Julian Assange arrest warrant upheld by court

The world is a strange place when no one notices, or cares, that the offenders are always trying to silence the 99%.

originally posted by: flice

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...!"

No the case is not closed

Swedish prosecutors drop Julian Assange rape investigation

Swedish prosecutors have dropped their preliminary investigation into an allegation of rape against the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, bringing an end to a seven-year legal standoff.

The decision was taken after prosecutors concluded that “at this point, all possibilities to conduct the investigation are exhausted”, Sweden’s director of public prosecutions, Marianne Ny, said on Friday.

“In order to proceed with the case, Julian Assange would have to be formally notified of the criminal suspicions against him. We cannot expect to receive assistance from Ecuador regarding this. Therefore the investigation is discontinued.

“If he, at a later date, makes himself available, I will be able to decide to resume the investigation immediately.”

a reply to: fluff007

He jumped bail in the UK. That's a crime.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Have a new piece:

TThe newly-released emails show that the Swedish authorities were eager to give up the case four years before they formally abandoned proceedings in 2017 and that the CPS dissuaded them from doing so.

Some of the material has surfaced from an information tribunal challenge brought late last year by the Italian journalist Stefania Maurizi.

The CPS lawyer handling the case, who has since retired, commented on an article which suggested that Sweden could drop the case in August 2012. He wrote: “Don’t you dare get cold feet!!!”.

As the case dragged on, the Swedish director of public prosecutions, Marianne Ny, wrote to the CPS on 18 October 2013 explaining that she had few options left. “There is a demand in Swedish law for coercive measures to be proportionate,” she informed London.

“The time passing, the costs and how severe the crime is to be taken into account together with the intrusion or detriment to the suspect. Against this background, we have found us to be obliged to lift the detention order ... and to withdraw the European arrest warrant. If so this should be done in a couple of weeks. This would affect not only us but you too in a significant way.”

www.theguardian.com...

It's the UK, Sweden dropped it. God shave the Queen!

a reply to: PublicOpinion

It says the same thing. They can reopen the case at any point in time.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The allegations have been withdrawn, I have no idea how they could justify any investigations from now on. Maybe she referred to legal loopholes I'm unaware of, Sweden has a pretty tough stance regarding rape.

Also, I have no idea if she didn't just make it up in a conversation with some British bulldog, who told her not to get cold feet. You see where that is going, right?

a reply to: Xcathdra

You said you had little sympathy for him in the first place, why is that? For being the face of an organisation that has exposed war crimes? Or for the Paradise papers exposure? For real investigative journalism as opposed to the partisan propaganda we usually get in the mainstream media?

Do you really believe Assange is guilty of rape? The only crime he is guilty of is skipping bail and that was to avoid being prosecuted for rape. You do realise just the accusation of rape can completely destroy a persons life, and it is a well known tactic for doing just that.

Do you suppose he enjoyed his time in the embassy away from his wife and kids?

To go through all that for a cause he truly believes in suggests he has bigger balls than any of the scum who would like to see him disappear.

originally posted by: surfer_soul
Do you really believe Assange is guilty of rape?

No-one actually knows, do they? He has managed to escape legal processes so far, so we only have his word and the word of the abused.

However, there are many rapists who think they are innocent, and many celebrities get away with all sorts because they rely on the blind loyalty of supporters.

He has committed an offence in England for which he will now have to face the consequences - skipping bail.

a reply to: surfer_soul

Do you really believe Assange is guilty of rape?

unlike you - who have decieded a-priori - i have no idea - and wish to deffer the matter to a swedish court

however i am deeply suspicions of mr assanges over night change of attitude

prior to the rape allegation - mr assange was processing an application for permanant residency in sweden [ it would not give him citizen ship - he would have remained austrailia - but he would have been able to enter and leave at will ( he was previously required to renew visas ever so often ) ]

there was no mention of the " risk " that the swedes would deport him to the USA

then BAM

he is suddenly - despoerate to avoid sweden at any cost - now claiming thsat they will hand him over to the USA

does this strike you as rational ?????????????

i dont think it is

as almost everyone has pointed out - the brittish judiciary has a far better extradition agreement with the US

so why was mr assange desperate to avoid sweden ?

a reply to: surfer_soul

Because his actions contradict what he claims to represent. He claims to want to expose corruption and illegal actions by the US government and people within it however the info he releases shows no criminal activity. Releasing thousands of classified diplomatic cables that showed nothing was not done to expose anything. It was done because that is what Assange wanted.

He speaks on accountability yet when it comes to his own potential crimes he is above the law. He claims its a conspiracy to get him and yet offers no proof. He claims by going to Sweden he would have been sent to the US and he had nothing to support that claim. He then compounded that claim with several lies.

He claimed -
* - He would be prosecuted for treason in the US.
* - He would be sent to Gitmo.
* - He would face the death penalty.

For starters Assange is an Australian national so he cant be charged with treason in the US. He cant be sent to Gitmo because he is not an enemy combatant. Finally none of the laws he violated have death as a punishment.

He claimed he wanted to expose corruption and yet he threatened to sue a media outlet who obtained leak copies of the documents Assange was wanting to release. His claim was by leaking the info he would have suffered financially from that release. In other words its ok for him to receive stolen information to leak for financial gains however but it is not ok for another entity to do the exact same thing.

for starters anyways...

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: Xcathdra

The allegations have been withdrawn, I have no idea how they could justify any investigations from now on. Maybe she referred to legal loopholes I'm unaware of, Sweden has a pretty tough stance regarding rape.

Also, I have no idea if she didn't just make it up in a conversation with some British bulldog, who told her not to get cold feet. You see where that is going, right?

The charges were withdrawn by the prosecutor and not the accusations. As for the claims being made and your comment on not knowing if she made it up is a bit hypocritical to be honest. You take what Assange says at his word without knowing if he is making things up.

Why the double standard?

a reply to: Xcathdra

So he has double standards you think? I suppose it’s because he is secretly working for Russia or perhaps he fancies becoming some kind of Bond villain holding the world to account with the info he has on everything.

Speaking of his info releases do the Panama or Paradise papers show no illegal activity or do they just show the amount of tax dodging loop holes used by the elite?
Did the realease of the helicopter footage in Iraq not show the targeting of journalists on the scene? The

I clearly remember a US general or NSA chief going on about how Snowden and Assange were enemies of the US and should be punished for their crimes.

Perhaps that’s why they set up Assange with rape because they couldn’t get to him by other means. You know how these spooks work don’t you? Or are you living in a la la land where everything is done in due process, where there are no corrupt police, no corrupt judges and certainly no corrupt governments?

Of course Assange didn’t want to face trial in Sweden, if he was set up in the first place he would have little chance of proving his innocence.

I suppose you think Snowden should be extradited to the US for his “crimes” though eh? What about you Ignorant_ape was Snowden a traitor?

originally posted by: surfer_soul
Perhaps that’s why they set up Assange with rape because they couldn’t get to him by other means.

That's drivel, as you probably know. The way you refute allegations is to face your accusers in court. The nature of the rape allegations are well known and have been covered as part of the extradition process to Sweden, and endless appeals in the UK. Could it be that Assange fears getting to court in Sweden because he has something to hide and because he'll have to face the women who he is alleged to have abused? It would not be the first time a celebrity raped someone and tried to get away with it.

On extradition to the US. This has been covered in all the appeals over time, but in the recent Ruling the Judge said...

14. I accept that Mr Assange had expressed fears of being returned to the United States from a very early stage in the Swedish extradition proceedings but, absent any evidence from Mr Assange on oath, I do not find that Mr Assange's fears were reasonable. I do not accept that Sweden would have rendered Mr Assange to the United States. If that had happened there would have been a diplomatic crisis between the United Kingdom, Sweden and the United States which would have affected international relationships and extradition proceedings between the states.
15. Rather than rendering Mr Assange to the United States, if the US had initiated a request to extradite Mr Assange from Sweden, Sweden would have contacted this court and the judiciary here would have had to consider the request. Mr Assange would then have been able to raise any bars to extradition including fair trial and conditions of detention.

Source recent Ruling - opens in PDF

The fact is, if you hate Julian Assange , then no matter what allegations are thrown at him, no matter how absurd, you will jump on him. Text messages seem to prove that the whole thing is bogus, and if I was in his shoes, I would have done exactly the same thing and fled to the embassy.

text messages

On 17 August, SW wrote "JA did not want to use a condom".

On 20 August, while at the police station, SW wrote that she "did not want to put any charges on Julian Assange" but that "the police were keen on getting their hands on him".
According to the statement she was "chocked (sic shocked) when they arrested him" because she "only wanted him to take [an STD test]".

On 21 August, SW wrote that she "did not want to accuse" Julian Assange "for anything" and that it was the "police who made up the charges "

On 23 August, SW wrote that it was the police, not herself, who started the whole thing.

On 26 August, AA wrote that they ought to sell their stories for money to a newspaper.

On 28 August, AA wrote that they had a contact on the biggest Swedish tabloid and SW wrote that their lawyer negotiated with the tabloid.

The whole thing is a is just dodgy as hell, and if anything, the powers that be are the criminals here. These people that certain people believe are mini Gods.

and another thing :

occams razor should be used judiciously on the entire sweden // UK // USA " triangle "

one has to laugh at the " logic " of :

the claim the USA " wants " mr assange - who at the time was in the UK - so instead of just requesting extradition from the UK - " they " alledgedly fabricate a " rape accusation plot " - so that mmr assage will be extradited to sweden - because ONLY then can the " evil " USA then extradite him from sweden to the USA

its when you parse it down - the utterr absurdity is laid bare - and yes ^ is what conspiracists claim

why the fook didnt the "evil USA " just request direct extraditin fromm the UK to the USA ????`- it was that simple - prepare a warrannt in secret - serve it on the brittish govt - who have the UK police arrest him - and bam - straight into an extradition hearing

but [ according to the conspiracist believers ] no the entire security serrvices of 3 countries thought UK >> sweden >> USA was the " best option

and no one thought UK >> USA would be simpler

and people wonder why i take the piss out of people

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
and another thing :

occams razor should be used judiciously on the entire sweden // UK // USA " triangle "

one has to laugh at the " logic " of :

the claim the USA " wants " mr assange - who at the time was in the UK - so instead of just requesting extradition from the UK - " they " alledgedly fabricate a " rape accusation plot " - so that mmr assage will be extradited to sweden - because ONLY then can the " evil " USA then extradite him from sweden to the USA

its when you parse it down - the utterr absurdity is laid bare - and yes ^ is what conspiracists claim

why the fook didnt the "evil USA " just request direct extraditin fromm the UK to the USA ????`- it was that simple - prepare a warrannt in secret - serve it on the brittish govt - who have the UK police arrest him - and bam - straight into an extradition hearing

but [ according to the conspiracist believers ] no the entire security serrvices of 3 countries thought UK >> sweden >> USA was the " best option

and no one thought UK >> USA would be simpler

and people wonder why i take the piss out of people

Well, going into the embassy before they had the chance to do that might have something to do with it. And why say "evil america" It the government's that do bad and terrible things. No one is saying America is evil, but your government, and my own are def not saints!

a reply to: Jay-morris

ROFLMAO - you areutterly clueless as to the facts of this case :

there :

August 2010 - the Swedish Prosecutor's Office first issues an arrest warrant for Mr Assange. It says there are two separate allegations - one of rape and one of molestation. Mr Assange says the claims are "without basis"

December 2010 - Mr Assange is arrested in London and bailed at the second attempt

May 2012 - the UK's Supreme Court rules he should be extradited to Sweden to face questioning over the allegations

June 2012 - Mr Assange enters the Ecuadorean embassy in London

August 2012 - Ecuador grants asylum to Mr Assange, saying there are fears his human rights might be violated if he is extradited

source

so much for :

going into the embassy before they had the chance to do that might have something to do with it

thankyou - that made mmy day

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Jay-morris

ROFLMAO - you areutterly clueless as to the facts of this case :

there :

August 2010 - the Swedish Prosecutor's Office first issues an arrest warrant for Mr Assange. It says there are two separate allegations - one of rape and one of molestation. Mr Assange says the claims are "without basis"

December 2010 - Mr Assange is arrested in London and bailed at the second attempt

May 2012 - the UK's Supreme Court rules he should be extradited to Sweden to face questioning over the allegations

June 2012 - Mr Assange enters the Ecuadorean embassy in London

August 2012 - Ecuador grants asylum to Mr Assange, saying there are fears his human rights might be violated if he is extradited

source

so much for :

going into the embassy before they had the chance to do that might have something to do with it

thankyou - that made mmy day

Sorry, but how has that made your day? Am I missing something here?

As soon as he new that there was a chance he was going to be extradited to Sweden, he went into the embassy, which was the right thing to do especially when the rape claims are very dodgy to say the least.

So, Assange, who knows he is innocent, knows about the holes in the rape claim would have been thinking "why is Sweden powers that be doing this?"

I mean seriously, you really believe there is any truth in this rape claim, even after the text message releases. Do you hate the guy so much that you would be happy if he got done for rape, even though he is innocent. That is a bit sick!

If I jumped bail I would get done.
He still broke a crime so he should man up and face it.

originally posted by: testingtesting
If I jumped bail I would get done.
He still broke a crime so he should man up and face it.

Yeah but you have not got the most powerful government in the world after you!

Big difference!