4 ms·
> who rendered a detailed decision based on significant amounts of witness testimony This is factually incorrect. The UK High Court ruled only on the question
by trevelyan 11y ago
> who rendered a detailed decision based on significant amounts of witness testimony
This is factually incorrect. The UK High Court ruled only on the question of whether the European Arrest Warrant was valid. It did not consider the reasonableness of the allegations and dismissed defense attempts to challenge them on empirical grounds:
> "[Assange's objections] are matters which would be highly relevant at trial. But it is not for this court to determine whether the allegations may fail." (126)
- tptacek 11y agoSorry, but I think it's you who are incorrect in this instance: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html
- trevelyan 11y agoYes, you need to read that, particularly the subsection titled "Issue 2".
- tptacek 11y agoAll you have to do to refute your claim upthread is open that document, click "Find" in your browser menu, and type the word "rape". I think you may have misread my comment; maybe you're trying to argue that the High Court decision doesn't include witness testimony? If you look carefully at what I wrote, I didn't claim that it did.