7 ms·

The Lauri Love case proves there’s zero probability of Assange being extradited to the US. He’s wanted here for skipping bail. The government can’t let the prec

by gaius 9y ago

The Lauri Love case proves there’s zero probability of Assange being extradited to the US. He’s wanted here for skipping bail. The government can’t let the precedent be set that you can get away with it, or everyone would do it.

jacquesm 9y ago
I don't think it proves that. I think that the US would like to get their hands on JA a lot more than they ever wanted to get their hands on Lauri Love.
- gaius 9y ago
  Also, Gary McKinnon in 2012.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    Both are UK citizens, Assange definitely is not, besides that he was never - as far as we know - on a wanted list of people wanted specifically for any computer related crimes but for an arguably much more serious offense. Also: Assange's fear was not to be extradited from the UK to the USA but from Sweden. Whether that is realistic or not is another matter entirely but there is some precedent.
    - gsnedders 9y ago
      > Also: Assange's fear was not to be extradited from the UK to the USA but from Sweden. Whether that is realistic or not is another matter entirely but there is some precedent. If he's extradited from the UK to Sweden, they then they UK consent to a further extradition from Sweden, and he can fight extradition in both the UK and Sweden. (Unless, of course, they go for an "extraordinary" extradition, which seems unlikely in such a high-profile case.)
    - rbobby 9y ago
      How afraid is he though? Not afraid enough to tweet an offer to "agree to US extradition" if Obama showed clemency to Manning.
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        Obama did, and Assange reneged.
        ElCapitanMarkla 9y ago
        I don't understand why this comment is getting down voted? Obama granted clemency over a year ago, and Assange is still in the embassy...
- pvg 9y ago
  What would the US do with Assange? He hasn't been indicted. It's not obvious what crime he'd be charged with and how a case against him could proceed let alone produce a conviction.
  - monocasa 9y ago
    It was leaked in the Stratfor emails that they have a secret indictment against Assange. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfor-emails-a-secret-indictment-against-assange-20120228 https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfo...
    - FireBeyond 9y ago
      That's a very biased interpretation of the very article you quote. Stratfor, a _private company_, with no connections to the DOJ, had one of its employees say in an internal email seven years ago that they had an indictment. Based on "conversations" with "people". In among literally thousands of emails doing little more than smearing Assange and Martin. And this was in context to Bradley Manning, though no confirmation of the indictment was mentioned in the grand jury. I have zero love for Assange. Quite a bit of contempt, actually. But it's not particularly verifiable to note that "they" have a "secret" indictment that hasn't been heard of much since a private security firm rumored it seven years ago.
      - monocasa 9y ago
        What else could it mean?
        FireBeyond 9y ago
        That it was a rumor. The parent to my post painted it a verifiable fact. "There is a secret indictment against him. See this leak.", when in fact said leak verifies nothing of the sort.
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        It is sort of the problem with secret indictments though, they are secret. So absence of proof is not the same as proof of absence.
toyg 9y ago
“Everyone” is not going to have an embassy aiding and abetting you; and any diplomat or spy worth his/her salt already has procedures to skip the country. The principle is a fig leaf on top of a political issue. This situation will not change until a different party gets in power, carrying a different view of the UK’s relationship with their traditional military allies.
- gaius 9y ago
  This situation will not change until a different party gets in power, carrying a different view of the UK’s relationship with their traditional military allies. I’m not sure the PM actually has the power to do that. Assange is wanted right now for skipping bail. No government is going to pass an Act declaring that not-a-crime.
  - leereeves 9y ago
    What's the penalty for that crime? If extradition to the US was absolutely impossible, Assange might be willing to turn himself in and suffer the penalty in order to regain his freedom.
    - gaius 9y ago
      What's the penalty for that crime Max 12 months in prison. The ONLY way Assange’s actions make sense is if he expects to be found guilty in Sweden.
      - leereeves 9y ago
        > The ONLY way Assange’s actions make sense is if he expects to be found guilty in Sweden. Or in the US, where there was (still is?) an active criminal investigation of Wikileaks for publishing government secrets.
      - guitarbill 9y ago
        Given the eagerness of the CPS to prosecute, seems like paranoia was a good strategy, no? There's some hidden agenda here, and it's hard to believe it's something as mundane as CPS bloke doesn't want a new case before he retires when emails conveniently get "deleted". I think you can expect better from lawyers. But it's especially galling for a lawyer who works for the government, they should have procedures to retain this information. The only thing that doesn't make sense to me is fleeing to the UK, who's government isn't known for it's integrity.
alex_hitchins 9y ago
I completely agree. It would set a terrible example. Thing I find annoying the most, is that as there is no US extradition warrant placed, if he did come out he'd probably do 18 months for missing bail and be released. If the US wanted him, really wanted him then they would have a warrant out now for him. EDIT : Down voters - why are you down voting? Are you down voting because I've made an error or breached the posting guidelines or just because you don't agree with me?
- tomp 9y ago
  How do you know there aren't any secret warrants (like the ones issued by the FISA court, but international/between UK and US)? In other words, the "rule of law" has become a farce recently - the powerful (= government, RIAA, etc) get whatever they want, one way or another.
  - alex_hitchins 9y ago
    Why would they need a secret warrant? In this case, it would have no advantage at all. Also, the US have said on record I believe that they have not placed any extradition warrants on him. I see it more that they can't actually arrest him for anything, as he hasn't broken any laws _in_ the USA. He has done things the don't like for sure, but as a non US citizen how can he be bound to these laws? If this were the case, Russia could extradite Gay rights activists all across the globe for breaking hideous Russian obscenity laws.
    - monocasa 9y ago
      It was leaked in the Stratfor emails. > https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfor-emails-a-secret-indictment-against-assange-20120228 https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfo...
      - alex_hitchins 9y ago
        Interesting. I note it's from 2012 but guess could still be current. Thank you for supplying the link. Again though, seems odd they would need to keep it sealed. I wonder what Assange would actually want to do regards to what would happen after he leaves the embassy (legal issues aside). I can't think there are many countries that would allow him entry, bar Ecuador and possibly Russia. Most likely Russia I'd assume as he seems on good terms with Russian media (thinking of his RT show)

by gaius 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

I don't think it proves that. I think that the US would like to get their hands on JA a lot more than they ever wanted to get their hands on Lauri Love.

gaius 9y ago
Also, Gary McKinnon in 2012.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  Both are UK citizens, Assange definitely is not, besides that he was never - as far as we know - on a wanted list of people wanted specifically for any computer related crimes but for an arguably much more serious offense. Also: Assange's fear was not to be extradited from the UK to the USA but from Sweden. Whether that is realistic or not is another matter entirely but there is some precedent.
  - gsnedders 9y ago
    > Also: Assange's fear was not to be extradited from the UK to the USA but from Sweden. Whether that is realistic or not is another matter entirely but there is some precedent. If he's extradited from the UK to Sweden, they then they UK consent to a further extradition from Sweden, and he can fight extradition in both the UK and Sweden. (Unless, of course, they go for an "extraordinary" extradition, which seems unlikely in such a high-profile case.)
  - rbobby 9y ago
    How afraid is he though? Not afraid enough to tweet an offer to "agree to US extradition" if Obama showed clemency to Manning.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      Obama did, and Assange reneged.
      - ElCapitanMarkla 9y ago
        I don't understand why this comment is getting down voted? Obama granted clemency over a year ago, and Assange is still in the embassy...
pvg 9y ago
What would the US do with Assange? He hasn't been indicted. It's not obvious what crime he'd be charged with and how a case against him could proceed let alone produce a conviction.
- monocasa 9y ago
  It was leaked in the Stratfor emails that they have a secret indictment against Assange. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfor-emails-a-secret-indictment-against-assange-20120228 https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfo...
  - FireBeyond 9y ago
    That's a very biased interpretation of the very article you quote. Stratfor, a _private company_, with no connections to the DOJ, had one of its employees say in an internal email seven years ago that they had an indictment. Based on "conversations" with "people". In among literally thousands of emails doing little more than smearing Assange and Martin. And this was in context to Bradley Manning, though no confirmation of the indictment was mentioned in the grand jury. I have zero love for Assange. Quite a bit of contempt, actually. But it's not particularly verifiable to note that "they" have a "secret" indictment that hasn't been heard of much since a private security firm rumored it seven years ago.
    - monocasa 9y ago
      What else could it mean?
      - FireBeyond 9y ago
        That it was a rumor. The parent to my post painted it a verifiable fact. "There is a secret indictment against him. See this leak.", when in fact said leak verifies nothing of the sort.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      It is sort of the problem with secret indictments though, they are secret. So absence of proof is not the same as proof of absence.

toyg 9y ago

“Everyone” is not going to have an embassy aiding and abetting you; and any diplomat or spy worth his/her salt already has procedures to skip the country. The principle is a fig leaf on top of a political issue. This situation will not change until a different party gets in power, carrying a different view of the UK’s relationship with their traditional military allies.

gaius 9y ago
This situation will not change until a different party gets in power, carrying a different view of the UK’s relationship with their traditional military allies. I’m not sure the PM actually has the power to do that. Assange is wanted right now for skipping bail. No government is going to pass an Act declaring that not-a-crime.
- leereeves 9y ago
  What's the penalty for that crime? If extradition to the US was absolutely impossible, Assange might be willing to turn himself in and suffer the penalty in order to regain his freedom.
  - gaius 9y ago
    What's the penalty for that crime Max 12 months in prison. The ONLY way Assange’s actions make sense is if he expects to be found guilty in Sweden.
    - leereeves 9y ago
      > The ONLY way Assange’s actions make sense is if he expects to be found guilty in Sweden. Or in the US, where there was (still is?) an active criminal investigation of Wikileaks for publishing government secrets.
    - guitarbill 9y ago
      Given the eagerness of the CPS to prosecute, seems like paranoia was a good strategy, no? There's some hidden agenda here, and it's hard to believe it's something as mundane as CPS bloke doesn't want a new case before he retires when emails conveniently get "deleted". I think you can expect better from lawyers. But it's especially galling for a lawyer who works for the government, they should have procedures to retain this information. The only thing that doesn't make sense to me is fleeing to the UK, who's government isn't known for it's integrity.

alex_hitchins 9y ago

I completely agree. It would set a terrible example. Thing I find annoying the most, is that as there is no US extradition warrant placed, if he did come out he'd probably do 18 months for missing bail and be released. If the US wanted him, really wanted him then they would have a warrant out now for him. EDIT : Down voters - why are you down voting? Are you down voting because I've made an error or breached the posting guidelines or just because you don't agree with me?

tomp 9y ago
How do you know there aren't any secret warrants (like the ones issued by the FISA court, but international/between UK and US)? In other words, the "rule of law" has become a farce recently - the powerful (= government, RIAA, etc) get whatever they want, one way or another.
- alex_hitchins 9y ago
  Why would they need a secret warrant? In this case, it would have no advantage at all. Also, the US have said on record I believe that they have not placed any extradition warrants on him. I see it more that they can't actually arrest him for anything, as he hasn't broken any laws _in_ the USA. He has done things the don't like for sure, but as a non US citizen how can he be bound to these laws? If this were the case, Russia could extradite Gay rights activists all across the globe for breaking hideous Russian obscenity laws.
  - monocasa 9y ago
    It was leaked in the Stratfor emails. > https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfor-emails-a-secret-indictment-against-assange-20120228 https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/wikileaks-stratfo...
    - alex_hitchins 9y ago
      Interesting. I note it's from 2012 but guess could still be current. Thank you for supplying the link. Again though, seems odd they would need to keep it sealed. I wonder what Assange would actually want to do regards to what would happen after he leaves the embassy (legal issues aside). I can't think there are many countries that would allow him entry, bar Ecuador and possibly Russia. Most likely Russia I'd assume as he seems on good terms with Russian media (thinking of his RT show)