4 ms·

"It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever “breached his bail”, “jumped bail”, absconded, fled an arrest warrant, or that he has ever b

"It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever “breached his bail”, “jumped bail”, absconded, fled an arrest warrant, or that he has ever been charged with such at any time." I would love to hear their explanation for why they think this isn't true.

nkurz 8y ago
Since we're unlikely to get an official statement from Wikileaks here (although it's not impossible) perhaps we could go the other way. Maybe you could research whichever of these you think is most clearly false, and report the evidence you find? My guess is that they are all technically true (as in, he didn't "breach his bail" because he never paid a bail), but it's also possible that at least one is an outright lie. I and others would be interested to see the clear evidence of this if you can find it.
- bootlooped 8y ago
  Here's an article about when he was released on bail: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-12005930 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-12005930 And here's how the people who posted the bail were ordered to pay the remainder when he breached the terms: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange-supporters-ordered-forfeit-bail https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange... Absconded: To leave quickly and secretly and hide oneself, often to avoid arrest or prosecution. He left his house arrest location quickly and secretly to avoid arrest and prosecution.
  - nkurz 8y ago
    OK, that convinces me: it's a lie to say that Julian Assange has never breached his bail. Version 1.3 of the document says: "It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever "breached his bail", "jumped bail", absconded, fled an arrest warrant, or that he has ever been charged with such at any time." And yet we have a decision by a UK judge that Assange "failed to appear in accordance with the conditions of his bail" and that "the associate sureties should be forfeited": https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Judgments/sureties-julian-assange-08102012.pdf https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Ju... So while I can see why Wikileaks might try to argue that seeking asylum instead of appearing did not "breach his bail", there is a clear UK legal judgment saying that he did. It's a lie for Wikileaks to claim otherwise. Nice job. I'd suggest passing it on the author of the post (Emma Best) to see if she can publicize this clear example.

nkurz 8y ago

Since we're unlikely to get an official statement from Wikileaks here (although it's not impossible) perhaps we could go the other way. Maybe you could research whichever of these you think is most clearly false, and report the evidence you find? My guess is that they are all technically true (as in, he didn't "breach his bail" because he never paid a bail), but it's also possible that at least one is an outright lie. I and others would be interested to see the clear evidence of this if you can find it.

bootlooped 8y ago
Here's an article about when he was released on bail: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-12005930 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-12005930 And here's how the people who posted the bail were ordered to pay the remainder when he breached the terms: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange-supporters-ordered-forfeit-bail https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/08/julian-assange... Absconded: To leave quickly and secretly and hide oneself, often to avoid arrest or prosecution. He left his house arrest location quickly and secretly to avoid arrest and prosecution.
- nkurz 8y ago
  OK, that convinces me: it's a lie to say that Julian Assange has never breached his bail. Version 1.3 of the document says: "It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange has ever "breached his bail", "jumped bail", absconded, fled an arrest warrant, or that he has ever been charged with such at any time." And yet we have a decision by a UK judge that Assange "failed to appear in accordance with the conditions of his bail" and that "the associate sureties should be forfeited": https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Judgments/sureties-julian-assange-08102012.pdf https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Ju... So while I can see why Wikileaks might try to argue that seeking asylum instead of appearing did not "breach his bail", there is a clear UK legal judgment saying that he did. It's a lie for Wikileaks to claim otherwise. Nice job. I'd suggest passing it on the author of the post (Emma Best) to see if she can publicize this clear example.