12 ms·
1901 days in prison, after all that time since 2012 holed up in a room in the Ecuadorian embassy first.
by Neil44 2y ago
1901 days in prison, after all that time since 2012 holed up in a room in the Ecuadorian embassy first.
- mytailorisrich 2y agoHe was in isolation in a high security prison without having been convicted of any crimes since 22 September 2019. He was only released after 'admitting' that he was guilty... I think the UK and US should abstain from criticising any countries' courts and justice system after that...
- randomopining 2y ago[flagged]
- orhmeh09 2y agoWhich ones are truly authoritarian?
- metabagel 2y agoRussia and China both have authoritarian governments. https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fiw&year=2024 https://freedomhouse.org/explore-the-map?type=fiw&year=2024
- kelipso 2y agoThat’s just a bunch of statements made by people in the US.. Maybe you should ask the Chinese and Russians for a list and compare lol.
- garciasn 2y agoI appreciate what you’re saying here, but it’s impossible to view the opinions of residents of an authoritarian state as unbiased and unaffected observers. They know they cannot possibly openly share their opinions without the potential for severe penalty. This is exactly why Putin did what he did to Alexei Navalny; it reminds the populace to keep the opinions to themselves or die in the most horrible way possible.
- rubytubido 2y ago> Putin did what he did to Alexei Navalny Using this logic we can say that Trump did what he did to Epstein?
- garciasn 2y agoYes. Absolutely.
- kelipso 2y agoThe Chinese and the Russians could say the exact same thing about you and be just as convincing.
- garciasn 2y agoTrump and Biden are fucking useless and shouldn’t be in office. I think they both should be banned from the office of the president. While we’re at it: George W. Bush is a war criminal and should be tried at The Hague. Obama was the best Republican president we’ve ever had. See? No.
- kelipso 2y agoWhat are you, waiting for a Chinese person to come here and post things about Xi? All you are practically doing is clowning around with those statements. Try doing what Assange did and see where that gets you lol.
- Beldin 2y agoAnd you don't think that what happened to some folks that said/did stuff that displeased the US and UK rulers might have a similar effect on their population? Like, for example, what happened to Julian Assange?
- orhmeh09 2y agoI think the country that imprisons the highest proportion of its own population in the world ought to qualify, but this list doesn't think so. Interesting.
- randomopining 2y agoSo if a country has laws written by democratically elected bodies - and people break those laws, they shouldn't be imprisoned if the law calls for it?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- root_axis 2y agoIs it possible that they just commit more crimes?
- Cthulhu_ 2y agoClearly it's not enough of a deterrent and we need harsher punishments, like prison camps in Alaska with a threatening name like "gulag".
- dang 2y agoSwerving into flamewar like this is not ok on HN, regardless of how wrong someone is or you feel they are. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Edit: we've had to ask you this multiple times before- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28885166 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28885166 (Oct 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28319175 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28319175 (Aug 2021) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26613766 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26613766 (March 2021)
- funkhouser 2y ago[flagged]
- dangus 2y agoHe wasn’t convicted of any crimes because he was avoiding trial.
- tootie 2y agoCrimes he was definitely guilt of and could likely have plead to at any time, served a sentence and been free years ago.
- etc-hosts 2y agoMy memory is the US was trying to extradite Assange to the US and was threatening to charge him with Sedition with a possibility of decades of prison time. That was at least the stated intent of the previous CIA director
- goodpoint 2y agoThey could even murder him.
- mythrwy 2y agoWouldn't he have to be a citizen of the US to be charged with sedition?
- etc-hosts 2y agoThe US tries to charge foreigners of crimes all of the time. Here's a slightly biased summary, but in this case I think the extreme outrage and bias is totally justified. https://prospect.org/justice/julian-assange-espionage-act-1917-freedom-press/ https://prospect.org/justice/julian-assange-espionage-act-19...
- HWR_14 2y agoNo. Until the recent convictions in relation to January 6th, the most recent US conviction for sedition was against an Egyptian for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He died in federal prison.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- asveikau 2y agoPlea deals and innocent people being pressured into accepting guilt is a huge problem in the US criminal justice system, but I'm not sure Assange in particular fits this. I think he did what is alleged. You could also separately argue that it shouldn't be a crime or that penalties should be less? I think that is a separate discussion.
- h0l0cube 2y ago> I think he did what is alleged ‘Think’ is the operative word here. Assange would not have had a jury trial if extradited without the plea deal, and for a jury trial, mere opinion isn’t enough to convict
- asveikau 2y agoWell yes, the fact that he was held without trial for a long time is worse than the fact he did a plea deal.
- h0l0cube 2y agoBut certainly a causal factor in a plea deal being reached. Without the extended incarceration (and the threat of prolonging it) there would have been little leverage to get Julian to sign the dotted line.
- asveikau 2y agoGiven that he was released with time served, I don't think US prosecutors gained much from allowing him to plea. What is the motivation for them to pressure him to do so when they are not seeking any additional outcome?
- h0l0cube 2y agoHe is now a convicted felon. The US can avoid further diplomatic damage with one of its military and economic allies while still securing legitimacy for their protracted judicial overreach (across continents no less) and deterring whistleblowers in the future. In exchange, Julian gets to leave his shoebox.
- ben_w 2y ago"Following his arrest, he was charged and convicted, on the 1st May 2019, of violating the Bail Act, and sentenced to fifty weeks in prison." So sure, given you said "since 22 September", but with a huge embassy-shaped reason why they didn't let him out on bail a second time.
- mytailorisrich 2y agoThat's right he was convicted of a crime and jailed. He should have been released from prison for that on 22 September 2019 but was instead kept imprisoned because of the extradition request by the US. So from 22 September 2019 until his release now he was jailed in very strict conditions without having been convicted of anything, which to me is unacceptable whatever the extradition request situation. Especially now that we see that the instant he pleads guilty he is immediately freed...
- ben_w 2y agoThat is indeed the consequence of skipping bail after having lost an extradition hearing, yes. What would you have done? "Oh, he ran away again, nothing we could have done, this was totally unforeseeable?"
- gambiting 2y agoNormally people get a tracking bracelet and they have to check in every few days but are free to go otherwise, given that you know, they haven't been found guilty of anything at that point - being kept in a tiny cell in isolation for 23 hours a day for 5 years is reserved for the worst of the worst criminals, people who even in prison are extreme danger to everyone else - it made zero sense to keep him locked up that way.
- ben_w 2y agoNormally people don't go into an embassy for seven years and give speeches from the window to an adoring* crowd, leaving the police obliged to post an officer at the embassy door 24/7 just in case he leaves because they're not allowed in without permission that isn't coming. Was he even wearing a tag on the first bail? * at least, I assume those crowds were adoring rather than booing…
- brookst 2y ago> I think the UK and US should abstain from criticising any countries' courts and justice system after that... Couldn't disagree more. By this logic, no country should criticize any other country's courts and justice systems because they all have problems and massive miscarriages of justice. Do we want more scrutiny and criticism or less? I think the world is better if the US and UK aggressively criticize and pressure other countries to improve AND ALSO everyone else criticizes abuses by the US and UK and pressures them to improve. IMO that is a much better world than one where nobody is highlighting abuses or asking anyone else to improve.
- mytailorisrich 2y agoAbuse is always highlighted (or minimised) because of ulterior motives, not because of the abuse itself. What I am highlighting is the hypocrisy.
- heylook 2y ago> Abuse is always highlighted (or minimised) because of ulterior motives, not because of the abuse itself. That strikes me as almost tautologically untrue. It simply doesn't seem possible that every decision about how much to highlight or criticize or ignore a country's abuse of their legal system could be based upon ulterior motives. It implies that there can never be genuine moral outrage, and honestly, for me, that just makes your whole point and outlook feel unfounded or uncommonly sad. For example, how much of the criticism of Otto Warmbier's detention in North Korea is based upon ulterior motives? Is it all of it? Or is it like, 50% or 10% or less? And if it's a smaller amount, are you actually highlighting a hypocrisy that is meaningful enough for it to be the main thrust of your comment? It feels like someone cooked you a gourmet meal and you said, "Food only ever tastes good or bad because of the salt."
- mytailorisrich 2y agoThere is no moral when it comes to national interests, that's correct.
- 2y ago
- crossroadsguy 2y agoAfter that? US and UK should abstain from criticising any country since as long as one can go back. The only reason they could criticise and even meddle is because they are powerful, too powerful; at least USA is and UK is not anymore, not so much.
- aleph_minus_one 2y ago> He was only released after 'admitting' that he was guilty... There is the deeply philosophical, mathematical (Bayesian estimates), legal and political question whether the fact that he admitted that he was guilty increases or decreases the probability/likelihood that he is actually guilty or not.
- class3shock 2y agoYes, he would have been treated much better for being involved with the dissemination of classified material in... which country exactly?