Slashdot Mirror
Spanish Superjudge To Represent Assange
First time accepted submitter ccguy writes "Spanish ex-judge Balsazar Garzón will represent wikileak's Julian Assange in his extradiction case. In the past 30 years Garzón has led the most important investigations in Spain: Against drug cartels, against terrorist groups (ETA), and against corruption. He's also famous for his attempt to extradite Chilean dictator Pinochet to Spain to judge him for crimes against humanity. In his last investigation Garzón ordered in-prison conversations between corrupt politicians and their lawyers to be monitored. This is legal in Spain if the goal is to prevent further crimes to be committed (such as the inmate telling his lawyer to destroy evidence, or offshore funds). This caused Garzón to be disbarred as a judge. The president of the Supreme Court that signed this disbarment (Carlos Dívar) was later on made to resign, after it was discovered that he used taxpayers' money for deluxe vacations."
Since he was removed from his judgeship, he'd be an ex-super-judge, no? Or perhaps a super-ex-judge?
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I'm picturing a spanish dude with a bull-ship and a gavel...
Will our Talented Framed Swedish Honey-trap Victim and Hero escape? Tune into the next episode of Assange ...
The purpose of existence is to make money.
We will bring you last week's news next week!
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Superjudge
Superman
You be the... "judge".
It's Baltazar Garzón.
Does this character even have any legal standing in England or Sweden? He certainly doesn't in Spain.
No way would this get me out of that embassy.
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
I think his name is Baltazar, not Balsazar.
"... ordered in-prison conversations between corrupt politicians and their lawyers to be monitored. This is legal in Spain if the goal is to prevent further crimes to be committed"
Is that so? Could you link to some proof of this assertion? We all have internet, you know.
This is becoming more and more media circus. Garzon has no credibility, as he acted as political activist, not a judge. But, perhaps, the best defense attorney for a mediawhore is another mediawhore - see also, fighting bullshit with bullshit, Michael Moore style.
In US, closest equivalent to Garzon would be Kenneth Starr or Spiro Agnew, or Lynne Stewart.
I live in Spain and they used to call him the "star judge", because he was always on the media, without getting nothing done, actually.
He made it again!
Why would the courageous and honourable man like Baltazar Garzon associate with a megalomaniacal, showboating, mentally ill (not to mention, traitorous) freak like Julian Assange?
Curious what the /, groupthink thinks of his attempt to extradite a Chilean and try him for crimes in a separate country. We all know the opinion on the US doing it, but what about Spain?
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
The paragraph of this news is manipulated and tries to disinform.
"This is legal in Spain if the goal is to prevent further crimes to be committed" FALSE. Allowed JUST in case of terrorism charges. Not applicable to the case he wiretapped. As this judge is politically compromised and the "separation of powers" is against his politics-truffled-past, always has friends ready to write in his favour.
Assange is doomed with this guy.
Actually, it's Baltasar, neither Balsazar, nor Baltazar... (just like the 3rd King Mage that travelled with Melchor and Gaspar to meet Jesuschrist in the Holy Bible... :-))))
I hope he can prevent Assange from being extradited to the united states. The united states government, which has offcourse 'nothing to hide' and is pro 'democracy', would like to 'have a word' with mr. Assange.
Didn't he lose his case and all the appeals?
You're probably too old to think, though.
Baltasar Garzón
(i am a spaniard) ....mmmm many things to make me wonder if this is the only lawyer assange should have.
Sorry for assange he better get more lawyers or at least ones with better work history.
Garzon directly asked for money to the owner of the bank he was judging for his conferences in the US (http://diariorc.com/?p=6950)
Garzon is accused by one spanish counter terrorist (whichever trust this might have) of hiding the real person in charge of spanish inmoral and illegal war against terrorism , by this time he became for some time a politician affiliated to the political party who was accused of supporting this death squadron.
Garzon was accused of not investigating a possible crime commited by the army and police minister or someone close of aborting a terrorist raid agains them
Dayum it's on now! Da game is ON!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Cool! He'll make a great cellmate for Assange at Gitmo.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
There's nothing to represent. Assanage has lost his case, and all appeals. He is to be deported. Hence why he jumped bail (which means he screwed all his supporters who posted it, they don't get their money back) and is hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy. This judge isn't going to accomplish shit. Either Ecuador will decide to grant him asylum or not, and if they do he'll either successfully get out of Britain or not. If the answer in either case is "not" he'll be deported to Sweden.
This judge is just pulling a stunt. Had he wanted to help fight extradition, that time was months ago. This guy is just trying to get his name in lights, something that it would seem he's succeeded at.
Will he be borrowing the cape and goggles from Cory Doctrow, for this latest exploit?
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Assange has already lost the extradition case and violated his bail conditions, there is nothing this guy can do.
For those who didn't get it right the first time.
How is he going to do that when Julian has fled his bail? Isn't Julian technically in another country right now since he is holed up in the embassy? Honestly, I think Julian has painted himself into a very small corner.
It was a rape so subtle that it took the incredible acumen of Swedish police prosecutors to detect it: the women themselves went to police to find out how to contact Assange after learning they both had sex unprotected, and after listening to their story the police told them "hey, you know what ? you've been raped". The prosecutor on the case is a man-hating feminist that once had a article about how to get back at and ruin the life of your former boyfriend that dumped you.
What evidence do you have to support your rather strange claims about Scandinavian law? Your claims are not in line with books or scholars on the subject. What are your credentials?
As a Scandinavian lawyer I have to disagree with your frankly unfounded claims on the basis of our legal history. Our law is built on the foundations of both Roman (Code Civil) and German (BGB) law. If that's not solid and strong then nothing is! Most countries in the world have similar foundations - with the exception of the former British colonies and some Muslim countries (mixed).
In modern times our laws have absolutely been constantly maintained and expanded with new laws from both national, regional and European sources. You do realize all the Scandinavian countries are subject to both the Council of Europe and EU law (either directly or indirectly)? According to most ratings, reviews and analysis human rights are better protected in Scandinavia than in the UK or US.
You are either ignorant or lying when you claim that Sweden or any other Scandinavian country would extradite a person to the US more easily. The US has been denied their own citizens on the basis that even US prisons are not satisfactory in terms of human rights according to our courts! The threat of the death penalty means a whole lot more to civilized countries where it's already illegal. It's also illegal under our laws to extradite if there's even the slightest chance that he could receive capital punishment! I can refer you to countless cases and verdicts.
cable/2005/02/05MADRID572
so umm we (the USA) used this judge for umm extraditions and ummm 9/11 stuff. and umm he does the USA circuit(guess teacher/lecture) often on the US tax payers dime. and ummmm.. he representing assage?
I smell bullshit.
"This is legal in Spain if the goal is to prevent further crimes to be committed (such as the inmate telling his lawyer to destroy evidence, or offshore funds)"
Not true. It is legal in Spain to prevent further crimes ONLY for terrorism cases (that communication was used in the past by terrorist to indicate to their accomplices what witnesses to kill to make their trials impossible or more difficult), so the statement in parentheses does not apply. Garzon knew very well that the wiretaps were illegal in any case since the charges where not of terrorism. Also, it is important to point that he tried to incriminate through the illegal wiretaps members of the then 2nd voted party in Spain (PP), and Garzón was previously in the nineties elected for parliament as a member of Spains then 1st voted party (PSOE), so there were some obvious conflicts of interest there.
Compromising the accused right to defend themselves is a very serious attack to the legal system.
Also, since he was disbarred previously, he was not judged for another case: asking for "donations" of thousands of $ to sponsor some conference courses (in which he where the only speaker) to some big companies and banks. The "donations" where paid, he received the lion share of those for the courses and a few months later he judged and put free the CEOs of some of those companies who had previously "donated" money that enden in his pockets. That sounds like bribes/extorsion to me.
So, IMO we could talk about a "super-corrupt ex-judge".
Why does the quoted part not appear in the linked Guardian article?