43 ms·
It’s not a trial, it’s a hearing to explore whether just cause exists for a US ‘arrest’, and whether the prosecution is not manifestly unreasonable. The US has
by implements 6y ago
It’s not a trial, it’s a hearing to explore whether just cause exists for a US ‘arrest’, and whether the prosecution is not manifestly unreasonable.
The US has excessive punishments and an overly politicised justice system by UK standards, but that’s not the what the hearing is about - legitimate jurisdiction is - and the US, as an ally, is generally trusted to prosecute people fairly under its own laws.
- somesortofsystm 6y agoOkay, its a hearing, not a trial - but as a 'hearing' it is still an utter farce. >as an ally, is generally trusted to prosecute people fairly under its own laws The US ranks lower than most of its allies in the international justice/rule of law rankings, in fact. Just like it does in health care and education, too. Where it ranks most of all, though, is BIG FUCKING WEAPONS STOCKPILE. So, yeah. Consider your moral authority irrelevant, comrade.
- megous 6y agoUS is also the nation that kidnaps foreign nationals from Europe, and tortures them without any restitution or acknowledgement after it turns out the identity of the person was mistaken, and obstructs whatever international justice might have happened in such case, by threatening the esteemed judges with US financial sanctions, instead of accepting a mistake.
- AllegedAlec 6y ago> It’s not a trial, it’s a hearing to explore whether just cause exists for a US ‘arrest’, and whether the prosecution is not manifestly unreasonable. It sort of is. There's oodles of evidence that it does not meet the test of extradition, among others on the basis of being a political prosecution. > the US, as an ally, is generally trusted to prosecute people fairly under its own laws. No it's not.