Julian Assange arrest warrant upheld by court

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: gortex

He jumped bail so no shock the UK warrant was not dismissed.

Secondly im not sure why everyone keeps going on about Swedish-US extradition. It would be easier extraditing from the UK than Sweden since the US and UK have separate extradition agreements that are more in depth than Swedish-EU agreements.

Also Sweden never dismissed their charges against Assange. They "froze" the case until such time Assange can be interviewed.

Sweden did drop the case..... in a statement they said that his time in exile matched the punishment which he could have received should he have been convicted. So... its closed...

The uk case is absurd... its a "we have to find some kind of excuse...!"

I thought Assange was donald’s friend. He helped him get elected, then what's he worrying about.


Assange and Donald are very close...right. He wanted him to get elected so much.

This is the summary of the ruling:

Assange ruling 13 Feb

I think Assange has been told to "man up" and face the fact he broke UK law. The ruling also bursts the bubble that Assange is "arbitrarily detained" and bursts a few myths he has collected on the way. Read the ruling. Quite interesting.

62. Having weighed up the factors for and against and considered Mr Summers’ arguments I find arrest is a proportionate response even though Mr Assange has restricted his own freedom for a number of years. Defendants on bail up and down the country, and requested persons facing extradition, come to court to face the consequences of their own choices. He should have the courage to do so too.

63. It is certainly not against the public interest to proceed. Whether section 6 proceedings are initiated will depend on Mr Assange’s circumstances (such as health) at the time he is produced to the court. If section 6 proceedings are launched, Mr Assange can then plead guilty or put forward a reasonable cause for his non-attendance and the court will then adjudicate. If found guilty the court will have the sentencing options available to it including that of committal to the Crown Court if the court finds its sentencing options to be too limited.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: SprocketUK
Is it really in the public interest to prosecute him for breach of bail if the original charges were withdrawn though?

I think the idea is that it's not in the public interest to make exceptions in the law just because people are famous.
That makes things unfair to ordinary people who are still expected to obey the law, and don't get declarations of immunity.

Tricky one, really.
Yes he failed to adhere to his bail conditions, was anyone hurt by it though? was justice thwarted?
Will our country be a better place for spending money prosecuting him?

I really don't think so.

originally posted by: SprocketUK
Tricky one, really.

No it ain't. You cannot make exceptions in the case of a celebrity. Let Assange escape legal process, then why not a thousand and one other people who are awaiting the consequences of skipping bail, some of whom may have had better reasons? As Judge Arbothnot said in her ruling (see above post), it is for the court to decide where to take his crime.

a reply to: SprocketUK
Perhaps they would not try very hard, let him off lightly.
But even so, it would not be a good precedent to say so in advance.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: gortex

It will be nice to see him jailed.
I hope it happens soon.

The usage of "Nice" is a little personal don't you think?

a reply to: Planet teleX

So?

This space available...

a reply to: Planet teleX
She's just still feeling butthurt that the intel released by Wikileaks/Julian recently has largely hurt her inspiring leader, Hillary, and not so much the Donald. No doubt (despite what she might say) she'd be praising Julian and calling for his immediate release and pardon if it was the other way around.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Planet teleX

So?

My mistake, I guess you two know each other. What did he do to you that makes you wish a prison sentence on him? I'll understand if you're unable to say...

originally posted by: Planet teleX
What did he do to you that makes you wish a prison sentence on him?

I appreciate you did not point this comment at me, but let me give you my slant.

Assange jumped bail in the UK and will be arrested for that offence. In court he will be able to plead his case and may, or may not, be sent to prison. That's up to the court. The Ruling yesterday was against Assange's assertion that the offence should be dropped without due process, thus treating him as an exception to English law. I am pleased the Judge reiterated the fact that his crime must be tried in a court and not just dismissed.

a reply to: TobyFlenderson

If the US does have some secret indictment and have him extradited, it will be the beginning of the end for both US and UK governments.

a reply to: paraphi

What myths are you referring too?

Assange restricted his own freedom as the judge puts it, because he was set up for a claim of rape in Sweden where he would have been extradited to and would have faced a long time in jail had he be found guilty. That case has since been dropped though.

The US also wanted him before the Trump administration. I seem to recall Hillary called for a drone strike on him even..

originally posted by: surfer_soul
What myths are you referring too?

Assange restricted his own freedom as the judge puts it, because he was set up for a claim of rape in Sweden where he would have been extradited to and would have faced a long time in jail had he be found guilty. That case has since been dropped though.

Firstly, we don't know whether Assange was "set up" as a rapist because he never actually got as far as defending himself in court. All the appeals in the UK against his extradition to Sweden dealt with the legitimacy of the Swedish laws.

Secondly, the second Ruling bursts a few myths around Assanges fears of extradition and "rendering" to the US, the UN stuff about "arbitrary detention" and so on. Read the Ruling, it;s all quite clear. Assanage is not above English law.

Ruling opens in PDF

a reply to: paraphi

I always found him to be hypocritical in that he attacks government for breaking the law and his mantra is to expose it and hold people accountable yet when it comes to Assange and his own actions he doesnt apply the same standards. My sympathy for Assange was low to start with and when he and his lawyers blatantly lied to everyone about the reasons against extradition to Sweden what little sympathy was left disappeared.

a reply to: paraphi

I too am interested in justice being served, I'm just not searching for an outcome based on my personal feelings. I mean, what reason do I have to feel personal about his case? "Sillyolme" it seems, has a connection to Assange's case and unless they voluntarily share (and with legal permission) we should all respect their right to privacy.

a reply to: Sillyolme

He shouldn't be jailed. He hasn't even been officially charged with a crime in US. Trump is giving him a pardon.

Why is he worried, his buddy Trump is president and will pardon him….am I right.

Doesn’t Trump have his back ?

originally posted by: fluff007
a reply to: Sillyolme

He shouldn't be jailed. He hasn't even been officially charged with a crime in US. Trump is giving him a pardon.

Sealed indictments are just that.. sealed. So its possible there are charges. The PA in Sweden nor the court dismissed his rape charges. The PA withdrew them and suspended the case until such time Assange can be interviewed. Finally he jumped bail in the UK - a criminal offense with penalties. Or are people suggesting the legal system should treat Assange different than others?

Assange has always been free to leave the embassy any time he wished. His exile was self imposed and his own fault.