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' Julian Assange to be extradited to Sweden

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by backinblack
 


This is where my confusion is coming in though. There is no "case" to speak of. Under Swedish Law they are seeking extradition because of the claims and how their goofy sex laws work. There is nothign really for the UK to decide other than if he is sent back, will he get a fiar trial.

The Judge agrees that he will and approved extradition. I know Assange is going to appeal, but my question is appeal what? All the higher courts can do is review the lower court ruling to look for errors in the decision.


No, I don't think the recent judge was allowed to rule on whether or not he would get a fair trial..
He could only rule on the legality of the extradition request..
The judge actually mentioned the odd circumstances but could not rule on them..




posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Actually the judge did. That point (fair trial) was raised by Assanges lawyers. His legal team has jumped through the hops in terms of challenging the law, which even though the UK says is weird, its not their law to decide. Assanges team has tried the argument that if sent to Sweden, he would not get a fair trial because of comments from one of the prosecutors, which the judge said was irrelevant.

They said the trial would be held in secret, which the judge disagreed with, pointing out part of it is not open to the public, but the actual trial and arguments are. They said he would not get a fair trial, and the judge said Sweden has remedies in place to appeal legal decisions.

They went so far as to attempt the sweden to US argument, and again the judge said its irrelevant because nothing has occured on the US side. In addition to that the US has not even gone on record yet with any type of pending charges, just the investigation which they are saying is not linking manning to Assange.

There entire argument is based on the fairness of the inquiry, which is why he does not want to go back. The Judge found all the papework in order, and made his ruling.

He can appeal according to the other poster to the EU Court system, but I still think that it will make a difference in the end.

I just wish this mess would go away to make room for more important matters.


Even if we set aside the legal issues, Assange can still be booted from the country since he is not a UK citizen.



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Fair enough, I just read about the fair trial bit from the judge..

I doubt the US will even mention any charges while Assange is in the UK..
There's really no point while he's locked up and it certainly could affect the extradition process..

All we can do is sit and wait...



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


His lawyers will appeal to the UK Appeal Courts, if the decision goes against assange, his lawyers can then appealto the UK Supremme Courty. If both appeals fail. As an EU Citizen his lawyers can then appeal to the ECHR, as a last resort. hence what I said it could take years before he is even extradited. If the UK tried to extradite him earlier, it wouldbe an infrignment of the european human rights act,and also an infringement of due process, in the Uk Judicary system.

I do know in certain cases, before the UK Supreme court was introduced. Any final say on extradition matters,went before the Law Lords in the House off Lord in Parliament,before it went to the ECHR. But I do not know f they still play a role in the process or not. I would need to research some to give a right answer on the topic. Might do that later oks.
edit on 28-2-2011 by Laurauk because: To add more content,



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


If assange lawyers can prove beyond a reasonable doubt,that thereis no basis,asto why or even show he has already been questioned with regards to the so called rape case,sex crim cases. (Yes I know sweden now wants to extraite him for trial, not questioning). The appeals court could over rule the lower court judges decision.

I do not know, how ever if the Home secretary plays a role in this,or the justice minister. that area I am not sure about.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   
If you are a fan of Julian Assange himself then I can understand why this decision would get your back up, but...Wikileaks doesn't end with Julian Assange. The worlds governments are trying to fight back and by doing so are making a dangerous decision. Someone else will take Julian Assange's place and more leaks will come to the fore and the more the worlds governments fight it, the worse the leaks will be.

Bring it on!



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Please have a look at my message regarding Private Eye magazine, in this ATS thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It shows that there is a conspiracy to smear Assange and certain so called 'anti establishment' people are involved. 'Private Eye' are the worst kind of hypocrites.

If I get any requests, I will name the informer involved and publish scans of the letter from 'Private Eye' refusing to expose his blatant anti semitism, anti-feminism and Holocaust denial.



posted on Mar, 25 2011 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by woogleuk
 


Does anyone remember the seen in jfk where mr x say's "They woulda killed you already but you got to much light on you!" There torturing him in a room all this time until he brakes and gives them everything and if not then they'll just hold him in solitary confignment on bull# charges for as long as they can till he becomes old news then thy'll kill him and make it look like suicide in his cell! You think it's a coincadence he had charges made up that quick lol it's just a coincedence the guy who is incharge of the company that hacked congress and tried to make it public commited these crimes at this time lol!!!! He's that smart'n that stupid at the same time ofcourse lol.



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 05:23 AM
link   
Update on this ongoing case:

The high court has upheld the extradition of Assange to Sweden, His lawyers are now going to appeal to the UK Supreme Courts, to see if they can have it over turned there.



Two judges at the High Court in London decided that a previous ruling in favour of extradition must be upheld.

Swedish authorities want him to answer accusations of raping one woman and sexually molesting and coercing another in Stockholm last year.


The US Authorities will be rubbing their hands gleefully at this verdict one more step before they can obtain him and silence him for good. One can only believe that the UK Supreme courts will not let this happen.

BBC News



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 05:48 AM
link   
It shocks me how a supposed open-minded ATS community all automatically support Assange and protest his innocence.

I personally agree with his agenda, that there are some secrets that need to be known, but .....

If he really is a rapist, he needs to rot in Hell for his crime. And you'll have all been cheering on and supporting a rapist.


Think before articulate your thoughts in Speech or Type text.. It can come back to bita ya.




Peace

Rock Ape



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Rock Ape
 


The charges against him was dropped the first time he was charged since there was no case to answer to. Then comes along another Prosecutor who decided they would charge him. That is what the dispute is over.



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Laurauk
 


Actually Sweden explained the questioning issue. The swedish embassy in Britain is apparently not sovereignswedish territory. Under swedish criminal law apparently a person must be within the jurisdiction of swedish territory in order to any statements to be admissable in thier courts.

Personally speaking I find that goofy, but then again they view unprotected sex as a crime.



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Laurauk
reply to post by Rock Ape
 


The charges against him was dropped the first time he was charged since there was no case to answer to. Then comes along another Prosecutor who decided they would charge him. That is what the dispute is over.


The initial prosecutor declined to file the charges. The decisions was reviewed by the secondary PA who is assinged to sexual assault cases. Sweden addressed that issue by saying the first prosecutor didnt have the authority to dismiss since it was outside her area of jurisdiction.

Personally after reading up on swedish law and history i would say they might as well be Klingons. They just seem to do their own thing.



posted on Nov, 2 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Fair enough, I just read about the fair trial bit from the judge..

I doubt the US will even mention any charges while Assange is in the UK..
There's really no point while he's locked up and it certainly could affect the extradition process..

All we can do is sit and wait...


Agreed....

Life.... It's what happens inbetween decisions.



posted on Nov, 3 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Actually Sweden explained the questioning issue. The swedish embassy in Britain is apparently not sovereignswedish territory.


There's nothing "apparently" about it. Embassies are not sovereign territory, they are just bits of land that have certain privilages. I think the status of embassies are laid out in the Vienna Convention.

Assange just needs to face the music and stop his "victim" impression. It's all a bit tiresom.

Regards



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Actually Sweden explained the questioning issue. The swedish embassy in Britain is apparently not sovereignswedish territory.


There's nothing "apparently" about it. Embassies are not sovereign territory, they are just bits of land that have certain privilages. I think the status of embassies are laid out in the Vienna Convention.

Assange just needs to face the music and stop his "victim" impression. It's all a bit tiresom.

Regards


My appologies and thanks for the correction.

I learned something new today.



posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 02:40 PM
link   
If Sweden hands him over to the US, he shouldn't worry...they have just judges:



And of course they kick out judges that are morons...oh...wait



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join