4 ms·

Did you read the article? Because it looks like you didn't. > Because the person they were investigating left the country and then put up one of the most exten

Did you read the article? Because it looks like you didn't. > Because the person they were investigating left the country and then put up one of the most extensive appeals against extradition in history and then fled to an embassy. No, he didn't. He asked not to be extradited to a foreign country where there is a risk his human rights will not be respected - which is standard international practice. He gave several dates where we would be available for questioning. He turned himself up to the police for questioning. All of those were denied to him.

Traster 7y ago
Firstly, you're literally talking about the contention of his legal appeal that I mentioned. Secondly, most extradition appeals don't go to the High court, let alone the supreme court - which is why I mentioned that he literally had one of the most extensive appeals in history. I also find it hilariously comical to see the absurd level of legal recourse Assange was afforded whilst people claimed that he is having his human rights violated. Somehow we're now in a world where someone shouldn't be extradited to Sweden from the UK because they're going to have their human rights violated. I'd love to hear the exact details of how exactly his rights would be violated, but frankly I think it's going to be more Gish galloping.
- nekopa 7y ago
  From the article: >Now the supervisor of the policewoman who had conducted the questioning wrote her an email telling her to rewrite the statement from S. W. >On the basis of the revised statement from S.W., an appeal was filed against the public prosecutor’s attempt to suspend the investigation, and on Sept. 2, 2010, the rape proceedings were resumed. A legal representative by the name of Claes Borgström was appointed to the two women at public cost. The man was a law firm partner to the previous justice minister, Thomas Bodström, under whose supervision Swedish security personnel had seized two men who the U.S. found suspicious in the middle of Stockholm. The men were seized without any kind of legal proceedings and then handed over to the CIA, who proceeded to torture them. This may be how his right could be violated in Sweden.

Traster 7y ago

Firstly, you're literally talking about the contention of his legal appeal that I mentioned. Secondly, most extradition appeals don't go to the High court, let alone the supreme court - which is why I mentioned that he literally had one of the most extensive appeals in history. I also find it hilariously comical to see the absurd level of legal recourse Assange was afforded whilst people claimed that he is having his human rights violated. Somehow we're now in a world where someone shouldn't be extradited to Sweden from the UK because they're going to have their human rights violated. I'd love to hear the exact details of how exactly his rights would be violated, but frankly I think it's going to be more Gish galloping.

nekopa 7y ago
From the article: >Now the supervisor of the policewoman who had conducted the questioning wrote her an email telling her to rewrite the statement from S. W. >On the basis of the revised statement from S.W., an appeal was filed against the public prosecutor’s attempt to suspend the investigation, and on Sept. 2, 2010, the rape proceedings were resumed. A legal representative by the name of Claes Borgström was appointed to the two women at public cost. The man was a law firm partner to the previous justice minister, Thomas Bodström, under whose supervision Swedish security personnel had seized two men who the U.S. found suspicious in the middle of Stockholm. The men were seized without any kind of legal proceedings and then handed over to the CIA, who proceeded to torture them. This may be how his right could be violated in Sweden.