Assange vows more leaks, fears death penalty

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by paraphi
This is going for the sympathy vote. Assange should know better and should not start dealing in fantasy if his cause and motivation is based on truth.

Firstly, there is no relationship between the current proceedings between the UK and Sweden which are based on accusations that Assange has committed sexually orientated offenses. Whether you believe he is innocent or guilt is irrelevant, what is relevant is the due process of Swedish law and the Swedish judicial system is transparent and independent. Maybe (just maybe) the whiter-than-white luvie of the anti-establishment and celebrity circus has a crime to answer for and is using his status to avoid answering for his actions.

Secondly, Sweden, like the UK or any number of European nations where the death penalty has been long outlawed would not extradite an offender to any nation where there was a hint that the person would face a court which has even mentioned the death penalty. Similarly, extradition would not be possible if the driver was politically motivated. If the US wants Assange then they will have to build a case which is persuasive to the independent judiciaries of the UK or Sweden.

Regards

I would love to believe you're right, paraphi. From what I have read, I am not so optimistic. There's very little doubt that the rape allegations are nonsense, so why did Sweden involve Interpol for offences that carry a maximum sentence of a $700.00 fine?
Vicky
Vicky

Bingo~! the interpol connection was always the give away.. i had no idea about that $700 fine business.. is that from a reliable source> ? i mean one would think he would just say " ok guilty, whatever" and send a cheque if that were the case rather than being paraded through the system, gaol, court, stylish anklet etc

I'd wager those three magic words are worth a lot of hassle to the CIA: Convicted Sex Offender.

Wait... There has been an in-depth discussion here about the framing, how it was done and who were behind it, right?

Originally posted by Lansky

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by paraphi
This is going for the sympathy vote. Assange should know better and should not start dealing in fantasy if his cause and motivation is based on truth.

Firstly, there is no relationship between the current proceedings between the UK and Sweden which are based on accusations that Assange has committed sexually orientated offenses. Whether you believe he is innocent or guilt is irrelevant, what is relevant is the due process of Swedish law and the Swedish judicial system is transparent and independent. Maybe (just maybe) the whiter-than-white luvie of the anti-establishment and celebrity circus has a crime to answer for and is using his status to avoid answering for his actions.

Secondly, Sweden, like the UK or any number of European nations where the death penalty has been long outlawed would not extradite an offender to any nation where there was a hint that the person would face a court which has even mentioned the death penalty. Similarly, extradition would not be possible if the driver was politically motivated. If the US wants Assange then they will have to build a case which is persuasive to the independent judiciaries of the UK or Sweden.

Regards

I would love to believe you're right, paraphi. From what I have read, I am not so optimistic. There's very little doubt that the rape allegations are nonsense, so why did Sweden involve Interpol for offences that carry a maximum sentence of a $700.00 fine?
Vicky
Vicky

Bingo~! the interpol connection was always the give away.. i had no idea about that $700 fine business.. is that from a reliable source> ? i mean one would think he would just say " ok guilty, whatever" and send a cheque if that were the case rather than being paraded through the system, gaol, court, stylish anklet etc

I read that all in an article about the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny, who insisted on making a meal out of it all, after one of her colleagues had already decided there was no case to answer, which is why Assange went to the UK. He was not actually fleeing at all, and so there was absolutely no need for Interpol to get involved!
Vicky
I shall see if I can find a link... This is what I read...
Marianne Ny
This is also very interesting..
More detail
Vicky

Bingo~! the interpol connection was always the give away.. i had no idea about that $700 fine business.. is that from a reliable source> ? i mean one would think he would just say " ok guilty, whatever" and send a cheque if that were the case rather than being paraded through the system, gaol, court, stylish anklet etc
I read that all in an article about the Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny, who insisted on making a meal out of it all, after one of her colleagues had already decided there was no case to answer, which is why Assange went to the UK. He was not actually fleeing at all, and so there was absolutely no need for Interpol to get involved!
Vicky
I shall see if I can find a link... This is what I read...
Marianne Ny
This is also very interesting..
More detail
Vicky

wow great reading and i love the tags "Technorati Tags: julian assange assange wikileaks marianne ny hurtig a*sholes" good find~ ! :-)

reply to post by Vicky32


Never mind my last question; this sums everything up surprisingly nicely. Well done.

I can't remember the correct time anymore but the thing is, the first "inquiry" by those ladies (one of which with "ties to cuba", if you know what I mean) was made just after the main prosecutor had clocked off, leaving a less experienced one in her place. Seems fairly obvious to me they wanted this to get caught up in the system long enough for the papers to have their field day (they let the media know at the same time as they "inquired"), knowing that the main prosecutor would throw the case out, as he duly did. Then it's just a matter of a little political maneuvering to get the "right" prosecutor assigned to the "case" and the whole circus could be started up again.

The only thing I noticed wrong in the articles is that I'm fairly sure Ny is not claiming any new evidence or information--or any particular reason, in fact--for re-opening the "case".

I don't think that they will execute him or kill him one way or another.They will make a hero out of him and more people will follow him,even the ones that they were doubting him.
If they have decided to kill him, they will find another Jared Loughner and he will do their dirty job.

reply to post by Phantom traveller


Agreed. I'd bet on a white loner; a gun collector with a fascination with conspiracy theories, if I were a betting man or partook in such morbidity.

Originally posted by Vicky32
I would love to believe you're right, paraphi. From what I have read, I am not so optimistic. There's very little doubt that the rape allegations are nonsense, so why did Sweden involve Interpol for offences that carry a maximum sentence of a $700.00 fine?

The point is that the Swedish judiciary is independent and the Swedish courts will be able to establish whether the charges are nonsense, or not. Also, if Mr Assange is found guilty of rape then he will get more than a $700 fine – he will expect a custodial sentence. Rape is a serious matter and shame on those who seek to trivialise it.

In fact, a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is only issued if the crime committed carries a custodial tariff. The involvement of INTERPOL is not surprising, so nothing sinister there.

Mr Assange is now a celebrity and his every move is (and will be) scrutinised. I think things are too far gone for panic talk about “forced rendition” and “death penalty extradition” and Assange does himself no favours by throwing this type of talk into the pot. He should face his accusers and let’s see what comes out. It will all be reported openly and the facts revealed.

Perhaps he protests too much and it is helpful to him to stir up a public mood of conspiracy. I would prefer to keep an open mind on this one.

Regards

reply to post by TedStevensLives


You forgot to mention that he has to be a member on ATS
Sorry couldn't help myself.

If someone try to kill him it won't be now that all the lights are on him.Unless someone wants the attention to himself.

Originally posted by paraphi
Also, if Mr Assange is found guilty of rape then he will get more than a $700 fine – he will expect a custodial sentence. Rape is a serious matter and shame on those who seek to trivialise it.

Wait... what? What rape? You seriously have no idea what happened in Sweden? It's pretty well documented by now, you know. I'm not saying you have to get acquainted with every detail of the case (to each his own) but basic knowledge of the issue at hand does seem like a sensible prerequisite to commenting on it. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned like that.

Thanks. I reckon I have heard about those leaks but since I figured that type of thing occured anyway maybe they didnt stick with me a wikileaks. reply to post by TedStevensLives

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Oh yeah, that's a good point I didn't make: you've probably read even more "Wikileaked" stories but Wikileaks are rarely a part of their headlines, and may not be mentioned at all. A US paper could cite a Norwegian paper as its source and that paper, in turns, cites Wikileaks, for example. A lot of those leaked cables are mostly important to specific countries, so there'd be no need to cover them in mainstream US media, but there've been more than a few in my neck of the woods, some of them pretty explosive.

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by Vicky32
I would love to believe you're right, paraphi. From what I have read, I am not so optimistic. There's very little doubt that the rape allegations are nonsense, so why did Sweden involve Interpol for offences that carry a maximum sentence of a $700.00 fine?

The point is that the Swedish judiciary is independent and the Swedish courts will be able to establish whether the charges are nonsense, or not. Also, if Mr Assange is found guilty of rape then he will get more than a $700 fine – he will expect a custodial sentence. Rape is a serious matter and shame on those who seek to trivialise it.

In fact, a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is only issued if the crime committed carries a custodial tariff. The involvement of INTERPOL is not surprising, so nothing sinister there.

Mr Assange is now a celebrity and his every move is (and will be) scrutinised. I think things are too far gone for panic talk about “forced rendition” and “death penalty extradition” and Assange does himself no favours by throwing this type of talk into the pot. He should face his accusers and let’s see what comes out. It will all be reported openly and the facts revealed.

Perhaps he protests too much and it is helpful to him to stir up a public mood of conspiracy. I would prefer to keep an open mind on this one.

Regards

Thing is, paraphi, that as far as anyone can tell, the charges are not rape at all, but something much less - molestation or 'sex by surprise', I believe...
Vicky

"Retrospective prophylactic disagreement" would be a suitable English term. One of the "victims" held a party in Julian's honor the night after the heinous act (tweetet about being with the "coolest people on earth") and the other has stated that she never intended Julian to be charged for rape (which, indeed, he hasn't). This is all pretty transparent, actually, which is probably why some people here don't see the point in looking at it.

Originally posted by Vicky32
Thing is, paraphi, that as far as anyone can tell, the charges are not rape at all, but something much less - molestation or 'sex by surprise', I believe...
Vicky

The thing is Vicky32 (and others), Mr Assange has been accused of rape, which is serious. It is up to due legal process in the UK regarding extradition and then if Assange gets to Sweden he will have to face his accusers in an open court in an open and independent judicial system which will uncover the validity of the accusations.

Overview of the charges and consequences from the BBC with the below extract...

These alleged crimes comprise one count of unlawful coercion, two counts of sexual molestation, and one count of rape. The offences are alleged to involve two women and to have taken place in August 2010.

Regards