Assange Could Face Execution Or Guantanamo Bay

An anonymous reader writes "WikiLeaker-in-chief Julian Assange faces the real danger of being executed or languishing in the US prison camp at Guantánamo Bay if, as a result of his extradition to Sweden, he ends up in the hands of the Americans, his lawyers argue. In a skeleton summary of Assange's defence, posted online, Assange's lawyers argue that it is likely that the US would seek his extradition 'and/or illegal rendition' from Sweden. In the United States 'there will be a real risk of him being detained at Guantánamo Bay or elsewhere,' his lawyers write."

Comments

Related Coverage

[Anonymous Coward]

In related news, the Guardian has in-depth coverage of his extradition hearing, including a list of legal arguments he's making and how the death threats he's received from US politicians are particularly worrying in light of the shooting in Arizona. Also, the right-wing blogger behind JulianAssangeMustDie.com has been exposed. The domain was registered by Melissa Clouthier.

Re:Back to earth

[zeroshade]

his stunts cause real harm to people the world over

Really? Last I heard there wasn't a single person they could prove was harmed by the wikileaks releases.

Of course the US is seeking to extradite him, to put him on trial for spying and other damages

None of which they can prove, and releasing the documents isn't illegal under US law. So what reason do they have to extradite him? Not saying it won't happen, just that it's ridiculous.

Re:This is absurd.

[jbolden]

The US Attorney General has said he's looking into him.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/16/world/16wiki.html

This is not FUD

Re:Let's be clear about the accusations against hi

[sangreal66]

This 'sex by surprise' nonsense is bullshit peddled by Assange's lawyer (much like this Gitmo nonsense). Read up on what he is actually charged with. Pretty much everything you said is false.

Her account to police, which Assange disputes, stated that he began stroking her leg as they drank tea, before he pulled off her clothes and snapped a necklace that she was wearing. According to her statement she "tried to put on some articles of clothing as it was going too quickly and uncomfortably but Assange ripped them off again". Miss A told police that she didn't want to go any further "but that it was too late to stop Assange as she had gone along with it so far", and so she allowed him to undress her. According to the statement, Miss A then realised he was trying to have unprotected sex with her. She told police that she had tried a number of times to reach for a condom but Assange had stopped her by holding her arms and pinning her legs. The statement records Miss A describing how Assange then released her arms and agreed to use a condom, but she told the police that at some stage Assange had "done something" with the condom that resulted in it becoming ripped, and ejaculated without withdrawing. When he was later interviewed by police in Stockholm, Assange agreed that he had had sex with Miss A but said he did not tear the condom, and that he was not aware that it had been torn. He told police that he had continued to sleep in Miss A's bed for the following week and she had never mentioned a torn condom.

On Wednesday 18 August, according to police records, Miss A told Harold and a friend that Assange would not leave her flat and was sleeping in her bed, although she was not having sex with him and he spent most of the night sitting with his computer. Harold told police he had asked Assange why he was refusing to leave the flat and that Assange had said he was very surprised, because Miss A had not asked him to leave. Miss A says she spent Wednesday night on a mattress and then moved to a friend's flat so she did not have to be near him. She told police that Assange had continued to make sexual advances to her every day after they slept together and on Wednesday 18 August had approached her, naked from the waist down, and rubbed himself against her.

The following day, Miss W phoned Assange and arranged to meet him late in the evening, according to her statement. The pair went back to her flat in Enkoping, near Stockholm. Miss W told police that though they started to have sex, Assange had not wanted to wear a condom, and she had moved away because she had not wanted unprotected sex. Assange had then lost interest, she said, and fallen asleep. However, during the night, they had both woken up and had sex at least once when "he agreed unwillingly to use a condom". Early the next morning, Miss W told police, she had gone to buy breakfast before getting back into bed and falling asleep beside Assange. She had awoken to find him having sex with her, she said, but when she asked whether he was wearing a condom he said no. "According to her statement, she said: 'You better not have HIV' and he answered: 'Of course not,' " but "she couldn't be bothered to tell him one more time because she had been going on about the condom all night. She had never had unprotected sex before."

More here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

Re:What grounds?

[Americano]

*sigh*

"Charges of espionage" =/= "conviction for espionage."

If he were charged (which he hasn't been), it's likely he would be charged under the Espionage Act. It's also likely that the charges wouldn't stick, and he wouldn't be convicted under that Act, because of the reasons you cite. It hasn't been "proven" that there is no charge of espionage until a court of law throws out the accusation as unfounded.

Re:attorneys

[TheRaven64]

To clarify: The UK does not extradite people to countries where they will face execution or torture. If the defence can show that it's likely that extraditing him to Sweden would result in his execution or torture in the USA, then extradition to Sweden will be denied.

This is a pretty standard approach in any extradition hearing in the UK. The other most common approaches that have worked in the past are to show that the defendant will not receive a fair trial or that the 'crime' is not considered as such in the UK (for example, people would not be extradited for drawing offensive cartoons of Mohammad, even to somewhere that would give them a fair trial and would only give them a small fine if they were found guilty). Neither of these approaches is likely to work in this instance - the Swedish legal system has a fairly good reputation individually and rape is a crime over here (although some of the allegations would only be classed as sexual assault, and some as just being a bit of a pillock, the latter of which isn't usually illegal).

Re:What grounds?

[Fauxbo]

.... If Assange had been found by U.S. agents instead of U.K. agents...

Uhhh... Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he walk into a police station?

Assange: I'd like to turn myself in to clear my name.
UK Agent: THERE HE IS!!!!

Re:He's worried about the US in Sweden not the *UK

[joh]

That's pretty funny. If the US wanted him "renditioned", they would have had him already from the UK. He's much more likely to be safe from US rendition in Sweden.

Really?

From cable 07STOCKHOLM506:

"Swedish military and civilian intelligence organizations are strong and reliable partners on a range of
key issues[...]. Due to domestic political considerations, the extent of this cooperation in not widely known within the Swedish government and it would be useful to acknowledge this cooperation privately, as
public mention of the cooperation would open up the government to domestic criticism."

Re:What grounds?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Actually newspaper reporters and editors have been charged with treason in the past, and probably will be again in the future

And Assange, not being an American, is pretty much incapable of treason against the USA.

Re:What grounds?

[joebok]

"We don't like him" and not being a citizen is pretty much the summary of how people were imprisoned at Gitmo - they are called "enemy combatants" to avoid POW status. Somehow these people are too dangerous to be let loose but too innocent to stand trial.

Re:attorneys

[countertrolling]

Also, you DO realize where Saddam got that poison gas, right?

Singapore (4,515 tons), the Netherlands (4,261 tons), Egypt (2,400 tons), India (2,343 tons), and West Germany (1,027 tons)

Of course the American alliance greatly facilitated the whole affair. I believe Bush even claimed to "have the receipts". It's a shame there is no effective outrage over that time period. The Reagan presidency is one of the most deplorable in the country's history. In fact everybody since him are nothing to be proud of.