Slashdot Mirror
Julian Assange Still Faces Legal Jeopardy In Three Countries (chicagotribune.com)
Though Sweden dropped an investigation into rape allegations against Julian Assange, "I can conclude, based on the evidence, that probable cause for this crime still exists," chief prosecutor Marianne Ny told reporters in Stockholm. An anonymous reader quotes Newsweek:
Ny stressed in her statement Friday that the investigation could be reopened before the statute of limitations on the case expires in 2020. If Assange "went into British custody, then the Swedes may well revisit their decision ⦠as extradition is suddenly easier", tweeted legal expert David Allen Green. Assange failed to answer a bail hearing when he took refuge in the embassy, resulting in an active warrant for his arrest by London's Metropolitan Police, punishable by up to a year in prison. Foremost of Assange's concerns is possible extradition to the U.S., where he he could be detained on espionage charges... Ecuador has offered Assange asylum should he be able to leave Britain.
Meanwhile, The Chicago Tribune reports that "a federal inquiry is widely assumed to be underway by prosecutors in Virginia." According to a former senior Justice Department official, who requested anonymity to discuss the Assange case, American authorities are now presented with a "cat and mouse game." "The decision on whether to indict him rests largely on whether they can get their hands on him," the former official said. Indicting the head of an organization such as WikiLeaks presents a huge number of First Amendment issues, but the Trump White House has indicated such issues may be less of a hurdle than during previous administrations. Prosecutors could seek a sealed indictment -- or may have one already -- to be unveiled if and when Assange strays within reach of American law enforcement, the former official said.
Meanwhile, The Chicago Tribune reports that "a federal inquiry is widely assumed to be underway by prosecutors in Virginia." According to a former senior Justice Department official, who requested anonymity to discuss the Assange case, American authorities are now presented with a "cat and mouse game." "The decision on whether to indict him rests largely on whether they can get their hands on him," the former official said. Indicting the head of an organization such as WikiLeaks presents a huge number of First Amendment issues, but the Trump White House has indicated such issues may be less of a hurdle than during previous administrations. Prosecutors could seek a sealed indictment -- or may have one already -- to be unveiled if and when Assange strays within reach of American law enforcement, the former official said.
US prosecution is a bit laughable. Assange did not steal any documents - they were given to him. As a non-US citizen, not resident in the US, all of whose actions took place outside of the US: he is clearly not subject to US jurisdiction.
I'm sure the US would love to prosecute him, but doing so would be a mockery of justice.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
That's begging the question. Of course she can, if the consent was given on false information or under duress. That is why there is a case to be answered in the first place, to establish that, using proper procedures, in a court of law.
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
The US is no longer a nation of laws but of men with power.
Hm. Tell that to the judge who smacked down Trump's muslim ban.
There's no doubt Trump would love to implement something similar to Putin's kleptocracy, but he's stupid. So there's that.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
It took Putin a while to beat down dissent. The sad part about Russia is that even though it was corrupt, they had a functional democracy and a free press for a few years. All murdered/imprisoned, now.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Yes, here you actually need reason to believe a crime has been committed in order to incarcerate someone. That seems superior to me.
You need that in Sweden too. The difference is that Sweden does not have a conveyor belt system of trial court judges that rubberstamps arraignments and arrest orders for cases they have no background knowledge about.
Because the arrest charges can differ from the trial charges, there's less of the American practice of tossing everything you can on the wall in the hope that enough sticks.
There's also a safeguard in that can sue for restitution for the time spent jailed if the case doesn't go to court. So it's not done lightly. In fact, that it isn't done lightly is what allowed Assange to leave the country.