It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WikiLeaks' Assange fights extradition to Sweden

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



As far as an actual list gimme some time to look.


Great, I cant wait to see the list..


I wouldnt hold your breath. It does not look like Sweden makes those records available to the GEneral Public as an open record. If they do I do not have access to it. You can look it up since you are so concerned about it. My reply contains enough info for you to actually research this.




posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:21 AM
link   
BBC Update - Extradition hearing **Link has Video footage containing more info than below**

A British judge has refused the argument that Assange would be treated unfairly in Sweden, saying the Swedish legal system has safeguards in place to protect against


7 February 2011 Last updated at 14:01 ET Help There is a risk of "denial of justice" if Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is tried for rape in Sweden, his lawyer has told a UK extradition hearing.

Geoffrey Robertson QC said his client could face the death penalty if then sent to the US on separate charges relating to the whistleblowing website.

Prosecutors rejected suggestions the Swedish legal system did not have safeguards against such a "violation".

Mr Assange, 39, denies claims of sexual assault against two women.

Alan Little reports.


Also, apparently new info keeps coming out form the investigation, as the video shows, that part of the allegation is Assange did in fact hold one of the females down, resulting in forced coercian, which meets the criteria of rape.


edit on 8-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 12:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Also, apparently new info keeps coming out form the investigation, as the video shows, that part of the allegation is Assange did in fact hold one of the females down, resulting in forced coercian, which meets the criteria of rape.


I'm sure you meant to say "alledged".....

BTW, as wierd as it sounds, some girls like to be held down..
Was this also the FIRST time they had sex??

Also, did she scream??
Did she report she was raped and how long after the fact?

Lots of info left out it seems..



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
I'm sure you meant to say "alledged".....


I used the word allegedly... Not sure what your point is here.


Originally posted by backinblack
BTW, as wierd as it sounds, some girls like to be held down..


Of course... However the key term would be consented to being held down.


Originally posted by backinblack
Was this also the FIRST time they had sex??


In criminal investigations this would be irrelevant since prior physical contact has nothing to do with a physical contact which is not consensual. - again key term consented


Originally posted by backinblack
Also, did she scream??


Not sure how this fits in, either way its irrelevant.


Originally posted by backinblack
Did she report she was raped and how long after the fact?


Are you being serious? Of course she filed a complaint, hence the reason for the big hoopla Assange is involved in. And yes one of the accusers went to the Hospital.


Originally posted by backinblack
Lots of info left out it seems..


Hence the reason for the investigation and extradition request so he can be interviewed.
edit on 8-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-2-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Are you being serious? Of course she filed a complaint, hence the reason for the big hoopla Assange is involved in. And yes one of the accusers went to the Hospital.


When?
There's no allegation of being held hostage, so was it within hours, same day, next day, days/weeks later??

Seems to me if someone has been raped and NOT being held hostage, they would report it within hours..
Did that happen??



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Are you being serious? Of course she filed a complaint, hence the reason for the big hoopla Assange is involved in. And yes one of the accusers went to the Hospital.


When?
There's no allegation of being held hostage, so was it within hours, same day, next day, days/weeks later??

Seems to me if someone has been raped and NOT being held hostage, they would report it within hours..
Did that happen??



Go back and read



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


I will repeat he was aready questioned before and no charges were brought against him. So thats why I have stated ths is more politically motivated, rather than it being to bring justice to the so called victims.

And anyways doesnt matter if the UK and USA have a exradition agreement,Assange can appeal against it to the European Court of Human Rights, ifhe needs to. If they ruled in his favour, he would no be extradited. The UK would have to abide by thier ruling.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Are you being serious? Of course she filed a complaint, hence the reason for the big hoopla Assange is involved in. And yes one of the accusers went to the Hospital.


When?
There's no allegation of being held hostage, so was it within hours, same day, next day, days/weeks later??

Seems to me if someone has been raped and NOT being held hostage, they would report it within hours..
Did that happen??



Go back and read


Nah, read enough..
I know the situation and have my opinions on why it's being played the way it is..

You have your opinions (or someone elses) and are not prepared to even consider the fact..

I've said all I need too...



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Are you being serious? Of course she filed a complaint, hence the reason for the big hoopla Assange is involved in. And yes one of the accusers went to the Hospital.


When?
There's no allegation of being held hostage, so was it within hours, same day, next day, days/weeks later??

Seems to me if someone has been raped and NOT being held hostage, they would report it within hours..
Did that happen??



Go back and read


Nah, read enough..
I know the situation and have my opinions on why it's being played the way it is..

You have your opinions (or someone elses) and are not prepared to even consider the fact..

I've said all I need too...


Right.. go back and read



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 01:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Right.. go back and read


My reading and comprehension skills are fine..
I've said enough and now it's up to our readers to decide..

You are obviously free to post as much more BS as you feel..



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
I don't understand how he thought he could go out and rape someone and everything would be fine.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by jonnywhite
I don't understand how he thought he could go out and rape someone and everything would be fine.


Yeah, and then she had breakfast with him the next day..
Please read the facts before posting..
It's NOT a rape case as you know it...



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
Please read the facts before posting..


Sage advice ou should consider taking yourself. Since we dont know all of the facts surrounding the criminal complaints, and wont until he is extradited and the investigation goes forward, then he allegedly committed rape, sexual molestation and sex without a condom.

I am sorry the facts dont fit your argument, but dismissing / ignoring them doesnt make them any less releveant to the situation.

Kudos for making me dizzy though.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


The appeals process you are referring to is for convictions, not extradition hearings. Assange has to be convicted in court in order to use the appeals process you are referring to.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 


It is alleged rape and there has been no charges brought against him. Your statement is baseless and has no proof what so ever.

edit on 8-2-2011 by Laurauk because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


No it is not, Extradition comes under this also. Tha tis what the hearing is all about. Weither or not he should be extradited to face questioning not charges, this is not to decide weither he is to be convicted or not.

If the Judge rules he should be extradited, his lawyers can, appeal against the judges ruling, to the appeal courts, if that fails, it then goes to the UK Supreme Court, then onto the Law Lords. Then finallif all fails, the European Court Of Justice And Human Rights.


There is a right to appeal the decision to extradite. This appeal would be heard by the Administrative Court.

A notice of appeal must be lodged within seven days of the decision to extradite. The Administrative Court should hear the appeal within 40 days of the notice being lodged. However, in practice this can often take three to four months.

It is possible to appeal from the Administrative Court to the Supreme Court, but only if the Administrative Court certifies that the appeal involves a point of law of general public importance and either it, or the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal.

It is then possible to appeal against the decision of the Supreme Court to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg


BBC Website
edit on 8-2-2011 by Laurauk because: To add Link



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Update from Assange's Extradition Hearing:




Swedish prosecutors did not follow "proper procedure" while investigating rape claims against Julian Assange, a UK extradition hearing was told.

Sven-Erik Alhem, a witness, said it was "quite peculiar" that authorities did not get the Wikileaks founder's version of events before seeking his arrest.



BBC NEWS



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


Yeah I just saw that.. My bad.. I was wrong.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Laurauk
Update from Assange's Extradition Hearing:




Swedish prosecutors did not follow "proper procedure" while investigating rape claims against Julian Assange, a UK extradition hearing was told.

Sven-Erik Alhem, a witness, said it was "quite peculiar" that authorities did not get the Wikileaks founder's version of events before seeking his arrest.



BBC NEWS


I just read an overview of the defenses case.

Extradition info

INtresting arguments presented. I find it odd that they would make an arguement based on English Law in an effort to bypass Swedish Law.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Because the Extradition Hearing is taking place in the UK, that s why. English Law takes prescedent over Swiss LAW, or European Law.. The same thing would happen if the Hearing was taken place in Scotland, Or any other European Country.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join