5 ms·

Possibly. However, if it was your life on the line, wouldn't you want assurances? I know I would. Especially if you look at what happened to others. You state

Possibly. However, if it was your life on the line, wouldn't you want assurances? I know I would. Especially if you look at what happened to others. You state that Sweden can't extradite him to the US. Given the fact that most of the laws created in most western countries (ranging from tax law to civil law) are often not extremely well defined (or frankly not even well thought out / put together), and can often easily be interpreted in very different ways by different judges, I can totally understand his point of view. At the end of the day, as long as Ecuador doesn't kick him out, all he has to do is wait for the statute of limitations to expire. He's got leverage. If Sweden really wanted a solution to this, they would've done this years ago.

ProfChronos 10y ago
"You state that Sweden can't extradite him to the US. Given the fact that most of the laws created in most Western countries (ranging from tax law to civil law) are often not extremely well defined, and can be interpreted in different ways by different judges, I can totally understand his point of view." => It is not a matter of justice system (common law vs civil law) or law definition, but a matter of independence. And when it comes to independence, Europe has shown a strong will not to extradite people to the US. Add the media pressure around Assange's case and you get a good assurance that he won't be extradited to the US
- render_ceasar 10y ago
  Then again this actually happened: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition#Sweden https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition#Swed...
  - ProfChronos 10y ago
    It happened for alleged terrorists no one knew about - apart from people working in security/intelligence/military services - and Sweden felt extremely shameful. Not sure they want to do that again with somebody almost every has heard of and who hasn't been a threat to Sweden
    - render_ceasar 10y ago
      To paraphrase grandparent, if it were you, would you be willing to risk it? It won't be much consolation to you if it happens and somebody in Sweden might feel ashamed about it.
- Tharkun 10y ago
  I seem to remember Belgium extraditing someone for plotting to attack US soldiers on Belgian base. When the US barks, Europe rolls over. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nizar_Trabelsi https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nizar_Trabelsi
  - efdee 10y ago
    Belgium was recently fined for this by the EU. So I'm not sure Europe is the one that rolled over.
    - kahnpro 10y ago
      Yeah but if you're Assange, some kind of punishment like a silly little fine later on really doesn't matter if you end up kidnapped.
      - Tharkun 10y ago
        Belgium routinely gets convicted and fined for its incredibly poor treatment of prisoners. In fact, it's been convicted TWENTY TWO times for locking up mentally ill prisoners in regular (overcrowded) prisons without treatment.
pascalmemories 10y ago
> all he has to do is wait for the statute of limitations to expire. The Swedish investigation may well expire (parts have already). This has never really been about the Swedish charges. The English charges (relating to failing to comply with bail) do not expire. Very few offences in English law expire - something I'm sure will surprise Americans who are used to relatively short statute of limitations on even some serious crimes (e.g. the Bill Cosby sexual assault allegations). England routinely prosecutes and jails people for alleged offences 50 & 60 years ago; many are elderly men in their 80's & 90's with little chance of mounting any sort of defence due to their age, but that's another issue. Arrange cannot wait out the English charges and England is well documented as an enthusiastic participant in torture and rendition of both it's own citizens and foreign nationals. The UK-US extradition treaty is a shocking travesty of justice and is routinely used to send people from the UK to the US for activity carried out in the UK and considered lawful in the UK but which has upset US authorities. [1] He has good reason to remain in the Embassy. Unfortunately he's likely to be there for many years to come and either be grabbed when he requires hospital treatment at some point in the future, or, the UK will decide it can live with some diplomatic protests and expulsion of UK diplomats after sending the SAS in to grab him from the embassy and hand him over to the US. [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-14339901 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-14339901
peeters 10y ago
> At the end of the day, as long as Ecuador doesn't kick him out, all he has to do is wait for the statute of limitations to expire. Don't know about Sweden, but in the U.S. the statute of limitations is not granted to those fleeing from the law. > No statute of limitations shall extend to any person fleeing from justice. - 18 U.S.C 3290 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3290 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3290):
- sorenjan 10y ago
  Some of the charges against him has already expired, the rape charge expires in august 2020.
sorenjan 10y ago
Forgive me, but this comment reads like yet more FUD. Do you have anything to add except more scare tactics? Of course I'd like assurances regarding anything with my life on the line, but why would I be special? Why would Assange be special? The law is the law, and an important principle in western law is that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. Should you or I be allowed to flee abroad and then demand to be questioned where we are? Sweden's government can't give any assurances beforehand, since every case must be judged independently. Sweden can't extradite Assange anywhere after he's been extradited to Sweden from the UK without the UK's permission [0, 1]. If the US needs Sweden and the UK to cooperate, why wouldn't they just ask the UK from the start, who's a much closer allied? [0] http://jtl.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/04/Forstein_53-CJTL-363.pdf http://jtl.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/04/F... [1] http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/07/wikileaks.assange/index.html http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/07/wikileaks.assange/index...
- james-watson 10y ago
  This is an absurdly naive view of a utopian hyper-rationalist. The laws are created by those in power to serve those in power. They do not stand on their own, because they are enforced by cops, lawyers and judges, who are people. These people choose to enforce the law based on the situation at hand, and this can lead to a large disparity in outcomes given technically similar cases. Assange and Snowden will both rot in Guantanamo the second they leave their safe houses. If you think otherwise, you are absurdly naive to the geopolitics of the world we live in.
- Lawtonfogle 10y ago
  He has a special case because they have been treating this as a special case from the start. Had he not been wanted for something beyond the official claim then he wouldn't have been treated as he is
notahacker 10y ago
If he sincerely believed his life was on the line from people that were willing to creatively reinterpret the law to get him to the US, he probably wouldn't have twice waited until the day there were no further legal impediments to him being prosecuted in Sweden before changing jurisdiction. On the other hand, insisting that superfluous assurances are made by bodies that don't have any legal authority to make them is a very good excuse for not going anywhere.
toomanybeersies 10y ago
Look at Kim Dotcom for a counterpoint. He's been fighting extradition for what, 4 or 5 years now? New Zealand is just as much a lapdog of the USA as Sweden, and Dotcom actually has had charges laid.
- MrMullen 10y ago
  Dotcom is a New Zealand citizen facing charges within the borders of New Zealand. New Zealand just can't grab on of its citizens and toss them out.
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    This is incorrect. The US is attempting to extradite Dotcom from New Zealand for violating US law outside of US jurisdiction. I don't like the guy, but let's not lie about it.
  - toomanybeersies 10y ago
    Dotcom is not a New Zealand citizen. He is a German citizen and a New Zealand resident. He was specifically barred from a path to citizenship and owning property because he failed the good character requirement.
- Kristine1975 10y ago
  >New Zealand is just as much a lapdog of the USA as Sweden This doesn't sound like something a lapdog would do (February 2016): http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/296076/us-requests-fast-track-for-dotcom-case http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/296076/us-requests-fa... Lawyers for the US were at the High Court in Auckland today, where they asked Justice Asher to give the appeal priority and set an early date for the hearing. Justice Asher declined that request but set a date for August.
  - lostlogin 10y ago
    The current New Zealand leadership are worse than lapdogs. The goings on with Hollywood contracts (The Hobbit), Dotcom and spy agency leadership, TPPA etc etc are shameful. The lengths the PM goes to get in a photo with Obama etc etc. USA asks, we say yes. It's gross. A shining light is New Zealand's judiciary who seem fairly offside with political leadership.

ProfChronos 10y ago

"You state that Sweden can't extradite him to the US. Given the fact that most of the laws created in most Western countries (ranging from tax law to civil law) are often not extremely well defined, and can be interpreted in different ways by different judges, I can totally understand his point of view." => It is not a matter of justice system (common law vs civil law) or law definition, but a matter of independence. And when it comes to independence, Europe has shown a strong will not to extradite people to the US. Add the media pressure around Assange's case and you get a good assurance that he won't be extradited to the US

render_ceasar 10y ago
Then again this actually happened: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition#Sweden https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition#Swed...
- ProfChronos 10y ago
  It happened for alleged terrorists no one knew about - apart from people working in security/intelligence/military services - and Sweden felt extremely shameful. Not sure they want to do that again with somebody almost every has heard of and who hasn't been a threat to Sweden
  - render_ceasar 10y ago
    To paraphrase grandparent, if it were you, would you be willing to risk it? It won't be much consolation to you if it happens and somebody in Sweden might feel ashamed about it.
Tharkun 10y ago
I seem to remember Belgium extraditing someone for plotting to attack US soldiers on Belgian base. When the US barks, Europe rolls over. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nizar_Trabelsi https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nizar_Trabelsi
- efdee 10y ago
  Belgium was recently fined for this by the EU. So I'm not sure Europe is the one that rolled over.
  - kahnpro 10y ago
    Yeah but if you're Assange, some kind of punishment like a silly little fine later on really doesn't matter if you end up kidnapped.
    - Tharkun 10y ago
      Belgium routinely gets convicted and fined for its incredibly poor treatment of prisoners. In fact, it's been convicted TWENTY TWO times for locking up mentally ill prisoners in regular (overcrowded) prisons without treatment.

pascalmemories 10y ago

> all he has to do is wait for the statute of limitations to expire. The Swedish investigation may well expire (parts have already). This has never really been about the Swedish charges. The English charges (relating to failing to comply with bail) do not expire. Very few offences in English law expire - something I'm sure will surprise Americans who are used to relatively short statute of limitations on even some serious crimes (e.g. the Bill Cosby sexual assault allegations). England routinely prosecutes and jails people for alleged offences 50 & 60 years ago; many are elderly men in their 80's & 90's with little chance of mounting any sort of defence due to their age, but that's another issue. Arrange cannot wait out the English charges and England is well documented as an enthusiastic participant in torture and rendition of both it's own citizens and foreign nationals. The UK-US extradition treaty is a shocking travesty of justice and is routinely used to send people from the UK to the US for activity carried out in the UK and considered lawful in the UK but which has upset US authorities. [1] He has good reason to remain in the Embassy. Unfortunately he's likely to be there for many years to come and either be grabbed when he requires hospital treatment at some point in the future, or, the UK will decide it can live with some diplomatic protests and expulsion of UK diplomats after sending the SAS in to grab him from the embassy and hand him over to the US. [1] http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-14339901 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-14339901

peeters 10y ago

> At the end of the day, as long as Ecuador doesn't kick him out, all he has to do is wait for the statute of limitations to expire. Don't know about Sweden, but in the U.S. the statute of limitations is not granted to those fleeing from the law. > No statute of limitations shall extend to any person fleeing from justice. - 18 U.S.C 3290 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3290 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3290):

sorenjan 10y ago
Some of the charges against him has already expired, the rape charge expires in august 2020.

sorenjan 10y ago

Forgive me, but this comment reads like yet more FUD. Do you have anything to add except more scare tactics? Of course I'd like assurances regarding anything with my life on the line, but why would I be special? Why would Assange be special? The law is the law, and an important principle in western law is that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. Should you or I be allowed to flee abroad and then demand to be questioned where we are? Sweden's government can't give any assurances beforehand, since every case must be judged independently. Sweden can't extradite Assange anywhere after he's been extradited to Sweden from the UK without the UK's permission [0, 1]. If the US needs Sweden and the UK to cooperate, why wouldn't they just ask the UK from the start, who's a much closer allied? [0] http://jtl.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/04/Forstein_53-CJTL-363.pdf http://jtl.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2015/04/F... [1] http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/07/wikileaks.assange/index.html http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/12/07/wikileaks.assange/index...

james-watson 10y ago
This is an absurdly naive view of a utopian hyper-rationalist. The laws are created by those in power to serve those in power. They do not stand on their own, because they are enforced by cops, lawyers and judges, who are people. These people choose to enforce the law based on the situation at hand, and this can lead to a large disparity in outcomes given technically similar cases. Assange and Snowden will both rot in Guantanamo the second they leave their safe houses. If you think otherwise, you are absurdly naive to the geopolitics of the world we live in.
Lawtonfogle 10y ago
He has a special case because they have been treating this as a special case from the start. Had he not been wanted for something beyond the official claim then he wouldn't have been treated as he is

notahacker 10y ago

If he sincerely believed his life was on the line from people that were willing to creatively reinterpret the law to get him to the US, he probably wouldn't have twice waited until the day there were no further legal impediments to him being prosecuted in Sweden before changing jurisdiction. On the other hand, insisting that superfluous assurances are made by bodies that don't have any legal authority to make them is a very good excuse for not going anywhere.

toomanybeersies 10y ago

Look at Kim Dotcom for a counterpoint. He's been fighting extradition for what, 4 or 5 years now? New Zealand is just as much a lapdog of the USA as Sweden, and Dotcom actually has had charges laid.

MrMullen 10y ago
Dotcom is a New Zealand citizen facing charges within the borders of New Zealand. New Zealand just can't grab on of its citizens and toss them out.
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  This is incorrect. The US is attempting to extradite Dotcom from New Zealand for violating US law outside of US jurisdiction. I don't like the guy, but let's not lie about it.
- toomanybeersies 10y ago
  Dotcom is not a New Zealand citizen. He is a German citizen and a New Zealand resident. He was specifically barred from a path to citizenship and owning property because he failed the good character requirement.
Kristine1975 10y ago
>New Zealand is just as much a lapdog of the USA as Sweden This doesn't sound like something a lapdog would do (February 2016): http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/296076/us-requests-fast-track-for-dotcom-case http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/296076/us-requests-fa... Lawyers for the US were at the High Court in Auckland today, where they asked Justice Asher to give the appeal priority and set an early date for the hearing. Justice Asher declined that request but set a date for August.
- lostlogin 10y ago
  The current New Zealand leadership are worse than lapdogs. The goings on with Hollywood contracts (The Hobbit), Dotcom and spy agency leadership, TPPA etc etc are shameful. The lengths the PM goes to get in a photo with Obama etc etc. USA asks, we say yes. It's gross. A shining light is New Zealand's judiciary who seem fairly offside with political leadership.