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: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: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: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.