Movement at Last , Prosecutor to Question Julian Assange at Ecuadorean embassy

After years of insisting that Julian Assange had to be questioned in Sweden Swedish prosecutors have now decided they can question Mr Assange at his place of safety in the Ecuadorean embassy , Mr Assange's legal team have welcomed the move.
The change of heart has been brought about by the approaching expiry of some of the charges in August under the Swedish statute of limitations , although the most serious charge of rape doesn't expire until 2020.

A Swedish prosecutor explained the change of strategy.

"My view has always been that to perform an interview with him at the Ecuadorean embassy in London would lower the quality of the interview, and that he would need to be present in Sweden in any case should there be a trial in the future," lead prosecutor Marianne Ny said in a statement.

"Now that time is of the essence, I have viewed it therefore necessary to accept such deficiencies in the investigation and likewise take the risk that the interview does not move the case forward."

Ms Ny said she had made a request to Mr Assange's legal team to take a DNA sample from him in London, as well as conducting questioning.

Mr Assange - an Australian journalist and activist - has not been formally charged, but prosecutors want to question him over allegations of rape and sexual misconduct made by two women he met during a trip to Sweden in August 2010.
www.bbc.co.uk...

Good luck Julian , don't drink the tea.

It is all about the statute of limitations. Assange is probably going to remain the embassy until 2020 and wait for the rape allegations to time out. The Swedes are just trying to close of processes.

He needs to face his accusers, but we all know that he protests too much! The man who has made an industry of transparency does not want a court appearance - even if it got that far. I wonder why?

a reply to: paraphi

The man who has made an industry of transparency does not want a court appearance - even if it got that far. I wonder why?

The 'rape' allegation has to do with condoms as I understand it.

If he goes to Sweden, he would end up in the USA where they want to prosecute him for releasing US Secrets even though he is an Aussie citizen and does not have to abide by US law.

The US seems to think that the whole world has to abide by their rules.

P

a reply to: paraphi

The man who has made an industry of transparency does not want a court appearance - even if it got that far. I wonder why?

Perhaps because he knows the charges are a ploy to get him extradited to the US , the charges were already dropped back in 2010 by Swedish Prosecutors.

The Swedish Prosecution Authority website said the chief prosecutor had come to the decision that Mr Assange was not suspected of rape but did not give any further explanation.
www.bbc.co.uk...

Your right the expiry of some of the charges is an issue. From what I've heard the rape charge is going to be difficult to convict on...of course I don't know all the details. Thus Sweden wants to interview prior to the expiry.

I still don't see Assange leaving the Embassy no matter what the results of the interview. Unless Sweden drops the whole case or is forced to because Assange has appealed to the high court in Sweden to drop it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the costs to Scotland Yard aren't also driving this movement to end the stalemate. Those costs are outrageous and I'm not sure the British public are very interested in seeing that much money spent on this issue.

www.bbc.com...

originally posted by: gortex
Perhaps because he knows the charges are a ploy to get him extradited to the US ,

So Assange would like everyone to believe.

The fact is that there is no evidence that this would happen, or that the US has asked for it to be the case. If the US are so desperate for Assange then they could have sought extradition from the UK. It's a smokescreen and a distraction.

He's wanted for questioning for some serious sexual offences. People might play them down, but then the law is the law and rape is rape. People who say it's all insignificant are probably not women.

originally posted by: paraphi
I wonder why?

To address your wonderings .. we would have to go back to the very beginning again .. and recount exactly why he sought refuge in the embassy in first place ...
It was extremely hard to miss the point back then ... and ever since ... donnt mean to be rude ... if his reasonings as to why eluded you or went over your head back then, when just about every seconds thread here alone discussed it, .. its extremely unlikely you will 'get it' now from any of us ...

pretty sure youre smart enough to understand whats going on .. and more likely the case you just refuse to .. or do not want to

By the power of greyskull .....

originally posted by: paraphi
If the US are so desperate for Assange then they could have sought extradition from the UK. It's a smokescreen and a distraction.

I don't think extradition to the US is a smokescreen. It's real and it's been discussed by US officials.
www.sbs.com.au...
The US won't admit to a Grand Jury procedure because if there has been a Grand Jury that virtually guarantees Assange will face US charges and extradition.

Assange choose the UK to be when this all happened for a reason. Extradition to the US over Wikileaks would face difficult legal challenges given UK laws. As well there are financial supporters willing to foot the bill in the UK. Sweden basically rubber stamps US extradition requests.

Assange not wanting to go to Sweden has lots to do with US extradition. My understanding of the Swedish charges are that he probably would be convicted on some of the more 'minor' ones but not on the rape charge. Of course in court you never know exactly what might happen.

a reply to: gortex

Good luck Julian , don't drink the tea.

An assassins misson?

Gotta wonder. Since the charges are here-say trumped BS to discredit him anyway, I would be really hard pressed to believe this isn't a ruse of some kind,

What are the possibilities? Explosives in the cameras is a little extreme. Force him out the front door? Or just a lethal virus on the DNA swabs?

"Quality of interview" in UK vs. Sweden is a poor excuse, watch out Julian!

Personally, I think it's not only disgusting...

But also the epitome of our current establishment, that they would fork out millions of £££s in tax payer money to protect a potential rapist.



Welcome to Thatcher's Britain!!!

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

They're not protecting him they're guarding the building to ensure he doesn't leave , as for the cost , well I'm sure it could be done more cheaply with fewer officers.

Innocent until proven guilty , this decision may be the first step that will allow him to clear his name.

a reply to: gortex

I'm a big fan of innocent until proven guilty...

Especially in sex offences because the accusation itself is a historical family breaking, career ending & soul destroying asseveration...


But hiding, or better yet, shying away from defending oneself democratically, doesn't add weight to his innocence in my opinion.

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Personally, I think it's not only disgusting...

But also the epitome of our current establishment, that they would fork out millions of £££s in tax payer money to protect a potential rapist.



Welcome to Thatcher's Britain!!!

Gee, does potential rapist = potentially innocent? Trying anyone in the court of public opinion lately?

a reply to: notmyrealname

Actually potential anything means they're currently not...

So save the outrage and deduce the obvious!

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

Wow just looking for a fight with those that disagree with you huh, take it easy and have a glass of milk….

If you look at the entire case from the beginning, you will see that the entire matter reeks of outside intervention. (case dropped/ case re-opened, etc.) Also if you think this case has nothing to do with Politics and the US being angry for Wikileaks, ask how many other cases of 'potential rape' received this type of coverage.

a reply to: CharlieSpeirs

He's hiding from extradition not the allegations , Assange knows that if he is extradited to Sweden the case will likely be dropped and the U.S will seek his extradition from Sweden , a request that will no doubt be handled expeditiously.

In 2011 the UK court dealing with the extradition hearing was told of secret text messages uncovered by Swedish investigators that could hold the key to finally clearing his name.

The truth of what lies behind this case is summed up by John Pilger here.

According to documents released by Snowden, Assange is on a "Manhunt target list". Washington's bid to get him, say Australian diplomatic cables, is "unprecedented in scale and nature". In Alexandria, Virginia, a secret grand jury has spent four years attempting to contrive a crime for which Assange can be prosecuted.

And regarding the text messages....

There are signs that the Swedish public and legal community do not support prosecutor's Marianne Ny's intransigence. Once implacably hostile to Assange, the Swedish press has published headlines such as: "Go to London, for God's sake."

Why won't she? More to the point, why won't she allow the Swedish court access to hundreds of SMS messages that the police extracted from the phone of one of the two women involved in the misconduct allegations? Why won't she hand them over to Assange's Swedish lawyers? She says she is not legally required to do so until a formal charge is laid and she has questioned him. Then, why doesn't she question him?
johnpilger.com...

This case is a contrivance , it's only aim is to get Assange to the U.S and into an American prison.

a reply to: paraphi

to be fair tho ... perhaps you did the same as me ....

when i see a new conspiracy arise in the forums ... which is many times a day it feels .... with all the dramatic headings etc .. i usually skip past them, for the first few weeks or months ... as am still tryin to assimilate everythin regardin previous conspiracies ... they are aplenty .. and i purposely choose not to read them all .. i feel like my head would implode if i did ....
tend to wait and see what ones get most attention .. then i might look at it, if it interests me .. but if its death, war or evil .. it may take me a while to read up on it

i had no idea what isis was until a couple of month ago .. and to be honest .. i still dont really know .. not sure i fully want to

sorry if i sounded condescending at all in last post .... didnt mean to... i think the assange thing is another one id probably have avoided, if i wasnt already glued to wikileaks, prior to Americas PTB manhunt for him

God Bless

originally posted by: paraphi
He needs to face his accusers, but we all know that he protests too much! The man who has made an industry of transparency does not want a court appearance - even if it got that far. I wonder why?

Yes, he does need to face his accusers. That said, Julian Assange has always offered the Swedes to interview him in London, after seeking and being granted asylum by Ecuador. That does not make him a hypocrite. He has every right to fear the USA and its power. Would you fear the USA, knowing you had released among the most numerous leaks in history? Hell yes you would.

As for the transparency thing - Julian Assange has always been big on individual privacy and freedom while also calling into account the lack of transparency on behalf of major corporations and governments. Just because he supports transparency in governments doesn't mean he should also support complete transparency in peoples' personal lives.

a reply to: notmyrealname

Wow just looking for a fight with those that disagree with you huh, take it easy and have a glass of milk….

I do believe it was you who fits that description, when you started this discussion by so sarcastically asking if I had tried anybody recently...

Julian Assange, WikiLeaks founder, to be cleared of sex claims

Julian Assange is set to be cleared of three sex assault claims next week after spending so long in hiding in Britain that the allegations have expired.

....

In March Swedish prosecutors agreed to demands from Mr Assange and Ecuadorean officials that he be questioned at the embassy in Knightsbridge, but no progress has been made.

Swedish prosecutors initially insisted Assange return to Sweden for interrogation — a condition he has rejected on fears Stockholm could deliver him to US authorities, who may try him for leaking nearly 750,000 classified military and diplomatic documents in 2010.

On June 16 and 17, Swedish prosecutors travelled to London to interrogate Assange, but Ecuador failed to authorise the questioning, the Swedish prosecution authority said.

One of the claims though won't expire until 2020 but - next week, Julian may be relatively free.