Wikileaks founder Assange loses appeal against extradition to Sweden

[koheesti]

In February 2012, seven judges in the UK Supreme Court must decide

If I were a citizen of the UK I would wonder why my Supreme Court is spending/wasting time deciding whether to send an Aussie to Sweden for questioning. Not enough going on with Brits themselves?

Then you would be asking why the Swedish authorities are doing that. He offered to talk to them but for some Reason the authorities want him in Sweden to talk, like that will make a difference because I'm sure his lawyers have told him to say nothing.

So I suggest your outrage should be put on Sweden as they are the ones that issued the warrant for the UK to hear the matter. Assange didn't have a choice in that.

Nope, I trust the Swedish prosecuters have their reasons for wanting to question him. Sweden isn't some banana republic, Great Satan's lap dog of a country without laws and they have one of the lowest corruption rates around. I trust them more than most. It's creepy Assange and his small legion of followers that I have my suspicions about - and those two scorned women.

[Wallaby]

Nope, I trust the Swedish prosecuters have their reasons for wanting to question him. Sweden isn't some banana republic, Great Satan's lap dog of a country without laws and they have one of the lowest corruption rates around. I trust them more than most. It's creepy Assange and his small legion of followers that I have my suspicions about - and those two scorned women.

There is nothing stopping Swedish authorities from questioning him where he is. Not that he has to answer them. It is them that are tying up the courts.

[midas]

In February 2012, seven judges in the UK Supreme Court must decide

If I were a citizen of the UK I would wonder why my Supreme Court is spending/wasting time deciding whether to send an Aussie to Sweden for questioning. Not enough going on with Brits themselves?

Then you would be asking why the Swedish authorities are doing that. He offered to talk to them but for some Reason the authorities want him in Sweden to talk, like that will make a difference because I'm sure his lawyers have told him to say nothing.

So I suggest your outrage should be put on Sweden as they are the ones that issued the warrant for the UK to hear the matter. Assange didn't have a choice in that.

Nope, I trust the Swedish prosecuters have their reasons for wanting to question him. Sweden isn't some banana republic, Great Satan's lap dog of a country without laws and they have one of the lowest corruption rates around. I trust them more than most. It's creepy Assange and his small legion of followers that I have my suspicions about - and those two scorned women.

Even if a country is not a banana republic it can still have a defective legal system.

You said you trust them ? Why do you trust them? Are you Swedish yourself? Why do you trust them when Swedish members of the legal profession in the country don't even trust them?

In 2006, fifteen Swedish lawyers signed an open letter to the Minister of Justice Thomas Bodström

and said

"Over the past 20 years many innocent men have been convicted to long prison sentences and permanent dishonour. The Supreme Court itself has recognised the fact that innocent men have been convicted because it has granted retrials since the 1990s. These are only the tip of the iceberg. Despite this Sweden’s courts of law continue to adjudicate in the same way that has led to past miscarriages of justice.

The complainants’ unverified information is soon turned into truth. In practice the burden of proof is routinely placed on the accused to prove his innocence, which offends the principles of the legal systems of every civilised country."

http://www.swedenver...ule-of-Law.html

Edited December 31, 2011 by midas

[chuckd]

In February 2012, seven judges in the UK Supreme Court must decide

If I were a citizen of the UK I would wonder why my Supreme Court is spending/wasting time deciding whether to send an Aussie to Sweden for questioning. Not enough going on with Brits themselves?

Then you would be asking why the Swedish authorities are doing that. He offered to talk to them but for some Reason the authorities want him in Sweden to talk, like that will make a difference because I'm sure his lawyers have told him to say nothing.

So I suggest your outrage should be put on Sweden as they are the ones that issued the warrant for the UK to hear the matter. Assange didn't have a choice in that.

The only thing we can really believe Assange had a choice in is what started this entire fiasco.

Whether or not to have sex with these two women. Unless, of course, they raped him while he was asleep?

[midas]

In February 2012, seven judges in the UK Supreme Court must decide

If I were a citizen of the UK I would wonder why my Supreme Court is spending/wasting time deciding whether to send an Aussie to Sweden for questioning. Not enough going on with Brits themselves?

Then you would be asking why the Swedish authorities are doing that. He offered to talk to them but for some Reason the authorities want him in Sweden to talk, like that will make a difference because I'm sure his lawyers have told him to say nothing.

So I suggest your outrage should be put on Sweden as they are the ones that issued the warrant for the UK to hear the matter. Assange didn't have a choice in that.

The only thing we can really believe Assange had a choice in is what started this entire fiasco.

Whether or not to have sex with these two women. Unless, of course, they raped him while he was asleep?

so did both ladies....

" Both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange."

http://www.guardian....-assange-sweden

and

" The allegations are controversial due to the involvement of a politician in reopening the investigation, which was previously closed, the actions of Swedish police and because both complainants (who went to the police together after meeting each other) admit to multiple consensual sexual acts, over multiple days, with Mr Assange.Both complainants admit to.consenting to sex and that consent to sex was not removed at any stage"

http://www.telegraph...nt-in-full.html

Edited December 31, 2011 by midas

[chuckd]

The only thing we can really believe Assange had a choice in is what started this entire fiasco.

Whether or not to have sex with these two women. Unless, of course, they raped him while he was asleep?

so did both ladies....

" Both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange."

http://www.guardian....-assange-sweden

and

" The allegations are controversial due to the involvement of a politician in reopening the investigation, which was previously closed, the actions of Swedish police and because both complainants (who went to the police together after meeting each other) admit to multiple consensual sexual acts, over multiple days, with Mr Assange.Both complainants admit to.consenting to sex and that consent to sex was not removed at any stage"

http://www.telegraph...nt-in-full.html

I never claimed the ladies did not agree. Does that absolve him from any personal responsibility in the matter?

By the way, please stop altering a quoted post of mine by changing the font. Even Assange apologists have to follow forum rules.

[TAWP]

Even if a country is not a banana republic it can still have a defective legal system.

You said you trust them ? Why do you trust them? Are you Swedish yourself? Why do you trust them when Swedish members of the legal profession in the country don't even trust them?

In 2006, fifteen Swedish lawyers signed an open letter to the Minister of Justice Thomas Bodström

and said

"Over the past 20 years many innocent men have been convicted to long prison sentences and permanent dishonour. The Supreme Court itself has recognised the fact that innocent men have been convicted because it has granted retrials since the 1990s. These are only the tip of the iceberg. Despite this Sweden’s courts of law continue to adjudicate in the same way that has led to past miscarriages of justice.

The complainants’ unverified information is soon turned into truth. In practice the burden of proof is routinely placed on the accused to prove his innocence, which offends the principles of the legal systems of every civilised country."

http://www.swedenver...ule-of-Law.html

Indeed - one of our most famous serial-killers...might not be one. He has been confessing to crimes in Sweden and Norway that we now know there is no chance he carried out. He was being coached by prosecutors and psychiatrists that, knowingly or unknowingly, allowed themselves to be cold-read by picking up on the mentions of facts that matched and disregarding all that was wrong.

Currently the tally is that the to life-time in prison sentenced man might have carried out some acts - but most likely is a 'wannabee', mentally disturbed, with a wish to be famous.

The most disturbing fact about this revelation: That there is many murderers still walking the streets due to this man being sentenced for the crimes they infact carried out.

[koheesti]

In 2006, fifteen Swedish lawyers signed an open letter to the Minister of Justice Thomas Bodström

and said

"Over the past 20 years many innocent men have been convicted to long prison sentences and permanent dishonour. The Supreme Court itself has recognised the fact that innocent men have been convicted because it has granted retrials since the 1990s. These are only the tip of the iceberg. Despite this Sweden’s courts of law continue to adjudicate in the same way that has led to past miscarriages of justice.

The complainants’ unverified information is soon turned into truth. In practice the burden of proof is routinely placed on the accused to prove his innocence, which offends the principles of the legal systems of every civilised country."

http://www.swedenver...ule-of-Law.html

Fifteen (15) lawyers wrote a letter in 2006? That year there were 4415 lawyers members of the Bar in Sweden (see link below). So I should be concerned about the Swedish legal system being corrupt because 0.34% of the lawyers wrote a letter? I'm sure a much higher percentage of people who personally know Assange think he should be in jail (1 out of every 200 would be higher).

http://www.ccbe.org/..._1179905628.pdf

Edited December 31, 2011 by koheesti

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been deleted. Please stay on the topic.

[TAWP]

In 2006, fifteen Swedish lawyers signed an open letter to the Minister of Justice Thomas Bodström

and said

"Over the past 20 years many innocent men have been convicted to long prison sentences and permanent dishonour. The Supreme Court itself has recognised the fact that innocent men have been convicted because it has granted retrials since the 1990s. These are only the tip of the iceberg. Despite this Sweden’s courts of law continue to adjudicate in the same way that has led to past miscarriages of justice.

The complainants’ unverified information is soon turned into truth. In practice the burden of proof is routinely placed on the accused to prove his innocence, which offends the principles of the legal systems of every civilised country."

http://www.swedenver...ule-of-Law.html

Fifteen (15) lawyers wrote a letter in 2006? That year there were 4415 lawyers members of the Bar in Sweden (see link below). So I should be concerned about the Swedish legal system being corrupt because 0.34% of the lawyers wrote a letter? I'm sure a much higher percentage of people who personally know Assange think he should be in jail (1 out of every 200 would be higher).

http://www.ccbe.org/..._1179905628.pdf

Since I didn't get any message from Scott I will assume my post was removed in error.

So again: The 15 lawyers are among the best known lawyers in the nation. To dismiss their open letter merely because they didn't search out all other lawyers in the nation is to demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge in regards to who they are.

[koheesti]

In 2006, fifteen Swedish lawyers signed an open letter to the Minister of Justice Thomas Bodström

and said

"Over the past 20 years many innocent men have been convicted to long prison sentences and permanent dishonour. The Supreme Court itself has recognised the fact that innocent men have been convicted because it has granted retrials since the 1990s. These are only the tip of the iceberg. Despite this Sweden’s courts of law continue to adjudicate in the same way that has led to past miscarriages of justice.

The complainants’ unverified information is soon turned into truth. In practice the burden of proof is routinely placed on the accused to prove his innocence, which offends the principles of the legal systems of every civilised country."

http://www.swedenver...ule-of-Law.html

Fifteen (15) lawyers wrote a letter in 2006? That year there were 4415 lawyers members of the Bar in Sweden (see link below). So I should be concerned about the Swedish legal system being corrupt because 0.34% of the lawyers wrote a letter? I'm sure a much higher percentage of people who personally know Assange think he should be in jail (1 out of every 200 would be higher).

http://www.ccbe.org/..._1179905628.pdf

Since I didn't get any message from Scott I will assume my post was removed in error.

So again: The 15 lawyers are among the best known lawyers in the nation. To dismiss their open letter merely because they didn't search out all other lawyers in the nation is to demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge in regards to who they are.

And I'm sure that if you find 15 people who know Assange best not all would agree that he is as innocent as his supporters here like to portray him. Look no further than his ex-colleagues at Wikileaks.

ANYWAY, no system is 100% perfect. You're Swedish, aren't you? Are you ashamed of your own legal system? Don't you think it's overall more fair than most?

Edited January 1, 2012 by koheesti

[TAWP]

So again: The 15 lawyers are among the best known lawyers in the nation. To dismiss their open letter merely because they didn't search out all other lawyers in the nation is to demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge in regards to who they are.

And I'm sure that if you find 15 people who know Assange best not all would agree that he is as innocent as his supporters here like to portray him. Look no further than his ex-colleagues at Wikileaks.

ANYWAY, no system is 100% perfect. You're Swedish, aren't you? Are you ashamed of your own legal system? Don't you think it's overall more fair than most?

Complete besides the point if he is guilty or not - due process still needs to be followed.

So yes, while we have grown up thinking our legal system is 'more fair' than others, there still is issues. While the idea of 'jury nullification' (even if not legal in all states iirc) would speak in favour of jury's, I think in general it is a weakness to have 'a jury of commons' in a legal system. Laws shouldn't be emotional, they should be logical. As should trials and verdicts.

But especially 'Tingsratt' (lowest instance in Swedish legal system) is riddled with issues of politically appointed 'namndeman' that has no legal schooling that vote for verdicts that directly goes against the verdicts voted for by the judge, the only legally trained person on the bench in that instance. Leading to a situation where appeals are the common due process, to 'Hovratten', without their being a need for a 'change in evidence' or 'issue with the trial', as prescribed in the US etc. It merely is a step of going to Mom, being upset with that she says and then going to Dad to try to get something better, be you the defense lawyer or prosecutor.

Anyway, a lot can be said of the system in general, but don't for one minute underestimate the damage some 'agenda pushers' at times cause to the legal system. There have been big cases in the past that is part of the national shame as far as I am concerned. Cases we now know was just completely without basis, sometimes completely manufactured by a few with an extreme agenda. In a setting where everyone is supposed to be 'good' and 'honest' (lawyer must inform the authorities if he knows about a crime that will occur, a lawyer must excuse himself if he knows the client is guilty but intend to claim he is not guilty etc) a few dishonest people have way too of a big advantage.

Anyway, this will become a rant. So I shall stop here.

Edited January 1, 2012 by TAWP

[midas]

And I'm sure that if you find 15 people who know Assange best not all would agree that he is as innocent as his supporters here like to portray him. Look no further than his ex-colleagues at Wikileaks.

ANYWAY, no system is 100% perfect

. You're Swedish, aren't you? Are you ashamed of your own legal system? Don't you think it's overall more fair than most?

that must be the understatement of 2012

1 The Swedish legal system features lay judges who are appointed because of their political affiliations to adjudicate in criminal proceedings. They have no formal legal training.

2 The Swedish legal system differs substantially not only from common law systems but also from most civil law systems. There is no strict division of the judicial and executive branches.

3 A poll in 2008 by the SOM Institute in Gothenberg revealed that 37% of Swedish people consider the competency of lay judges to be low.

4 A poll in 2011 by Swedish state television revealed that 60% of the professional judges have no confidence in the lay judge system.

http://www.swedenver...Lay-Judges.html

Edited January 2, 2012 by midas

[nikster]

Step back for a moment and consider the allegations, the severity of the alleged crime.

How many other people do we see extradition requests for for this sort of crime, where formal proceedings have not even started? Where there isnt even a trial scheduled? My bet: None. Zero.

Assange is being targeted because of who he is and what he did, namely embarrass nearly all nations in the western world. They have it in for him.

If I was accused of having committed the exact same crime, do you think swedish prosecutors would file extradition requests? No chance in hell... Due process? This is the opposite. It should be obvious that a trial in this case cannot ever yield a coinviction.

Edited January 2, 2012 by nikster

[midas]

Step back for a moment and consider the allegations, the severity of the alleged crime.

How many other people do we see extradition requests for for this sort of crime, where formal proceedings have not even started? Where there isnt even a trial scheduled? My bet: None. Zero.

Assange is being targeted because of who he is and what he did, namely embarrass nearly all nations in the western world. They have it in for him.

If I was accused of having committed the exact same crime, do you think swedish prosecutors would file extradition requests? No chance in hell... Due process? This is the opposite. It should be obvious that a trial in this case cannot ever yield a coinviction.

" A great deal more damning evidence is yet to be revealed about what passes for legal process in Sweden, such as Assange’s lawyers having not received a single official document until November 18, 2010 (and then in Swedish language contrary to European Law) and having to learn about the status of investigations through prosecution media announcements but make no mistake: it is not Julian Assange that is on trial here but Sweden and its reputation as a modern and model country with rules of law."

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/12/02/when-it-comes-to-assange-r-pe-case-the-swedes-are-making-it-up-as-they-go-along/

[midas]

And I'm sure that if you find 15 people who know Assange best not all would agree that he is as innocent as his supporters here like to portray him. Look no further than his ex-colleagues at Wikileaks.

But the most impressive part about people who do believe in him even when they didn't know him is that they were prepared to put their money where their mouth is !

John Pilger is one of the best journalists out there and you only have to see how many awards he has won to verify that

http://johnpilger.com/biography

John Pilger said about JulianAssange “This is a man who’s made some very serious enemies for the very best of reasons.” He said he knew Assange personally and had “a very high regard for him.

He said that he was prepared to put up 20,000 pounds as surety “because there was a possibility of an injustice being perpetrated against Julian Assange personally. He has been doing the job of a journalist and he deserves the support of people who believe that the free flow of information is the bedrock of a democracy.”

Ken Loach, director of such films as Land and Freedom, Bread and Roses, and The Wind That Shakes the Barley, said that he did not know Assange personally but was willing to put up 20,000 pounds for bond. “I think the work he has done has been a public service,” he said. “I think we are entitled to know the dealings of those that govern us.”

Jemima Khan, who is also the sister of Conservative Member of Parliament Zac Goldsmith, told the court that although she did not personally know Assange she was prepared to offer 20,000 pounds, “or more if need be.” Retired solicitor Geoffrey Shears and retired Professor Patricia David also pledged the same sum, while a sixth unnamed person offered to put up 80,000, for a total bail fund of 160,000.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/dec2010/assa-d08.shtml

[Nasreddin]

In February 2012, seven judges in the UK Supreme Court must decide

If I were a citizen of the UK I would wonder why my Supreme Court is spending/wasting time deciding whether to send an Aussie to Sweden for questioning. Not enough going on with Brits themselves?

UK judges are probably not xenophobic.

[koheesti]

Oooo, Assange has made powerful enemies!!! And powerful firends as last I heard he was living in a 10-bedroom mansion. IF, a very big IF, Assange had all of these powerful enemies he wouldn't be walking around today. There are easier and more efficient ways of dealing with him. BUT, it sounds really cool and the conspiracy brigade will be happy to open their wallets to protect him against Assange's fabricated enemies. Or give him a mansion to live in. Maroons.

[happysanook]

what a joke. if she was truly asleep, how did she know?she acknowledges inviting him for sex, then willingly did it twice ...

simply shocking this even made it past a laughing desk officer....

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

Edited January 2, 2012 by happysanook

[chuckd]

what a joke. if she was truly asleep, how did she know?she acknowledges inviting him for sex, then willingly did it twice ...

simply shocking this even made it past a laughing desk officer....

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

I thought she awoke as he was climbing off. It seems it didn't rock her boat, as they say.

[Ulysses G.]

what a joke. if she was truly asleep, how did she know?

Probably because she woke up with some seedy, blond guy on top of her.

Edited January 2, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[midas]

Oooo, Assange has made powerful enemies!!! And powerful firends as last I heard he was living in a 10-bedroom mansion. IF, a very big IF, Assange had all of these powerful enemies he wouldn't be walking around today. There are easier and more efficient ways of dealing with him. BUT, it sounds really cool and the conspiracy brigade will be happy to open their wallets to protect him against Assange's fabricated enemies. Or give him a mansion to live in. Maroons.

koheest I was wondering why you together with chuckd and Ulysses are not on this list ..................?

http://www.peopleokw...m/the_list.html

Edited January 2, 2012 by midas

[chuckd]

Oooo, Assange has made powerful enemies!!! And powerful firends as last I heard he was living in a 10-bedroom mansion. IF, a very big IF, Assange had all of these powerful enemies he wouldn't be walking around today. There are easier and more efficient ways of dealing with him. BUT, it sounds really cool and the conspiracy brigade will be happy to open their wallets to protect him against Assange's fabricated enemies. Or give him a mansion to live in. Maroons.

koheest I was wondering why you together with chuckd and Ulysses are not on this list ..................?

http://www.peopleokw...m/the_list.html

Now why would an undocumented blog site run by two guys named Mike and Alfred bother with three anonymous posters on a forum in Thailand?

Add my name if you want to, but the so called quote of Governor Huckabee doesn't say Assange should be killed. Read his quote again and let us know what you think.

The rest of it is too silly to comment on.

[Scott]

I think we are getting a little too personal and a little too far off-topic.

[midas]

" The Swedish prosecutorial office, after investigating the charges, dismissed them. But, strangely, another Swedish prosecutor, a woman suspected of connections to Washington, resurrected the charges and is seeking to extradite Assange to Sweden from the UK for questioning.

The legal question is whether a prosecutor can seek extradition for investigative purposes. The UK Supreme Court thinks that this is a valid question, and has agreed to hear the case. Normally, extradition requests come from courts and are issued for persons formally charged with a crime. Sweden has not charged Assange with a crime."

Paul Craig Roberts ( formerly Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.)

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

Edited January 3, 2012 by midas

[Naam]

" The Swedish prosecutorial office, after investigating the charges, dismissed them. But, strangely, another Swedish prosecutor, a woman suspected of connections to Washington, resurrected the charges and is seeking to extradite Assange to Sweden from the UK for questioning.

The legal question is whether a prosecutor can seek extradition for investigative purposes. The UK Supreme Court thinks that this is a valid question, and has agreed to hear the case. Normally, extradition requests come from courts and are issued for persons formally charged with a crime. Sweden has not charged Assange with a crime."

Paul Craig Roberts ( formerly Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.)

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

Assange’s case is mysterious. Assange sought refuge in Sweden, where he was seduced by two women. Both admit that they had sexual intercourse with him voluntarily, but afterwards they have come forth with claims that as they were sleeping with him in the bed, he again had sexual intercourse with them, and that they had not approved this second helping and that he was asked to use a condom but did not.

[GentlemanJim]

" The Swedish prosecutorial office, after investigating the charges, dismissed them. But, strangely, another Swedish prosecutor, a woman suspected of connections to Washington, resurrected the charges and is seeking to extradite Assange to Sweden from the UK for questioning.

The legal question is whether a prosecutor can seek extradition for investigative purposes. The UK Supreme Court thinks that this is a valid question, and has agreed to hear the case. Normally, extradition requests come from courts and are issued for persons formally charged with a crime. Sweden has not charged Assange with a crime."

Paul Craig Roberts ( formerly Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.)

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

Thanks. Good article.

[koheesti]

" The Swedish prosecutorial office, after investigating the charges, dismissed them. But, strangely, another Swedish prosecutor, a woman suspected of connections to Washington, resurrected the charges and is seeking to extradite Assange to Sweden from the UK for questioning.

The legal question is whether a prosecutor can seek extradition for investigative purposes. The UK Supreme Court thinks that this is a valid question, and has agreed to hear the case. Normally, extradition requests come from courts and are issued for persons formally charged with a crime. Sweden has not charged Assange with a crime."

Paul Craig Roberts ( formerly Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.)

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

"another Swedish prosecutor, suspected of connections to Washington"? What does that mean exactly? Paul doesn\t bother to elaborate.

Ironic that you Assange supporters believe that since she is "suspected" she must be guilty by association but at the same time, Assange is also "suspected" but he is innocent. In the Assnage case there are two eye witnesses and he hasn't denied sleeping with them. Even if this Swedish prosecutor has any "connections" to Washington (whatever that means) does that automatically make the charges BS and Assange innocent?

[GentlemanJim]

" The Swedish prosecutorial office, after investigating the charges, dismissed them. But, strangely, another Swedish prosecutor, a woman suspected of connections to Washington, resurrected the charges and is seeking to extradite Assange to Sweden from the UK for questioning.

The legal question is whether a prosecutor can seek extradition for investigative purposes. The UK Supreme Court thinks that this is a valid question, and has agreed to hear the case. Normally, extradition requests come from courts and are issued for persons formally charged with a crime. Sweden has not charged Assange with a crime."

Paul Craig Roberts ( formerly Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal.)

http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/

"another Swedish prosecutor, suspected of connections to Washington"? What does that mean exactly? Paul doesn\t bother to elaborate.

Ironic that you Assange supporters believe that since she is "suspected" she must be guilty by association but at the same time, Assange is also "suspected" but he is innocent. In the Assnage case there are two eye witnesses and he hasn't denied sleeping with them. Even if this Swedish prosecutor has any "connections" to Washington (whatever that means) does that automatically make the charges BS and Assange innocent?

There is lots of information and links concerning this on the thread. Here is part of some info I posted a couple of weeks ago.

.

1. The original prosecutor in charge, Eva Finné, dropped the charges the same week they were made and stated they were groundless.

2. Eva Finné was removed from the case by Claes Borgström and a new prosecutor, Marianne Ny, was appointed. Her first act was to reinstate the charges.

3. Claes Borgström is a former politician. His law partner is Thomas Bodström. Thomas Bodström is Sweden’s former Minister of Justice.

4. Thomas Bodström is currently in the USA, he has close connections with the CIA and approved rendition flights out of Sweden without following due process.

5. It is Swedish protocol not to release the names of people accused of rape until after a conviction. The Swedish prosecutors office claims they have “no idea” how Assange’s name was leaked.

6. Normally Swedish media will not publish an accused’s name until after a conviction. Swedish media is controlled by a single ruling class family named Bonnier who work closely with local politicians to protect their media monopoly.

7. Claes Borgström’s two sisters, Annette Kullenberg and Kerstin Vinterhed, both work for Bonnier family newspapers.

8. Anna Ardin (one of the victims) and Thomas Bodström are high ranking members of the right wing Christian political organization “Socialdemokrat-Brödraskapet”.

9. Claes Borgström is a right wing politician whose push for larger big brother powers for the Swedish state were leaked by Wikileaks.

So the strong link to Washington is the ex Minister for Justice, who worked closely with the CIA. He and one of the victims are senior members of the same right wing group. He is permanent resident in the USA now, yet has been instrumental in initiating the actions that have brought about the 'renewed interest in Assange in sweden'. The whole thing is a can of worms.

[koheesti]

Still just a lot of flimsy circumstantial "evidence".

#1 & #2 - does this prove that the charges are trumped up? Or does it prove that Eva Finne wasn't doing her job? What are her connections??? Is she left wing?

#3 - CB is a former politician. He works with TB. TB is a former M of J. All that proves is they should know each other.

#4 - TB is now in the USA (which means what?) and has close connections to the CIA (we know this because the writer tells us so?)

#5 - Someone broke Swedish protocol. Happens all the time. How does this make Assange innocent?

#6 - "Normally..." which means not all the time.

#7 - CB's two sisters worked for the largest media conglomerate in the country. So have tens of thousands of others.

#8 - AA - one of the victims - is a member of a right wing group - and still slept with Assange? So obviously she wasn't taken in by Assange's charm, fame or good looks so it must have been a setup. Except that she apparently didn't report anything wrong for a couple weeks or so. If anything that proves it wasn't a setup.

#9 - CB had some of his own communication leaked by Assange. So, anyone whose name appeared in the 200,000+ cables leaked by Assange can't be trusted?