3 ms·

As much as I don't want to give in to his bullying tactics; I almost want Sweden to interview him in situ just to shut him up. Are there legal reasons this can'

• oneeyedpigeon 12y ago
  From [1]: "The next step in the Swedish proceedings is to conduct a second interview with him before making a decision whether to formally charge him. The prosecutor is presently disposed to charge him, unless any new evidence emerges that might change her mind. If a decision is taken to formally charge him, Assange would face trial within two weeks of that decision being made. It is difficult to see how this could happen if the final interview takes place in the Ecuadorian embassy in Knightsbridge. Even if he were interviewed in the embassy, if a decision was then taken to formally charge him, it is somewhat difficult to believe that Assange would suddenly renounce his claim to asylum in Ecuador." [1] https://storify.com/anyapalmer/why-doesn-t-sweden-interview-assange-in-london https://storify.com/anyapalmer/why-doesn-t-sweden-interview-...
  • alex_hitchins 12y ago
    Very interesting indeed. Thanks for the link.
  • Jedd 12y ago
    Interesting insight, thank you. I wonder what the material difference is for Sweden between continuing to not question him, and to question him on site at the embassy is, given the end result would seem to be identical (viz. they don't get to formally charge him and force him to face trial within Sweden in either scenario).