a degree.

But it's one thing for a judge to grump in their own courtroom and another to buck political pressure from above. :(

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. The Brits should be offering him political asylum rather than detaining him. K&R

[smiley]

8. Why?

they're just as scared of his info as the U.S.

[Kaleko]

7. ..."demands to the Swedish prosecutor for evidence have been denied."

So there is no evidence that can be produced to justify Assange's arrest and that prosecutor's extradition request.

[EFerrari]

9. This looks more farcical all the time, doesn't it? n/t

[malaise]

12. Farcical is a kind word

This is how you silence critics while screaming about 'freedoms. Fuck all the fascists.

[EFerrari]

15. I'm on tilt.

Have been wanting to put a piece together for days and then, some new mendacity pops up and immobilizes me. It's atrocious and on a global scale.

[Kaleko]

14. Hell, the Beast is exposing itself more readily than even Assange and his team might have hoped for.

Have you seen this petition on behalf of Wikileaks by Avaaz?

http://www.avaaz.org/en/wikileaks_petition/95.php?CLICKTF

I'm looking for the button on how to start a thread to get more peeps to sign that, but I can't find it and I've got to run. Maybe somebody else here can start a new thread?

[EFerrari]

17. I'm a member and still missed it!

Thanks.

Maybe I can do a petition round up later this evening. :hi:

[AngryAmish]

21. You see, there is this thing called the European Union

It is a confederation of states in Europe for a common market, a common currency, common parliment and to a great extent a common law system. Under the various treaties, all Sweden has to say to Great Britain is that there is someone in your jurisdiction that we think may be a criminal. May we have him please?

No evidence is required for extradition.

Imagine if I robbed a gas station in Illinois. No video, just the word of the attendant that I did it. I then go to Wisconsin where I get pulled over for my broken taillight (which I really mean to get fixed). Can I then demand that Illinois show evidence to get me extradicted from Wisconsin? No, that is silly. They just have to prove that I have a warrant. Same thing in the EU.

[Kaleko]

28. I am European, and if such a treaty exists between Sweden and Britain

then it would appear that Assange's lawyers are incompetent in that they're asking for evidence that is not required according to your interpretation.

The point I was making in my post is that repeated requests for evidence of criminal conduct on Assange's part have been met with silence. This silence speaks volumes if you're not entirely tone deaf.

* edit for hasty typos, arrgh.

[mrfrapp]

29. Not True

"No evidence is required for extradition."

I'm pleased to say that this is simply not true. The envisioned goal of the EU may allow that kind of thing but as it stands currently the requested country can decline extradition.

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/judicial_cooperation_in_criminal_matters/l14015a_en.htm

To support my assertion I point to the fact that Assange is currently languishing in an English and not a Swedish prison.

[AngryAmish]

30. From your link

"The following information from the requesting State is regarded as adequate:

the identity of the person sought;
the authority requesting the arrest;
the existence of an arrest warrant or other document having the same legal effect or of an enforceable judgment;
the nature and legal description of the offence;
a description of the circumstances in which the offence was committed;
the consequences of the offence in so far as this is possible."

All provided. All that's needed. No evidence need be provided, such as DNA, transcripts of police interviews and whatnot.

[mrfrapp]

32. Also

Also from link:

"Notwithstanding this, the requested State retains the right to request further information if the information provided proves insufficient."

In particular, there was a suggestion in the Democracy Now segment that the Judge considered that the nature and legal description of the offence as insufficient. Who knows, this is a job for the lawyers :shrug:

[Forkboy]

16. Why do you hate women?

[EFerrari]

18. LOL. It's my 13 dimensional chess response to The Man?

:smoke:

[Forkboy]

20. ....

:rofl:

[krabigirl]

26. .....

[mike_c]

22. I've been arguing about this all over DU for the last 24 hours....

I can't tell you how many otherwise well informed DUers are working to promulgate the meme that Assange has been charged with rape or sexual assault. Sheesh.

[EFerrari]

25. Corporate McPravda at its finest.

That's why they have to take down Wikileaks. We might get access to information and then, they're screwed.

:)

[ljm2002]

24. Mad props for Amy Goodman and Democracy Now!

She really is the best of the best. Amazing how many other "journalists" fail to note little details like the fact that no actual charges have been made, and that the Swedish prosecutor has refused to offer any evidence for their extradition request.

K&R

[EFerrari]

27. Her Federal Bullies Inc file must be respectable.

:)