Wikileaks' Julian Assange loses extradition appeal

reply to post by JohnySeagull


Must be down, I have tried numerous times to access the site and it comes up blank or it wont load. Is it the correct link?

I saw Julians press conference outside the Courthouse on the news tonight.
And he mentioned a website where those who were interested could keep up with the latest and also view the court papers from todays case..

This is the website he mentioned...

www.swedenversusassange.com...

Statement from Assange after his Appeal was rejected by two judges at the High Court in London:

Originally posted by Laurauk
Every stage he looses his appeals process, the easier it will be for the US Authorities to, launch their extradition case, to Sweden, after all Sweden does have the same extradition treaty, as the UK does when it comes to the US, as well as the E.U.

I fear if he is sent back to Sweden, it will be a staging process for him to be transferred to the US. Or again to get him over there so they can silence him for good.

edit on 2-11-2011 by Laurauk because: (no reason given)

If he's in the UK, and being extradited to Sweden ( Not to the US) and Sweden's Extradition agreement with the US is the exact same as the UK's..
How exactly does that make it "easier" for the US?
according to the material posted, it's exactly the same...just no cushy mansion to stay in.

I support Assange as long as WL is dropping info on unethical and criminal acts...but lately he's just been enjoying a vacation.

I will state now that History will be very kind to Assange.
His and WL's actions have inspired the massive global demonstrations and protests you see today.
He kick started it all.

reply to post by BadNinja68

If he's in the UK, and being extradited to Sweden ( Not to the US) and Sweden's Extradition agreement with the US is the exact same as the UK's..

The laws are not the same..
It's much easier for the US to extradite him from Sweden..

reply to post by backinblack


Well the Extradition laws are the same, Both countries fall under the EU Laws for Extradition agreement between the EU and the USA.

EU & USA Extradition Agreement

Either way it could be a long processed wait, if Assange's lawyers have their way, I for one, do hope they are given the right to appeal this judgement.

reply to post by Laurauk


The distinction people are trying to make with regards to extradition revolves around rendition and the secret CIA prisons. The argument by some is since Sweden allowed the extrajudicial operations that they would allow it for Assange.

Assange and his lawyers have made that argument along with the "fear mongering tactics" by also suggesting -
* - If Assange is extradicted to the US, he would face the death penalty
* - Assange would be charged with treason
* - Assange would be held in Gitmo

The above comes from his lawyers during the main extradition appeal in London. The problem is Assnage is Austrailian, not American and as such, cant be charged with treason. He was not captured on a battle field and if any charges are filed, they would be Federal Domestic, and not UCMJ so no, he cant be sent to gitmo. The list of "possible" charges do not carry the death penalty.

Hypothetically speaking, if Assange were charged he would face like 40 years in Prison if that. Again, hypothetically.

The media argument would be an interesting defense. People are under the wrong impression when they state that media is immune from prosecution by releasing / publishing classified documents. The Pentagon papers, which is the basis of their argument, is misunderstood by people.

The Pentagon Papers ruling by the US Supreme Court only addressed the Prior restraint issue. It did not grant any type of ruling / immunity to media. The 2 jounalists who put the story together were charged for possessing and printing classified documents. It went to court, and during the opening phases of the trial the PA errored with regards to evidence / procedure resulting in a mistrial.

All that aside the argument Sweden would be more willing to extradite to the US, imo, makes no sense. In addition to the EU extradition guidelines, the Us and UK have individual legal agreements that fall outside of the EU guidelines. If the Us wanted Assange, they would have stood a better chance getting him from the UK than sweden.

If Assange and his lawyers are correct, then Assange should return to sweden and expose the accusers as having ulterior motives, sue for defamation / slander / libel / whatever its called in Europe and recoup losses.

One part of your comment, I would to like to reply to: Please do not think I am ignoring all your comments. But this one in particular. I would like to respond to.

The Pentagon Paperrs ruling by the US Supreme Court only addressed the Prior restraint issue. It did not grant any type of ruling / immunity to media. The 2 jounalists who put the story together were charged for possessing and printing classified documents. It went to court, and during the opening phases of the trial the PA errored with regards to evidence / procedure resulting in a mistrial.

The US Supreme Courts Ruling would not apply to British Media Outlets or British Newspapers. Which are under UK Liable Laws. If it is proven to be the case they have a case to answer they would be tried in the UK under those laws first before, there is even a case is launched for them, to be sent to the USA to face justice there. But If say the owners of those Newspapers, Media Outlets etc lived in the US and not in the UK, then they could face justice under US laws. The media and the press, are protected under the freedom of the press, in the UK.

The is the distinction I am trying to make in this case.

As for the rest of your comments, I have no disagreement with them.

reply to post by Laurauk


No worries, people are free to respond in any matter they chose to my posts and I dont take offense to it. I actually welcome it since more than one view point is a good thing.

While I understand what you are saying about British Law, British law wouldnt cover Assange. The reason I brought up the Pentagon papers was to point out a common counter argument with freedom of the press argument people make.

The criteria for whistle blower revolves around the disclosure of criminal activity. Since Assange has released documents that dont show criminal activity, trying to use that as a defense would be quickly disassembled by the prosecution.

As far as British law the Us has filed charges and was granted the extradition of hackers who operated out of the UK that targeted US military databases.

Location within a foreign country doesnt make a person immune from prosecution in another country. As far as British laws vs. foreign law, all we need to do is look at Assanges case with Sweden. Under British law the "rape" charge would never see the inside of a court room since assanges actions under British law is not considered rape / criminal offense.

Had Assange stuck to the stated goals of wikileaks I think he would have been fine.

reply to post by Xcathdra


The point I am trying to get across. Is with regards to the Papers such as the Guardian, etc, who published some but not all of the leaks which was provided to them. By either Assange or a third party. It was asked if they could, come under the radar of the US Justice system also.

Is why I stated under UK Liable laws it would not stand. Unless the Government brought in legislation to change the liable laws to allow this.

reply to post by Laurauk


I understand what you are saying. I am pointing out that the actions of manning and assange broke US federal law. The British courts would not have any jurisdiction aside from an extradition hearing.

Either way im curious where this will go.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
I meant is Bradley Manning still in solitary confinement not JA.

They moved him to medium-security facility in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, in april, supposedly he is "allowed" to "interact" with other inmates.

If anyone really thinks the US will not go to any lengths to have Assange extradited to the US. May I present you this. This video footage will show you the lengths the US will go to, to have someone moved to the US. Even if it is to have the silenced. Once he is on Swedish Soil. He is gone that is for sure.

reply to post by Laurauk


Little more than 2 years going through the extradition process from Thailand. A 3 week trial in federal court which included testimony from people who were also arrested and charged who worked for Mr. Bout.

Selling weapons and releasing classified information, while both being serious, are difficult to compare to each other.

Anyone know if Assange is appealing the extradition loss?

reply to post by Xcathdra


Have not heard of anything yet, His lawyers have 9 days I think to go back to the high court to see if the Judges will grant their appeal or refuse to grant it. Which I doubt they will refuse the appeal.