Wikileaks founder Assange loses appeal against extradition to Sweden

[Wallaby]

Normally an accused will say nothing and the police will arrest or not arrest on the evidence they have. Usually anything an accused says will not be of assistance to him but will assist the police in determining what charges to lay. If they don't have enough evidence to charge a person, if he says nothing, then they won't arrest him.

I agree with that BUT to me the Assange situation seems like this...

I'm at home and a knock comes at the door. It's the police;

POLICE: Mr. Koheesti, You need to come down to the police station with us to answer some questions.

ME: Why? What have I done?

POLICE: A couple women have accused you of blah, blah, blah.

ME: You know, I was down there a couple months ago and nobody wanted to ask me any questions then. What's up?

POLICE: Mr. Koheesti, sir, there are some questions now. Will you please come with us?

ME: Well, I have the right to remain silent so I refuse to go with you. You can ask me questions now while you're standing in my doorway but I won't answer them.

POLICE: OK, Mr. Koheesti. That is your legal right. Sorry for disturbing you. Thank you for your time and have a nice day.

I can understand your point but you could try to look at it this way.

Police ask you to come to the station for questioning. You refuse. Why the hell would they then issue a warrant for questioning when you are not going to answer? Surely they would just arrest and charge you, if they have the evidence. If they don't have the evidence then they should in fact just leave.

Don't get me wrong, I have no doubt it has nothing to do with 'questioning'. When they get him on Swedish soil he will be charged. The warrant for questioning is only because it is easier to get him to Sweden that way, instead of an actual arrest warrant when they don't have much evidence. Sweden are playing it well.

Will be interesting how the higher court in the UK deals with it.

Edited January 8, 2012 by Wallaby

[Ulysses G.]

I wouldn't even waste your time any more with these guys GentlemanJim! I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Ulysses

and his colleagues will still be on here arguing he is guilty even if the UK Supreme Court rules against Sweden!

The ruling of the UK Supreme Court has nothing to do with Assange being guilty or innocent. They are only deciding if he should be extradited.

Edited January 8, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[Scott]

One off-topic post deleted.

Please stay on the topic.

[midas]

" A year ago this week, it was learned that a US grand jury had secretly issued subpoenas for the Twitter account information of several WikiLeaks supporters."

Good. He should face justice in both places.

Requiring out IP addresses to track down the real identity of SUPPORTERS isn't directly about Assange, it is about tracking down everyone that dislikes big government and be able to harass them at will.

http://grantjkidney.com/new-homeland-security-program-designed-to-monitor-journalists-in-orwellian-assault-on-free-speech/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=new-homeland-security-program-designed-to-monitor-journalists-in-orwellian-assault-on-free-speech

[Scott]

Two off-topic posts have been deleted.

Please stick to the topic, which is not about US political parties. At least not at this point in time.

[midas]

for those interested you can see live coverage of the two-day appeal hearing beginning today

at the UK Supreme Court at this link

http://www.abc.net.au/news/livevideo/

[midas]

for those interested you can see live coverage of the two-day appeal hearing beginning today

at the UK Supreme Court at this link

http://www.abc.net.au/news/livevideo/

Assange's barrister is brilliant! I can't possibly see how the female barrister acting for Sweden ( who is yet to be heard )can effectively

counteract the content of the current argument in which she even gave a chronology regarding the evolution

of the European arrest warrant.

would never get this kind of coverage in a Swedish court

Edited February 1, 2012 by midas

[chuckd]

for those interested you can see live coverage of the two-day appeal hearing beginning today

at the UK Supreme Court at this link

http://www.abc.net.au/news/livevideo/

Assange's barrister is brilliant! I can't possibly see how the female barrister acting for Sweden ( who is yet to be heard )can effectively

counteract the content of the current argument in which she even gave a chronology regarding the evolution

of the European arrest warrant.

would never get this kind of coverage in a Swedish court

Thanks for the link, Midas. Best sleeping pill I have had in weeks. Dozed right off listening to the crackling of turning pages and the monotone of a female lawyer.

Now I am out for some real excitement...watching my grass grow...in the dark. Might even count the stars in the sky.

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been deleted.

If you don't want to watch the proceedings on the link provided, then you may also refrain from commenting about it.

The thread is about Assange and his appeal; not viewer habits in various countries.

[Wallaby]

for those interested you can see live coverage of the two-day appeal hearing beginning today

at the UK Supreme Court at this link

http://www.abc.net.au/news/livevideo/

Assange's barrister is brilliant! I can't possibly see how the female barrister acting for Sweden ( who is yet to be heard )can effectively

counteract the content of the current argument in which she even gave a chronology regarding the evolution

of the European arrest warrant.

would never get this kind of coverage in a Swedish court

Thanks for the link, Midas. Best sleeping pill I have had in weeks. Dozed right off listening to the crackling of turning pages and the monotone of a female lawyer.

Now I am out for some real excitement...watching my grass grow...in the dark. Might even count the stars in the sky.

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

It is probably because of the ingrained psych in the aussies of a 'fair go' and a liking for an underdog. Ned Kelly springs to mind. Aussies also have a mistrust of authority and do not take kindly to those in power using bullying tactics and spin to make things seem different to what they are really after.

To put it bluntly, aussies don't like being bullied. Tell us the truth and we'll understand and help. Lie to us or try and use spin, or bully us and we will forever hate you.

[midas]

for those interested you can see live coverage of the two-day appeal hearing beginning today

at the UK Supreme Court at this link

http://www.abc.net.au/news/livevideo/

Assange's barrister is brilliant! I can't possibly see how the female barrister acting for Sweden ( who is yet to be heard )can effectively

counteract the content of the current argument in which she even gave a chronology regarding the evolution

of the European arrest warrant.

would never get this kind of coverage in a Swedish court

Thanks for the link, Midas. Best sleeping pill I have had in weeks. Dozed right off listening to the crackling of turning pages and the monotone of a female lawyer.

Now I am out for some real excitement...watching my grass grow...in the dark. Might even count the stars in the sky.

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

It is probably because of the ingrained psych in the aussies of a 'fair go' and a liking for an underdog. Ned Kelly springs to mind. Aussies also have a mistrust of authority and do not take kindly to thosein power using bullying tactics and spin to make things seem different to what they are really after.

To put it bluntly, aussies don't like being bullied. Tell us the truth and we'll understand and help. Lie to us or try and use spin, or bully us and we will forever hate you.

its " un- Australian " mate

Edited February 2, 2012 by metisdead
30) Do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes, added emoticons, or altered wording.

[midas]

if anyone else watched the proceedings last night I would be interested in their perspective.

I thought Assange's barrister was exceptional and the timing of the two recent Parliamentary debates together with

the material and the forceful argument she presented all appeared strong.

Tonight is the last night although the barrister for Sweden is already 30 to 45 min into her submission but

she doesn't have anywhere near the eloquence of Assange's barrister and she doesn't appear to have

any ammunition.

The argument she has presented so far seems incredibly weak and nebulous and you could see instantly

from the reaction of the judges and the questions they were asking her that she has a weak case.

Edited February 2, 2012 by midas

[Wallaby]

I note the appeal is strictly on a matter of law re the extradition. A decision as to whether he is to be extradited has absolutely nothing to do with the Judges thoughts of him guilty or not or whether there is a strong or weak case against him.

Some pretty impressive arguments being put forward, for those that are interested in legal argument. For those not interested in legal argument there will be no need to visit a chemist for sleeping pills for a while.

[chuckd]

I note the appeal is strictly on a matter of law re the extradition. A decision as to whether he is to be extradited has absolutely nothing to do with the Judges thoughts of him guilty or not or whether there is a strong or weak case against him.

Some pretty impressive arguments being put forward, for those that are interested in legal argument. For those not interested in legal argument there will be no need to visit a chemist for sleeping pills for a while.

I just tuned in for some more mind numbing dialog and can't find anything. Am I missing anything or has the entire network been put to sleep?

[Credo]

I note the appeal is strictly on a matter of law re the extradition. A decision as to whether he is to be extradited has absolutely nothing to do with the Judges thoughts of him guilty or not or whether there is a strong or weak case against him.

Some pretty impressive arguments being put forward, for those that are interested in legal argument. For those not interested in legal argument there will be no need to visit a chemist for sleeping pills for a while.

As it should be. It's really not up to the British to determine the guilt or innocence.

I am not too interested in the legal debate, but I am interested in the outcome.

[midas]

I note the appeal is strictly on a matter of law re the extradition. A decision as to whether he is to be extradited has absolutely nothing to do with the Judges thoughts of him guilty or not or whether there is a strong or weak case against him.

Some pretty impressive arguments being put forward, for those that are interested in legal argument. For those not interested in legal argument there will be no need to visit a chemist for sleeping pills for a while.

I just tuned in for some more mind numbing dialog and can't find anything. Am I missing anything or has the entire network been put to sleep?

you said you are not interested? Anyway it is only 9:10 AM in London and it doesn't start until about 10.30 am

if Australian broadcasting Corporation doesn't cover it today you can still see it on the Supreme Court website

http://news.sky.com/home/supreme-court

[midas]

I note the appeal is strictly on a matter of law re the extradition. A decision as to whether he is to be extradited has absolutely nothing to do with the Judges thoughts of him guilty or not or whether there is a strong or weak case against him.

Some pretty impressive arguments being put forward, for those that are interested in legal argument. For those not interested in legal argument there will be no need to visit a chemist for sleeping pills for a while.

I just tuned in for some more mind numbing dialog and can't find anything. Am I missing anything or has the entire network been put to sleep?

you said you are not interested? Anyway it is only 9:10 AM in London and it doesn't start until about 10.30 am

if Australian broadcasting Corporation doesn't cover it today you can still see it on the Supreme Court website

http://news.sky.com/home/supreme-court

incidentally it was mentioned on ABC News yesterday that Julian Assange will be given an

opportunity to address the court himself? I don't know whether this is true or not but if it is

today's hearing should be quite fascinating

[chuckd]

Assange's barrister is brilliant! I can't possibly see how the female barrister acting for Sweden ( who is yet to be heard )can effectively

counteract the content of the current argument in which she even gave a chronology regarding the evolution

of the European arrest warrant.

would never get this kind of coverage in a Swedish court

Thanks for the link, Midas. Best sleeping pill I have had in weeks. Dozed right off listening to the crackling of turning pages and the monotone of a female lawyer.

Now I am out for some real excitement...watching my grass grow...in the dark. Might even count the stars in the sky.

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

It is probably because of the ingrained psych in the aussies of a 'fair go' and a liking for an underdog. Ned Kelly springs to mind. Aussies also have a mistrust of authority and do not take kindly to those in power using bullying tactics and spin to make things seem different to what they are really after.

To put it bluntly, aussies don't like being bullied. Tell us the truth and we'll understand and help. Lie to us or try and use spin, or bully us and we will forever hate you.

Got the link back and was enthralled until they just stopped. Perhaps a pee break?

Let me ask further on Aussie support...

Who exactly is allegedly bullying Assange and/or Australia? Why is he considered the underdog in this little melee?

If Aussies look for a fair shake for all concerned, why don't any of them have any empathy for the two alleged victims? None of us were there when Assange allegedly unzipped his pants all those alleged times and allegedly committed the foul deeds so why do you accept his version of the truth and totally ignore the other versions?

Methinks if you really believed in fairness, you would have to give as much weight to the stories of the two alleged victims as to the version mouthed by your countryman. He may very well be innocent of the allegations but, then again, he might be guilty as well.

Fair is fair, after all.

[midas]

Assange's barrister is brilliant! I can't possibly see how the female barrister acting for Sweden ( who is yet to be heard )can effectively

counteract the content of the current argument in which she even gave a chronology regarding the evolution

of the European arrest warrant.

would never get this kind of coverage in a Swedish court

Thanks for the link, Midas. Best sleeping pill I have had in weeks. Dozed right off listening to the crackling of turning pages and the monotone of a female lawyer.

Now I am out for some real excitement...watching my grass grow...in the dark. Might even count the stars in the sky.

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

It is probably because of the ingrained psych in the aussies of a 'fair go' and a liking for an underdog. Ned Kelly springs to mind. Aussies also have a mistrust of authority and do not take kindly to those in power using bullying tactics and spin to make things seem different to what they are really after.

To put it bluntly, aussies don't like being bullied. Tell us the truth and we'll understand and help. Lie to us or try and use spin, or bully us and we will forever hate you.

Got the link back and was enthralled until they just stopped. Perhaps a pee break?

Let me ask further on Aussie support...

Who exactly is allegedly bullying Assange and/or Australia? Why is he considered the underdog in this little melee?

If Aussies look for a fair shake for all concerned, why don't any of them have any empathy for the two alleged victims? None of us were there when Assange allegedly unzipped his pants all those alleged times and allegedly committed the foul deeds so why do you accept his version of the truth and totally ignore the other versions?

Methinks if you really believed in fairness, you would have to give as much weight to the stories of the two alleged victims as to the version mouthed by your countryman. He may very well be innocent of the allegations but, then again, he might be guilty as well.

Fair is fair, after all.

They are having an hour for lunch

regarding your questions they all seem to have been addressed many times before in this thread.

If there was any substance to the allegations of rape,why did the first prosecutor drop the case and why is there no DNA evidence whatsoever on the condom that constitutes the evidence.

Why do they have to him in the country when firstly he hung around in Sweden for six weeks and then he offered to be interviewed at the Swedish embassy in London.

No one is suggesting there is no empathy for the two ladies but together with all the evidence from the police reports they seem to have very little evidence to prosecute?

Edited February 2, 2012 by midas

[Scott]

Let's stay on the topic of the appeal, rather than the guilt or innocence.

[Wallaby]

Assange's barrister is brilliant! I can't possibly see how the female barrister acting for Sweden ( who is yet to be heard )can effectively

counteract the content of the current argument in which she even gave a chronology regarding the evolution

of the European arrest warrant.

would never get this kind of coverage in a Swedish court

Thanks for the link, Midas. Best sleeping pill I have had in weeks. Dozed right off listening to the crackling of turning pages and the monotone of a female lawyer.

Now I am out for some real excitement...watching my grass grow...in the dark. Might even count the stars in the sky.

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

It is probably because of the ingrained psych in the aussies of a 'fair go' and a liking for an underdog. Ned Kelly springs to mind. Aussies also have a mistrust of authority and do not take kindly to those in power using bullying tactics and spin to make things seem different to what they are really after.

To put it bluntly, aussies don't like being bullied. Tell us the truth and we'll understand and help. Lie to us or try and use spin, or bully us and we will forever hate you.

Got the link back and was enthralled until they just stopped. Perhaps a pee break?

Let me ask further on Aussie support...

Who exactly is allegedly bullying Assange and/or Australia? Why is he considered the underdog in this little melee?

If Aussies look for a fair shake for all concerned, why don't any of them have any empathy for the two alleged victims? None of us were there when Assange allegedly unzipped his pants all those alleged times and allegedly committed the foul deeds so why do you accept his version of the truth and totally ignore the other versions?

Methinks if you really believed in fairness, you would have to give as much weight to the stories of the two alleged victims as to the version mouthed by your countryman. He may very well be innocent of the allegations but, then again, he might be guilty as well.

Fair is fair, after all.

Chuckd I agree with Midas in answer to your query and add...

To most aussies bullying is as simple as a big corporation or govt going after an individual. We like to see our govt, any govt, with all the resourses it has at it's disposal get beaten by the underdog.

The reason you aren't seeing empathy to the women is because of the actions of the prosecution. If Assange had simply did what he is alleged to have done and then did a runner the girls would have been seen as the 'underdog' or basically be seen as Assange being the aggressor and should be brought to justice.

But what has happened is that the women complained, Assange stayed in Sweden to answer whatever they wanted to ask. They dropped the case and he left. They now want to question him again. Surely he can answer whatever they want to ask and he can decide whether to answer or not. But no, they issue an arrest warrant purely for questioning.

That is where the aussies get their back up. He offered, they didn't think it necessary and he left.

If they had issued an actual arrest warrant for charges it may be different but Sweden to the soft option of only wanting to question him. Why can't they do that where he is. Why can't they ask him any questions they like and if he doesn't want to answer then issue an arrest warrant. Why haven't they even charged him.

He isn't even charged and aussies don't like authority using strange powers to get what they want. If they think there is an issue then just charge him and issue the arrest warrant. Don't beat around the bush, so to speak.

[GentlemanJim]

If like me the Austrailian link has now gone dead, try here for continued live coverage. Assange's barrister is good!

http://news.sky.com/home/supreme-court

[gopnarak]

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

Do all Aussies believe Assange? What makes you think his Nationality has something to do with it?

Do all American fervently believe Assange is guilty because their national pride is hurt? Or who comes that you think it would be a case of Australian national pride when they support him?

[midas]

If like me the Austrailian link has now gone dead, try here for continued live coverage. Assange's barrister is good!

http://news.sky.com/home/supreme-court

I thought so too although I have to concede Sweden's barrister was much better on the second day

but then Assange's barrister came back with a superb rebuttal. I think you would have to conclude

the whole European arrest warrant system is very inconsistent.

Some leading extradition lawyers in London have said in the media judges ultimately always seem to

allow the extradition and give the benefit of the doubt to the requesting state but another lawyer said

if they do rule in favour of Assange then the whole European arrest warrant system will temporarily

ground to a halt until it is essentially rewritten. we will now have to wait for about four weeks to see

if these judges make such a historic decision.

Edited February 3, 2012 by midas

[GentlemanJim]

If like me the Austrailian link has now gone dead, try here for continued live coverage. Assange's barrister is good!

http://news.sky.com/home/supreme-court

I thought so too although I have to concede Sweden's barrister was much better on the second day

but then Assange's barrister came back with a superb rebuttal. I think you would have to conclude

the whole European arrest warrant system is very inconsistent.

Some leading extradition lawyers in London have said in the media judges ultimately always seem to

allow the extradition and give the benefit of the doubt to the requesting state but another lawyer said

if they do rule in favour of Assange then the whole European arrest warrant system will temporarily

ground to a halt until it is essentially rewritten. we will now have to wait for about four weeks to see

if these judges make such a historic decision.

You raise a good point, and it is that point that may result in the Law Lords deciding to extradite him. They will give the benefit of the doubt to Sweden therebye forcing the European Arrest Warrant system to be re written, without the inconsistencies. It is how law is improved and legal loop holes eradicated.

[chuckd]

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

Do all Aussies believe Assange? What makes you think his Nationality has something to do with it?

Do all American fervently believe Assange is guilty because their national pride is hurt? Or who comes that you think it would be a case of Australian national pride when they support him?

1. Probably. It certainly looks that way.

2. Because Aussies are traditionally very nationalistic. If you aren't an Aussie, do you know any of them?

3. I don't know how other Americans feel about Assange but many don't like hackers and fences. I detest the man and his actions, both in and out of bed. He is a contemptible character and a convicted felon. My feelings about this guy are well documented on the forum.

4. Huh? The question in your sentence is unclear.

[Scott]

A lengthy series of off-topic posts has been deleted. This is about Assange's appeal.

Stick to the topic, please.

[koheesti]

A lengthy series of off-topic posts has been deleted. This is about Assange's appeal.

Stick to the topic, please.

...13 hours later, any news?

Edited February 3, 2012 by koheesti

[GentlemanJim]

A lengthy series of off-topic posts has been deleted. This is about Assange's appeal.

Stick to the topic, please.

...13 hours later, any news?

I would imagine as it is a Supreme Court judgement on a point of law it will take 4-6 weeks.

[softgeorge]

Let me ask a question. Why do all the Aussies fervently believe Assange has done nothing wrong and is so severely mistreated? Is it simply nationalistic pride or is there yet another reason involved.

Do all Aussies believe Assange? What makes you think his Nationality has something to do with it?

Do all American fervently believe Assange is guilty because their national pride is hurt? Or who comes that you think it would be a case of Australian national pride when they support him?

1. Probably. It certainly looks that way.

2. Because Aussies are traditionally very nationalistic. If you aren't an Aussie, do you know any of them?

3. I don't know how other Americans feel about Assange but many don't like hackers and fences. I detest the man and his actions, both in and out of bed. He is a contemptible character and a convicted felon. My feelings about this guy are well documented on the forum.

4. Huh? The question in your sentence is unclear.

You say he is a convicted felon.... What has he been convicted of???