Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, faces yet another hurdle in his prolonged extradition battle as judges in the UK High Court ruled that he could launch a new appeal against being sent to the US. The court's decision came with the condition that the US must assure Assange of freedom of speech protections and guarantee that he will not face the death penalty upon extradition.

 

The legal saga surrounding Assange stems from WikiLeaks' publication of thousands of classified documents between 2010 and 2011. While supporters argue that the leaks exposed US criminality, Assange has been criticized for failing to redact the names of intelligence operatives, potentially endangering lives. Seeking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, Assange attempted to evade extradition to the US but was ultimately arrested in 2019 and has since been held in UK prisons.

 

The recent ruling by the UK High Court follows a decision by then-Home Secretary Priti Patel in June 2022, approving Assange's extradition to the US to face trial for 18 offences. However, Assange's legal team has vigorously contested this decision, submitting nine grounds of appeal to the High Court, six of which were initially rejected.

 

Of the remaining three grounds, the court found merit in two critical issues. Firstly, it questioned whether Assange, as a foreign national, would receive adequate freedom of expression protections under the US constitution. Secondly, concerns were raised about the lack of sufficient guarantees that Assange would not face the death penalty in the US, despite not being charged with such an offence.

 

 

Assange's lawyers cited remarks by former US President Donald Trump, suggesting support for the death penalty in Assange's case, as cause for concern. While the US has reassured that Assange is not charged with any capital offence and has offered assurances regarding his potential sentence and the possibility of serving it in Australia, the UK court remains cautious.

 

The court's adjournment of the final decision by three weeks allows the US government time to address these concerns. If assurances are provided, a final hearing could take place in May; otherwise, Assange will be granted leave to appeal without further delay.

 

Outside the courtroom, Assange's wife, Stella Assange, denounced the proceedings, portraying her husband as a "political prisoner" persecuted for his journalistic endeavors. Despite facing a potential sentence of up to 175 years in jail if convicted, the US government has downplayed the severity of the punishment, suggesting a shorter term.

 

As the extradition battle continues, Assange's fate hangs in the balance, with his legal team exploring all available avenues, including a potential appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. Meanwhile, calls for his release have gained traction, with Australia's parliament passing a motion urging the UK and US governments to grant Assange freedom, though the legal implications remain uncertain.

 

27.03.24

Source

 

2 hours ago, Social Media said:

The court's decision came with the condition that the US must assure Assange of freedom of speech protections and guarantee that he will not face the death penalty upon extradition.

Easily done.

They are in any case two baseless claims made by Assange himself.

 

If the Australian parliament wish to get involved they might consider paying the bill for the costs caused to the UK by their citizen going on the lam.

 

 

Two faced double morality, strange not everyone sees it that way

Good luck Julian. And well done Australia. 

 

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are two principles that any civilized society must uphold. The US government must not be allowed to trample over both to cover up their dirty, not so little secrets. 

 

Keep fighting the good fight. 

It’s a salutary fact that not a single minute of the time Assange spent in hiding and later in prison can be attributed to anything other than Assange’s decision to go on the lam.

 

Chelsea Manning faced justice, served her time and is out free and getting on with life.

 

Assange has pished away the prime of his life not man enough to face justice for his own actions.

 

 

DT and his more dastardly enablers (like Roger Stone) were supposedly trying hard to get Assange extradited when he was in the WH.  I suspect they were looking to make use of his talents in the 2020 election, not stick him in a supermax.

 

7 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press are two principles that any civilized society must uphold.

First, Assange is a private individual and not the "press."

US Case Law applies vs UK's Common Law. The US will insist US laws apply, not UK with Assange as an incarcerated prisoner wherein many freedoms are limited.

"[W]hen a regulation impinges on inmates' constitutional rights, the regulation is valid if it is reasonably related to legitimate penological interests."  Turner v. Safley 482 U.S. 78 (1987).

 

Hope to see an end to all this, and you back home in Oz

a free man. 

13 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s a salutary fact that not a single minute of the time Assange spent in hiding and later in prison can be attributed to anything other than Assange’s decision to go on the lam.

 

Chelsea Manning faced justice, served her time and is out free and getting on with life.

 

Assange has pished away the prime of his life not man enough to face justice for his own actions.

 

 

Justice? btw he was not hiding, he was under protection in an Embassy of a country that eventually could not resist the pressure.

If Assange was such a champion of morality in society, he would have returned to Sweden to face the allegations of sexual assault which he was charged with.

Let’s get him over here on trial heck he can be trumps press secretary in the slammer and possibly some proud boys wife lol 😂 

7 hours ago, arithai12 said:

Justice? btw he was not hiding, he was under protection in an Embassy of a country that eventually could not resist the pressure.

He was hiding from justice, he hid at the Embassy of a nation with a deplorable record on suppression of the press and murder of journalists, but which had at the time Assange fled into the embassy a President who had made a political career out of thumbing his nose at the U.S.

 

An election in Ecuador removed Assange’s benefactor, Assange was then back to being held accountable for his own behavior.

 

 

You don’t get to rewrite history:

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2019/apr/11/julian-assange-ecuador-president-lenin-moreno-evict-from-embassy

 

 

42 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

An election in Ecuador removed Assange’s benefactor, Assange was then back to being held accountable for his own behavior.

 

The world needs people like Julian Assange.

When foxes are in charge,  of most of the Hen houses.

Bad things can happen.

 

What were those words again.

Light em up. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. two Reuters personal dead.

cover ups,  happen when bad foxes are in charge.

if those journalists were your family, wouldn't you want the truth. 

 

1 hour ago, quake said:

 

The world needs people like Julian Assange.

When foxes are in charge,  of most of the Hen houses.

Bad things can happen.

 

What were those words again.

Light em up. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. two Reuters personal dead.

cover ups,  happen when bad foxes are in charge.

if those journalists were your family, wouldn't you want the truth. 

 

Opinions differ.

On 3/27/2024 at 9:22 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s a salutary fact that not a single minute of the time Assange spent in hiding and later in prison can be attributed to anything other than Assange’s decision to go on the lam.

 

Chelsea Manning faced justice, served her time and is out free and getting on with life.

 

Assange has pished away the prime of his life not man enough to face justice for his own actions.

 

 

Lack of space no doubt prevented you from mentioning the fact that Julian sought refuge in London to escape a charge of sexual assault in Sweden. A charge that was subsequently dropped. Furthermore, the woman making the charge was found to be a CIA operative.

You talk of facing "justice"?

Jeez!

1 hour ago, Red Forever said:

Lack of space no doubt prevented you from mentioning the fact that Julian sought refuge in London to escape a charge of sexual assault in Sweden. A charge that was subsequently dropped. Furthermore, the woman making the charge was found to be a CIA operative.

You talk of facing "justice"?

Jeez!

Reliable source for this please.

 

"Furthermore, the woman making the charge was found to be a CIA operative."

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Reliable source for this please.

 

"Furthermore, the woman making the charge was found to be a CIA operative."

Don’t hold your breath.

On 3/28/2024 at 11:49 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Opinions differ.

Far left fascism

5 hours ago, Dolf said:

Far left fascism

Says Putin shill

On 3/27/2024 at 6:36 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Easily done.

They are in any case two baseless claims made by Assange himself.

 

If the Australian parliament wish to get involved they might consider paying the bill for the costs caused to the UK by their citizen going on the lam.

 

 

Article 7.

 

 

For those suffering the delusion that treaties and case law doesn’t matter:

 

https://www.congress.gov/treaty-document/108th-congress/23/document-text

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Says Putin shill

So you are pro war

Happy with wmd lies

23 hours ago, stevenl said:

Reliable source for this please.

 

"Furthermore, the woman making the charge was found to be a CIA operative."

At least linked to a sweedish investigator. The accusations was mildly said suspicious. But, people read and see exactly what they want to see, and without proofs, or conviction, who really knows? 

 

We all have to judge based on what we do not know, or not judge at all. Always those who is sure they know, even they do not. 

 

Trust the system someone said once

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/assange-case-in-turmoil-as-accuser-linked-to-police-20110311-1br48.html

 

 

1 hour ago, Dolf said:

So you are pro war

Happy with wmd lies

Says he who supports the guy that invaded another country and is threatening nuclear war.

11 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Says he who supports the guy that invaded another country and is threatening nuclear war.

Who supports who

12 hours ago, Hummin said:

At least linked to a sweedish investigator. The accusations was mildly said suspicious. But, people read and see exactly what they want to see, and without proofs, or conviction, who really knows? 

 

We all have to judge based on what we do not know, or not judge at all. Always those who is sure they know, even they do not. 

 

Trust the system someone said once

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/assange-case-in-turmoil-as-accuser-linked-to-police-20110311-1br48.html

 

 

 

Why were the accusations suspicious? Because one of the investigating officers had contact with one of the alleged victim in the past?

14 hours ago, Hummin said:

At least linked to a sweedish investigator. The accusations was mildly said suspicious. But, people read and see exactly what they want to see, and without proofs, or conviction, who really knows? 

 

We all have to judge based on what we do not know, or not judge at all. Always those who is sure they know, even they do not. 

 

Trust the system someone said once

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/assange-case-in-turmoil-as-accuser-linked-to-police-20110311-1br48.html

 

 

On the matter of Assange reviving bail backed by a guarantor and then going on the lam, burdening his guarantor with the legal obligation to shell out the cash.

 

Do you have any thoughts on that, or is it one of those gray areas between known truths, signed agreements and the desire of a toxic narcissist to avoid justice kind of things?!

 

 

14 hours ago, Hummin said:

At least linked to a sweedish investigator. The accusations was mildly said suspicious. But, people read and see exactly what they want to see, and without proofs, or conviction, who really knows? 

 

We all have to judge based on what we do not know, or not judge at all. Always those who is sure they know, even they do not. 

 

Trust the system someone said once

 

https://www.smh.com.au/world/assange-case-in-turmoil-as-accuser-linked-to-police-20110311-1br48.html

 

 

Let the guy go home

12 hours ago, Dolf said:

Let the guy go home

He can after the DOJ has finished with him.

43 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He can after the DOJ has finished with him.

Fascist

On 3/27/2024 at 6:36 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Easily done.

They are in any case two baseless claims made by Assange himself.

 

If the Australian parliament wish to get involved they might consider paying the bill for the costs caused to the UK by their citizen going on the lam.

 

 

And done so easily:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/apr/16/us-provides-assurances-to-prevent-assange-appeal-against-extradition