Slashdot Mirror
Julian Assange Served With Extradition Notice By British Police
An anonymous reader writes "London's Metropolitan Police have delivered an 'Extradition Notice' to Julian Assange, the Wikileaks founder, who sought refuge and political asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London last week. Scotland Yard have said in a brief statement that 'the notice requires Julian Assange to attend a police station of our choosing at a set time.' SY also said, 'This is standard procedure in extradition cases and is the first step in the removal process. He remains in breach of his bail conditions and failure to surrender would be a further breach of those conditions and he is liable to arrest.' However, under international diplomatic arrangements, the British Metropolitan Police cannot actually go into the Ecuadorian embassy to arrest Mr Assange. Assange would have to leave the embassy to be lawfully arrested. This raises the following question of course: Is this the 'endgame' for Julian Assange as far as extradition is concerned? If the Ecuadorians fail to grant Assange political asylum, which is a possibility, will he be arrested by Metropolitan Police, and sent to Sweden to stand trial for two alleged counts of 'rape?' Will Sweden then hand Assange over to the United States, where many well known and quite senior politicians have publicly stated that they think 'Assange should be punished severely' for publishing confidential U.S. diplomatic cables on Wikileaks?"
Scare quotes are absolutely appropriate.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Statements made by his own lawyer about what Assange did talk about actions that are legally rape, both in Sweden and in the UK. That's not my opinion, but has been said by other lawyers.
I don't agree that he should be extradited just for questioning, I think there should be charges first, but the courts have upheld the extradition so Assange should just go and answer the questions. Of course, based on the above quotes, he is guilty and does not want to go and face justice.
In any case, if Assange wants to avoid extradition to the US, Sweden is a hell of a lot safer for him than the UK! The UK government hands over anyone and everyone if the US shows as much as a passing interest in prosecuting. Our government doesn't even ask for evidence! On the other hand, Sweden will not extradite anyone for political crimes or where the death penalty may be applied. In addition to extradition from Sweden being far less likely than from the UK, if he were in Sweden then both the UK and Swedish governments would have to agree for further extradition to the US to take place. Picking Ecuador as a place to flee to just proves that Assange is a hypocrite. Ecuador has a rubbish record on freedom of speech.
I support Wikileaks. I stand for freedom of speech. That doesn't change what Assange did.
Assange is not a hero anymore, he's just trying to avoid justice.
A latent existence
He can ride in an ecuadoran-flagged vehicle to the airport and board an ecuadoran-flagged aircraft and fly anywhere in the world he wishes without setting foot on British soil.
Any diplomatic conveyance flying the flag of its home country is considered sovereign soil under international diplomacy law.
Wasn't there something about him having sex with her while she was asleep? That isn't exactly consensual.
Seem like he stayed there until they said it was ok to go. "Assange has made himself available to the Swedish prosecution from the beginning: he stayed in Sweden for 5 weeks waiting to be interrogated, and left Sweden after asking permission to do so from the Swedish Prosecutor Marianne Ny (which she granted)." http://justice4assange.com/Investigation.html
Come on. This has been talked about everywhere. You can't possibly be unaware by now that what you describe ("consent was withdrawn, yet he continued") is not even alleged by the prosecutors.
And come on again. You can't possibly not know that this entire affair is because of the conspiracy to extradite from Sweden. The "crime" he committed isn't even a prison offense. It's not that he "doesn't want to pay for what he did to those girls" as you put it - girls which by the way, praised him in a party following the "rape", and by the way, were even unaware they've been "raped" until the nice prosecutor told them so.
I'm not sure what your angle is, but you are woefully misinformed and misinforming to be accidental.
Wow, this post went from "+4 Insightful" to "0 Troll" in the time it took me to get a glass of milk -- WTFLOL?!
"Army of fake social media friends to promote propaganda
It's recently been revealed that the U.S. government contracted HBGary Federal for the development of software which could create multiple fake social media profiles to manipulate and sway public opinion on controversial issues by promoting propaganda. It could also be used as surveillance to find public opinions with points of view the powers-that-be didn't like. It could then potentially have their "fake" people run smear campaigns against those "real" people."
http://blogs.computerworld.com/17852/army_of_fake_social_media_friends_to_promote_propaganda
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
The article talks about "standing trial" in Sweden - where charges have not even been filed against him. "Extradition for inquiry" by a judge does not met a recognised standard for extradition, and the British justices tortured the statutes and precedent to accomplish their writ.
The whole thing is a shadow-play, to get Sweden extraditing him to the US, where he will be "Braziled", a'la Sam Lowery.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Wrong. He had sex with them with their consent, then they retroactively attempted to withdraw their consent - AFTER they were visited by a prosecutor.
You can't retroactively withdraw consent for something that has already occurred.
Oh, and using QED like that just makes you sound like an asshole.
In Sweden, the US only needs to request a "temporary transfer", which, if approved by the Swedish police, will send Assange on a plane and to the US on the presumption that someday he'll be back to face charges in Sweden as well. Unlike the UK, there is no court in the way. Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition#Sweden
If the US really wanted him they would already have him. The US government has already shown they really don't give a shit about him. He is not worth the bother. The guy is publicity hound so why oblige his narcissism and give him a bigger pulpit to preach his gospel? They got the person who allegedly stole the data off military computers which is clearly a civilian and military crime. The most Assange could have every really been charged with is receipt of stolen property. If it had been data stolen from the Russians and most likely China Assange would have already suffered some kind of fatal accident.
Not until a day after the act when the girl found out that he was sleeping around. He's just a normal sleaze and not a criminal one.
Given the UK's extradition treaty with the US basically hands over our sovereign rights to the US with ridiculously low standards for extradition why would it make any sense to extradite him to Sweden first?
Because extradition from the UK requires you to be accused of a crime and the USA can't come up with one.
Extradition from Sweden doesn't require a crime, they can send you to the USA for 'questioning' (with zero paperwork, too - double win!)
Full details here: http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html
No sig today...
It's not called rape, even in sweden.
And we call fingering someone against their will (if there is penetration involved) rape.
However, having sex without a condom when you told someone that they only want to have sex with you with a condom is definitely breaking the terms of engagement since it puts a risk of pregnancy and stds into the picture.
Which fundamentally changes the act.
Of course it's blown WAY out of proportion.
And, no, most real victims of rape (not violent attack rape that is but the domestic kind which is BY FAR the most common type) I've actually talked to are very, very sensitive to all types of sexual abuse and won't condone any of it since they know how vulnerable you are.
Just like people who have been physically abused are way more sensitive about even "friendly" physical fights.
Would you point out to me where the treaty allows for extradition for questioning when no charges have been filed? http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/024.htm
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
One of the many lies about the Assange case. He's facing up to four years in prison.
These are not trivial charges. He's accused of pinning someone down sexually until she consented to sex with a condom to avoid sex without the condom, then deliberately breaking the condom, then continually making sexual advances on the person later, and with another woman, having sex with her while she slept, in violation of the terms of consent she had had when awake (usage of a condom) (not that a sleeping person can consent in *any* circumstances). Two British courts have found the charges against him credible.
Yes, the use of Interpol is of course selective. But that's what Interpol is used for, going after high-profile cases and especially cases deemed to be high risk of international flight. Assange fits the typical Interpol target to a tee.
Rhetorical questions suck. Why ask a question if you don't want an answer?
Article 2.1
Though don't mind me bursting your bubble.