WikiLeaks

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Do you really think Sweden would allow themselves to be pressurised by the US?

indeed like we already bend backwards.

whether the charges are trumped up or not. Questions must be raised.

why sweden let him leave
why sweden refused ecudors proposals of swedish police interview assange at embassy
why sweden refuse to give assurances no future granted deportion to america.

makes me very suspicious of the whole affair makes me wonder snatch squads already on standby to get him in USA.

crazy thing is why ecudor would think any north american nation would be anything but safe for assange.

I have strange funny feeling also ecador may use him as political pawn for own ways hand him over anyway.

Like USA got big bounty who they will pay handsomely for which country delivers his head. We got 3 way scrap.

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

The 2 women most like have been allowed a nice large sum of money though

Well I'll guess we might never find out if they are telling the truth or not since Mr Assange is evading any questioning or ability to be charged and go to court.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Damien

Well I'll guess we might never find out if they are telling the truth or not since Mr Assange is evading any questioning or ability to be charged and go to court.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think he was evading questioning. I thought he just doesn't want to be questioned be questioned in Sweden?

Anyway we're the ones getting screwed here.

We are obliged to abide by Sweden's extradition request by law. This isn't the Government deciding to help out the axis of Evil (i.e Sweden and America), it's the law. Sweden followed all the proper processes for making the request, we let him avail himself of the legal system here but there were no grounds for halting the request and so we had to extradite him. He runs away and hides in the Ecuadorian embassy but it's still our problem!

So now we have a minor international incident with Ecuador whilst trying to execute our legal obligation to Sweden who, some allege, are a front for the United States. This is the worst game of Piggy in the middle ever.

Originally Posted by Damien

Well I'll guess we might never find out if they are telling the truth or not since Mr Assange is evading any questioning or ability to be charged and go to court.

Perhaps its easier to get a dodgy conviction in Sweden compared to one in the UK? This is all to convenient mind you I am surprised he wasn't disappeared although I guess that would have stunk more than this

Originally Posted by danielf

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't think he was evading questioning. I thought he just doesn't want to be questioned be questioned in Sweden?

He said that by my understanding is that if the Swedish police wish to charge him they need to do so in their own jurisdiction, he can't be charged in absentia. Additionally part of the process is an interview/questioning before the charges are made. Sweden can 'question' him here but it serves no purpose because they have no legal authority in Britain.

---------- Post added at 15:54 ---------- Previous post was at 15:52 ----------

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

Perhaps its easier to get a dodgy conviction in Sweden compared to one in the UK? This is all to convenient mind you I am surprised he wasn't disappeared although I guess that would have stunk more than this

Why does he even need a conviction? We're not the ones charging him with anything (other than breaking his bail conditions). You don't need to be convicted to be extradited.

Originally Posted by Damien

Sweden haven't entered the row, they were already deeply in.

Well technically that's not true. Sweden have requested extradition from Britain. No diplomatic tensions existed. Britain has to honour extradition laws. No row existed.

Britain sent a threatening letter to Ecuador, telling them the UK could remove diplomatic status from Ecuador Embassy and then enter it to retrieve Assange should they choose to do so but that is a last resort.

This has now flared up tensions with Ecuador and a row has now erupted between Britain and Ecuador. As far as I know, Sweden has not made any demands to Ecuador until this afternoon, when it has summoned the Ecuador Ambassador and labelling it's decision to grant Asylum to Assange, unacceptable. Hence my original statement that Sweden now entering the row is correct.

Originally Posted by Mick

Well technically that's not true. Sweden have requested extradition from Britain. No diplomatic tensions existed. Britain has to honour extradition laws. No row existed.

Britain sent a threatening letter to Ecuador, telling them the UK could remove diplomatic status from Ecuador Embassy and then enter it to retrieve Assange should they choose to do so but that is a last resort.

This has now flared up tensions with Ecuador and a row has now erupted between Britain and Ecuador. As far as I know, Sweden has not made any demands to Ecuador until this afternoon, when it has summoned the Ecuador Ambassador and labelling it's decision to grant Asylum to Assange, unacceptable. Hence my original statement that Sweden now entering the row is correct.

Ok. Either way Sweden would have got involved because it's they he is running from. We're just the mugs in the middle.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

Perhaps its easier to get a dodgy conviction in Sweden compared to one in the UK? This is all to convenient mind you I am surprised he wasn't disappeared although I guess that would have stunk more than this

Or, radical suggestion here, maybe he is actually guilty and is desperately trying to get off the hook for serious sexual assault charges.

Originally Posted by danielf

I thought the snag was that the Diplomatic Status of the Embassy can be revoked, so the Police can simply go into the Embassy and arrest him there?

AFAIK the rules allowing revocation of status were put in place after PC Yvonne Fletcher was murdered and the killer fled justice. It's not a new law they have just come up with and I believe it's only been used once before.

Originally Posted by danielf

IMO, it would be a travesty if they'd revoke the Diplomatic Status of the Embassy though.

Why? It's not a citizen of Ecquador who is hiding out. It's someone trading on the fact the President of Ecquador was slagged off by the US and is willing to let him kip on the couch in their embassy as a GIRUY to the USA.

He was also happy to grab money from supporters to get bail and leave them hanging in the wind when he went running for cover.

Let him sit there as long as he wants and lift him the second he comes out for air. That said it would be terrible if there was a fire alarm there causing the building to be evacuated...

As I said previously, the puppet strings are far reaching from across the pond.

Originally Posted by Mick

As I said previously, the puppet strings are far reaching from across the pond.

But there isn't any proof of this and it doesn't make sense that they would go via Sweden instead of ourselves. This presumption may be letting someone accused of rape avoid the authorities so you would want something stronger than assumption...

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

The 2 women most like have been allowed a nice large sum of money though

If that was remotely true, why were they both 'supporters' of him, and if they are going to make up a story, why not make up a more serious one and straight away.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Derek

Why? It's not a citizen of Ecquador who is hiding out. It's someone trading on the fact the President of Ecquador was slagged off by the US and is willing to let him kip on the couch in their embassy as a GIRUY to the USA.

He was also happy to grab money from supporters to get bail and leave them hanging in the wind when he went running for cover.

Let him sit there as long as he wants and lift him the second he comes out for air. That said it would be terrible if there was a fire alarm there causing the building to be evacuated...

Because The UK would (seemingly) be the only country in the world that seems willing to not respect the international convention that Embassies are part of the territory of the country in question. In doing so, the UK is sticking two fingers up to the rest of the world, and saying 'We don't care about diplomatic convention'. If we want to invade your embassy we will.

The fact that this case happens to be about Assange is neither here nor there. I'm not a great fan. In fact, I think he's an irresponsible moron. I just think that diplomatic convention is there for a reason, and we should not pick and choose when we do and don't follow it.

Originally Posted by Derek

AFAIK the rules allowing revocation of status were put in place after PC Yvonne Fletcher was murdered and the killer fled justice. It's not a new law they have just come up with and I believe it's only been used once before.

I might be wrong, but there's no mention of it ever being used on Wiki, so my guess is that it would be a first.

Originally Posted by Damien

But there isn't any proof of this and it doesn't make sense that they would go via Sweden instead of ourselves.

The Evidence is right in front of us Damien, since when would we risk a potential diplomatic falling out over one man ?

This one man, who has been accused of Sexual Assault, big wow, he is only at the accused stage, you or I or some Joe Bloggs in the street can be accused of doing something, doesn't mean they are guilty of it. Assange has technically not been charged of the crime.

Sweden cannot storm another Countries Embassy on British soil. But Britain can and has made a strong threat that it can do so. Nothing can happen until someone makes a move, which is why I am guessing someone from across the pond, is leaning on Britain to make the first move and quickly.

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Mick

This one man, who has been accused of Sexual Assault, big wow, he is only at the accused stage, you or I or some Joe Bloggs in the street can be accused of doing something, doesn't mean they are guilty of it. Assange has technically not been charged of the crime.

Yeah he's not been charged with the crime as he is going all out to avoid extradition so he can be questioned.

As I see it there are two choices

1. He did it and is trying anything to save his skin
2. He didn't do it. The USA made it all up but instead of extraditing him from a country they have good ties with decided instead to frame him for a crime from a third country in the hope he goes there and gets extradited from country three to the US

I know which one my money is on.