Next step in Assange extradition case due in UK court on Friday

[Basil B]

10 hours ago, Jerry787 said:

if he will be deported, it will mark the end of FREE OF SPEACH and the FREEDOM OF JOURNALISM in the so called  western democracy

 

Assange its a journalist , it shall be freed immediately !

Thankfully he is inside, I assume until end of February next year when a full extradition hearing starting 25th Feb 2020 and expected to last 5 days starts, and even if he were to get remission on his 50 weeks sentence I doubt he is going to get out of prison before boarding a flight to the USA.

 

Quote

By certifying the request on Thursday, Sajid Javid allowed it to be considered by the court.

Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot ordered for a full extradition hearing, expected to last five days, to begin on 25 February 2020.

Assange, 47, told Westminster magistrates via video link that "175 years of my life is effectively at stake" and defended his website against hacking claims, saying: "WikiLeaks is nothing but a publisher".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48633682

 

[jany123]

19 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Yes, I'm well aware of Trump (and Bolton's) comments. We had one of them lengthy topics at the time.

But be that as it may, I think USA policy on this front predates Trump. And that's before getting into the whole bit about the USA not signing up to the ICC etc.

 

I don't think that the USA is unique when it comes to how authorities and courts handle charges of war crimes. The part about "thus demonstrating that the US is unable to fairly adjudicate on war crimes committed by US citizens" is a bit of a tall order, and apparently them "international courts" are not all that decided about this point.

 

Still at a lose as to why you compare war crime charges with Assange's case. Apples and oranges.

 

There will be no "international court" (or rather, a soap box) for Assange. At best, he can hope that the extradition request will be denied, or that he'll manage to get a note from the doctor preventing him from facing trial. Might pull either/both, but woudn't bet on his chances.

 

 

Assange is on the hook for matters military... war crimes are matters military. Maybe it’s a matter of oranges and lemons, but that’s not the point really, as I was seeking alternative venues to prosecute Assange in a setting where fairness and transparency would prevail

 

the main thrust of my post was (and is) that Assange can not expect a fair trail in a US court, so should not face a US court.

 

in need, send US prosecutors to a neutral location, where a fair trail might be possible, with an unbiased jury pool. (Or at least a less tainted one), as regardless of ones opinion of his guilt or innocence, he does have the right to fair trial, and I would hope that all free citizens uphold that belief.

[from the home of CC]

13 hours ago, tokachinter said:

I have asked people on another forum to investigate this. So far, the answer is zero, nadda and zilch.

I have no idea if compromised assets were assassinated in various countries with the data dump. But if indeed that did happen then I would expect not to hear a word of it. Countries don't shout out and proclaim when intelligence officers are killed, it kind of defeats the whole purpose of the exercise let alone possibly endangering the lives of others. We'll probably never know the actual damage.

[bendejo]

I am still unsure of how Assange would be treated in the US: will DT pin a medal on him for his help in the 2016 election or will he face prosecution for pre-Trump Chelsea Manning involvement?  And even if it is the latter, DT can still pardon him.  There is no doubt his help in rigging the 2020 election would be welcome, in fact if his ass is in the US next year he will definitely be put to use by the GOP campaign.  Don't expect that to be mentioned in the press, of course.

 

 

[Sujo]

On 6/14/2019 at 12:04 AM, Thongkorn said:

I wounder how many operatives died becasue of this mans Ill intention ,

Zero

[Sujo]

On 6/13/2019 at 9:58 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

It doesn't strike me as odd at all, what does strike me as odd is the ridiculous conspiracy theories Assange's supporters come up with. 

 

What I find odd is he notion that the US has the need to (by means unexplained) manipulate the judicial system in Sweden to 'smear' Assange. 

 

The US are piling all manner of extremely serious charges on Assange, why on earth would the DoJ (or anyone else for the matter) waste time and take the risk of interfering with the judicial system in Sweden to bring charges that are only likely to delay the US getting their hands of Assange?

 

As for Assange not having been tried yet. 

 

Who's fault is that?!

 

 

That would Swedens fault considering he hasnt been charged. He is only wanted for questioning. He doesnt have to be in Sweden to be questioned. He doesnt even need to answer anything at all.

 

He is under no obligation at all to do anything. The obligation is on Sweden to do what it needs to do. Not assange.

[Sujo]

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Then he has nothing to fear when facing trial in open courts before juries and in the glaring light of the world's media .... does he?!

I think the fear is that it wont be in an open court, given the issues involved.

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, jany123 said:

Assange is on the hook for matters military... war crimes are matters military. Maybe it’s a matter of oranges and lemons, but that’s not the point really, as I was seeking alternative venues to prosecute Assange in a setting where fairness and transparency would prevail

 

the main thrust of my post was (and is) that Assange can not expect a fair trail in a US court, so should not face a US court.

 

in need, send US prosecutors to a neutral location, where a fair trail might be possible, with an unbiased jury pool. (Or at least a less tainted one), as regardless of ones opinion of his guilt or innocence, he does have the right to fair trial, and I would hope that all free citizens uphold that belief.

Unsubstantiated hogwash claims.

 

Assange will face trial in open courts before juries.

 

He’ll get a fair trial which comes with rights of appeal.

 

What he doesn’t get to is choose where he wishes to be tried. He’s had a crack at avoiding courts he doesn’t wish to face, look how that went.

 

[Morch]

8 hours ago, jany123 said:

Assange is on the hook for matters military... war crimes are matters military. Maybe it’s a matter of oranges and lemons, but that’s not the point really, as I was seeking alternative venues to prosecute Assange in a setting where fairness and transparency would prevail

 

the main thrust of my post was (and is) that Assange can not expect a fair trail in a US court, so should not face a US court.

 

in need, send US prosecutors to a neutral location, where a fair trail might be possible, with an unbiased jury pool. (Or at least a less tainted one), as regardless of ones opinion of his guilt or innocence, he does have the right to fair trial, and I would hope that all free citizens uphold that belief.

 

Well no, Assange's case is more to do with what could be labeled as espionage, rather than strictly "military" issues. Even military legal matters aren't solely to do with war crimes. The connection seems tenuous, at best.

 

I think that both the UK legal system and "international courts" (whatever falls under this label) generally do not seem share your extreme views regarding the USA's ability to judge people and conduct trials. The bar, when it comes to deciding such matters, isn't all that high, really. Inserting some ideal benchmark is all very well, but the reality is that people routinely get extradited without such objections aired.

 

I'm not aware (could be wrong) that's there's a provision such as you outline, or that it applies to the case at hand in any way. It appears as if some posters argue that Assange should be treated differently than others...because of reasons.

 

 

[Basil B]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

On 6/13/2019 at 5:04 PM, Thongkorn said:

I wounder how many operatives died becasue of this mans Ill intention ,

Zero

It is not just agents, it is informers to.

 

Do you not think the USA and many other countries do not have agents or informers in most of the Middle East countries?

 

In Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran and other countries many people are tortured and killed just for the reason of being suspected of being an informer.

 

Assange and his WikiLeaks do not filter the information they put out, they just dump anything they have on the web. 

[tifino]

On 6/14/2019 at 2:04 AM, Thongkorn said:

I wounder how many operatives died becasue of this mans Ill intention ,

they/or the CollateralDamage,  were already dead... and he released the concealed videos of it all    

 

the Scales of Justice are locked away in the cupboard!

[tifino]

20 minutes ago, Basil B said:

It is not just agents, it is informers to.

 

Do you not think the USA and many other countries do not have agents or informers in most of the Middle East countries?

 

In Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran and other countries many people are tortured and killed just for the reason of being suspected of being an informer.

 

Assange and his WikiLeaks do not filter the information they put out, they just dump anything they have on the web. 

trouble is that the info/videos etc that ultimately squeezed the US's zits too far, were A10 WartHog/ F18 etc gunsight videos

 

[jany123]

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Unsubstantiated hogwash claims.

 

Assange will face trial in open courts before juries.

 

He’ll get a fair trial which comes with rights of appeal.

 

What he doesn’t get to is choose where he wishes to be tried. He’s had a crack at avoiding courts he doesn’t wish to face, look how that went.

 

What are “unsubstantiated hogwash claims?”

 

my personal opinion that Assange won’t get a fair trail in the US? How should I attempt to substantiate my personal opinion as to that.... it’s a personal opinion?

 

i will admit that I don’t know enough about legal alternatives to accurately discuss how or where he will get a fair trial, (as evidenced by suggesting it be done by an international court, which has been sufficiently derided by Morch for me to accept) but I simply can’t see that happening in the US, with its rampant overzealous patriotism, xenophobia and partisan appointed judges, which is more opinion. I’m not calling it fact, it’s opinion

 

Im also not suggesting he get to choose anything. He shouldn’t have to choose. The system should ensure Assange gets a fair trial, or so I believe. More opinion

 

the only fact that I’m claiming is that Assange, wether innocent or guilty, has the right to a fair trial. Is that unsubstantiated hogwash? If so... fine... I’m not going to try to substantiate it, because if that’s really needed, I’m just wasting time typing

 

And whilst I might be wrong, in considering his “human rights” as part of the extradition hearing, the court, or Assanges lawyers, will also give/hear opinion on this in February

 

theres all sorts of angst in Hong Kong at the moment, about a bill to extradite folk to the mainland for prosecution, because, or so its claimed, it will infringe on the fairness and transparency of trials etc (attacking political rivals, using torture plus plus), so it seems that concerns over human rights are not just concerns that I hold (more oranges and lemons), and ironically, given US comments on the matter, so does the US.

[jany123]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Well no, Assange's case is more to do with what could be labeled as espionage, rather than strictly "military" issues. Even military legal matters aren't solely to do with war crimes. The connection seems tenuous, at best.

 

I think that both the UK legal system and "international courts" (whatever falls under this label) generally do not seem share your extreme views regarding the USA's ability to judge people and conduct trials. The bar, when it comes to deciding such matters, isn't all that high, really. Inserting some ideal benchmark is all very well, but the reality is that people routinely get extradited without such objections aired.

 

I'm not aware (could be wrong) that's there's a provision such as you outline, or that it applies to the case at hand in any way. It appears as if some posters argue that Assange should be treated differently than others...because of reasons.

 

 

Assange should not be treated differently, he should be treated fairly. If to be treated fairly, he needs to be treated differently, then that’s fair.

 

that others are routinely extradited without these objections, is irrelevant, because this is not routine, nor for example, is Mengs extradition from Canada, which is also being objected too

 

im fine with the rest of your post and accept that my suggestion of  using the international courts was ill advised, and that this does not rise to war crimes. However, I still believe that the US will be unable to treat Assange fairly as I obviously have a lower opinion of the US judicial system than you, which, again, has always been the crux of my post/ position.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, jany123 said:

What are “unsubstantiated hogwash claims?”

 

my personal opinion that Assange won’t get a fair trail in the US? How should I attempt to substantiate my personal opinion as to that.... it’s a personal opinion?

 

i will admit that I don’t know enough about legal alternatives to accurately discuss how or where he will get a fair trial, (as evidenced by suggesting it be done by an international court, which has been sufficiently derided by Morch for me to accept) but I simply can’t see that happening in the US, with its rampant overzealous patriotism, xenophobia and partisan appointed judges, which is more opinion. I’m not calling it fact, it’s opinion

 

Im also not suggesting he get to choose anything. He shouldn’t have to choose. The system should ensure Assange gets a fair trial, or so I believe. More opinion

 

the only fact that I’m claiming is that Assange, wether innocent or guilty, has the right to a fair trial. Is that unsubstantiated hogwash? If so... fine... I’m not going to try to substantiate it, because if that’s really needed, I’m just wasting time typing

 

And whilst I might be wrong, in considering his “human rights” as part of the extradition hearing, the court, or Assanges lawyers, will also give/hear opinion on this in February

 

theres all sorts of angst in Hong Kong at the moment, about a bill to extradite folk to the mainland for prosecution, because, or so its claimed, it will infringe on the fairness and transparency of trials etc (attacking political rivals, using torture plus plus), so it seems that concerns over human rights are not just concerns that I hold (more oranges and lemons), and ironically, given US comments on the matter, so does the US.

Yes it is your opinion that Assange will not get a fair trial in the US.

 

It’s still unsubstantiated hogwash.

 

Incidentally, Hong Kong is not a US State and it’s judicial system has nothing to do with that of the US.

 

You are not wrong to believe Assange’s human rights will be part of his extradition hearing, the court will almost certainly hear his lawyers arguments with respect to his human rights. If the court disagrees with those arguments expect Assange to appeal.

 

More evidence of the fair hearings Assange is getting and arguments against him being ill treated.

[jany123]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes it is your opinion that Assange will not get a fair trial in the US.

 

It’s still unsubstantiated hogwash.

 

Incidentally, Hong Kong is not a US State and it’s judicial system has nothing to do with that of the US.

 

You are not wrong to believe Assange’s human rights will be part of his extradition hearing, the court will almost certainly hear his lawyers arguments with respect to his human rights. If the court disagrees with those arguments expect Assange to appeal.

 

More evidence of the fair hearings Assange is getting and arguments against him being ill treated.

Evidence of a fair hearing that Assange should be able to expect.... in the UK

 

no worries.... I can live with you believing that my opinions are hogwash.

 

and incidentally, that Hong Kong is not a US state or dominion, does not lessen the relevance of its inclusion in a discussion on the import of fair trials in general, which is what I have been continually advocating. 

 

If you believe that he will receive a fair and transparent trial in a US federal court, then more power to you.

[Sujo]

Assange will be extradited as long as the death penalty is off the table.

 

US govt will give that assurance.

Sweden havent even charged him with anything.

 

The hearing will consider the severity of the alleged crimes when deciding who gets him first.

 

I doubt its Sweden.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 12:51 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

People need to obey the law in nations they visit.

 

 

He did. Consensual sex is legal, even in Sweden.

Enough information has come out for the original claim to be debunked, IMO.

 

Soooooo, will all those that claimed that he did not face extradition to the US now admit that they were wrong? I'm not holding my breath.