Ecuador Could Decide On Assenge'S Asylum Request On Thursday

[chuckd]

have you read the provisions relating to " temporary surrender " which exists between USA and Sweden

and seems to be quite unique to these two countries?

[Temporary surrender] facilitates the orderly and efficient prosecution of a person sought in two jurisdictions by allowing the temporary transfer of the person to the Requesting State for prosecution, when that person is subject to proceedings (either prosecution or service of a sentence) in the Requested State. The transfer is subject to conditions agreed to in advance of the transfer. - Council of the European Union - Handbook on the practical application of the EU-U.S. Mutual Legal Assistance and Extradition Agreements (p. 15)

Have you read the US Grand Jury Indictment and the US Request for Extradition? Yeah, I thought not...since there is no evidence the documents even exist.

As far as your "unique" temporary surrender issue is concerned, I find most Extradition Treaties have this provision such as UK, New Zealand, Australia, most EU countries, etc. etc. etc.

Temporary surrender is only for the purposes of a trial. If an extradited person is convicted, he/she must be returned to the extraditing country to serve any prison sentences there before they will then be returned to the extradition requesting country to serve any sentences received as a result of their conviction.

Let us examine some hypothetical situations concerning Assange.

1. IF the UK charges him with jumping bond and he is convicted, he might get, say, a two year prison sentence.

2. After the trial he could be sent to Sweden to face their potential charges on temporary surrender. IF he is convicted of potential rape charges, he could receive, say, ten years in prison.

3. Sweden would then return him to the UK to begin his bond jumping conviction of the imaginary two year term.

4. During the time he is serving his sentence in Sweden, the US might ask for temporary surrender from Sweden in order to hold an imaginary trial for espionage. IF he is convicted of espionage, he could receive life in prison. Remember, the death sentence was taken off the table during the original temporary surrender request from the US.

5. After his trial in the US is over, the US must return him to Sweden to serve his imaginary ten year sentence.

6. After he has served his ten years in Sweden he would then be routed to the US to begin his imaginary life sentence in the very real federal prison system.

You people spend more time worrying about the US doing anything than the real threat (now) of a prison sentence in the UK and Sweden. You will have plenty of time to worry about what the US will do if an indictment is ever issued by a Federal Grand Jury.

[koheesti]

He [Assange] also fears being extradited to the United States, where he believes he could be sentenced to death if he is indicted.

He is a liar. He does not believe that for one second. Possibly locked up for a long time, maybe, but executed for espionage? Zero chance and he knows it. Just trying to make excuses. I bet a lot of his supporters are starting to realize that this creep probably really did rape those women.

Actually the US does have the death penalty for this sort of thing. You want he should just "try his luck"?

Your mental leap about raping people is ridiculous, and you are obviously ignorant of the circumstances in this case. Why don't you go do a bit of background reading on it before drawing narrow minded conclusions?

Zero chance of him getting executed - while in US custody. Only the naive and feeble-minded conspiracy nut America-haters off their meds believe that. Seriously, when was the last time someone was executed in the USA? With all the evil, right-wing, Republican US presidents over the decades surely there must be one example?

Unlike some people around here, I don't get my info from the newsletter they send out with each donation to Assange. There is a sub-class of kooks out there who will believe anyone who happens to go after anyone or anything in power - whether a government, military, corporation or one of the dreaded 1%!! Ooooooo.

I think the women are full of shit and out for revenge but that doesn't make Assange exempt from the law. If some women accuse me of rape/assault/whatever and the police want to talk to me, I can't simply ignore then and neither can you. But Assange has access to lot of money and powerful (kooky) friends so that makes him special. Special and above the law - just like the people he criticizes and goes after himself. What a creepy, evil, hypocrite. I wish the US was as bad as you nuts believe so they would just take out this guy already. Sadly, they aren't, and we'll have to listen to his crap for many years to come.

At the end of the day, Ecuador will not risk bad relations with just about everybody to take in Assange. There is no upside for them, only down.

Edited June 30, 2012 by koheesti

[Jingthing]

I hope Ecuador does not give him asylum and I agree they have lots to lose by doing so. However, I don't agree Correa has NOTHING to gain. Being the modern day Che of the moment has bragging rights in Latin America.

[maidu]

He [Assange] also fears being extradited to the United States, where he believes he could be sentenced to death if he is indicted.

He is a liar. He does not believe that for one second. Possibly locked up for a long time, maybe, but executed for espionage? Zero chance and he knows it. Just trying to make excuses. I bet a lot of his supporters are starting to realize that this creep probably really did rape those women.

Actually the US does have the death penalty for this sort of thing. You want he should just "try his luck"?

Your mental leap about raping people is ridiculous, and you are obviously ignorant of the circumstances in this case. Why don't you go do a bit of background reading on it before drawing narrow minded conclusions?

Zero chance of him getting executed - while in US custody. Only the naive and feeble-minded conspiracy nut America-haters off their meds believe that. Seriously, when was the last time someone was executed in the USA? With all the evil, right-wing, Republican US presidents over the decades surely there must be one example?

Unlike some people around here, I don't get my info from the newsletter they send out with each donation to Assange. There is a sub-class of kooks out there who will believe anyone who happens to go after anyone or anything in power - whether a government, military, corporation or one of the dreaded 1%!! Ooooooo.

I think the women are full of shit and out for revenge but that doesn't make Assange exempt from the law. If some women accuse me of rape/assault/whatever and the police want to talk to me, I can't simply ignore then and neither can you. But Assange has access to lot of money and powerful (kooky) friends so that makes him special. Special and above the law - just like the people he criticizes and goes after himself. What a creepy, evil, hypocrite. I wish the US was as bad as you nuts believe so they would just take out this guy already. Sadly, they aren't, and we'll have to listen to his crap for many years to come.

At the end of the day, Ecuador will not risk bad relations with just about everybody to take in Assange. There is no upside for them, only down.

now breeeeathe

[meand]

He [Assange] also fears being extradited to the United States, where he believes he could be sentenced to death if he is indicted.

He is a liar. He does not believe that for one second. Possibly locked up for a long time, maybe, but executed for espionage? Zero chance and he knows it. Just trying to make excuses. I bet a lot of his supporters are starting to realize that this creep probably really did rape those women.

Actually the US does have the death penalty for this sort of thing. You want he should just "try his luck"?

Your mental leap about raping people is ridiculous, and you are obviously ignorant of the circumstances in this case. Why don't you go do a bit of background reading on it before drawing narrow minded conclusions?

Zero chance of him getting executed - while in US custody. Only the naive and feeble-minded conspiracy nut America-haters off their meds believe that. Seriously, when was the last time someone was executed in the USA? With all the evil, right-wing, Republican US presidents over the decades surely there must be one example?

Unlike some people around here, I don't get my info from the newsletter they send out with each donation to Assange. There is a sub-class of kooks out there who will believe anyone who happens to go after anyone or anything in power - whether a government, military, corporation or one of the dreaded 1%!! Ooooooo.

I think the women are full of shit and out for revenge but that doesn't make Assange exempt from the law. If some women accuse me of rape/assault/whatever and the police want to talk to me, I can't simply ignore then and neither can you. But Assange has access to lot of money and powerful (kooky) friends so that makes him special. Special and above the law - just like the people he criticizes and goes after himself. What a creepy, evil, hypocrite. I wish the US was as bad as you nuts believe so they would just take out this guy already. Sadly, they aren't, and we'll have to listen to his crap for many years to come.

At the end of the day, Ecuador will not risk bad relations with just about everybody to take in Assange. There is no upside for them, only down.

Things haven't necessarily turned out so well for small countries who follow every beck and call from the US. I just totally disagree with you, but I will agree it could turn out badly. I guess in your mind it is ill-advised for them to even be considering it? I think it shows a lot of wisdom for a small country to be carefully considering this in today's shifting global climate (in terms of power, not temperatures ).

Edited July 1, 2012 by meand

[Credo]

The Australian government says he has committed no crime in Australia, so why didn't he just walk into the Australian Embassy and say he wanted to go home? Why Ecuador?

[necronx99]

The Australian government says he has committed no crime in Australia, so why didn't he just walk into the Australian Embassy and say he wanted to go home? Why Ecuador?

Uh ..because the Australians would extradite home to Sweden?

Or America...

[Credo]

I don't think Australia would turn him over to a country if he had a well founded fear of persecution, which is usually the standard for considering someone a refugee.

It sounds like he is fleeing prosecution, not persecution.

[necronx99]

Australia, good lapdogs that they are would ship him off to either in a heartbeat.

[chuckd]

The Australian government says he has committed no crime in Australia, so why didn't he just walk into the Australian Embassy and say he wanted to go home? Why Ecuador?

It is unlikely they would or could ship him back to Australia since the UK has a hold on him for Sweden.

[trainman34014]

Shit travels downhill; so we know where this hypocritical creep is headed. Enough said.

[Credo]

If he is fleeing persecution, then I don't for a minute believe that Australia would throw one of its citizens to the wolves. I mean, really, is Ecuador known for being more humane or pro-human rights than Australia?

[maidu]

Australia, good lapdogs that they are would ship him off to either in a heartbeat.

Why call the Aussies lap dogs (?), when they would likely respect the wishes of countries they're friendly with.

Assenge is a suspect in several crimes. Unlike Thailand's PT party and the Reds, the US and Sweden follow procedures for upholding their laws.

[chuckd]

If he is fleeing persecution, then I don't for a minute believe that Australia would throw one of its citizens to the wolves. I mean, really, is Ecuador known for being more humane or pro-human rights than Australia?

Exactly who is persecuting this guy? He is wanted for questioning in Sweden about alleged sexual misconduct, when he admits to having the sex in question.

The UK government has jumped through the hoops to try and take care of him by all legal means. He chose to repay their gracious actions when he entered the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, causing the forfeiture of his 200,000 pound bond which his supporters so kindly posted for him.

It is doubtful the Australian government would have seen turning him over to the authorities as throwing one of its citizens to the wolves. More likely they would have seen it as doing their legal duty to turn over a citizen that is wanted by the police.

[JUDAS]

In his case, the British government will most likely be super-vigilant for as long as it takes. They gave this creep every consideration and he screwed them and his benefactor too. I would not be surprised if a team of SAS is watching the place at all times.

The last I heard the SAS were also actively hunting those with outstanding parking tickets....

[koheesti]

At the end of the day, Ecuador will not risk bad relations with just about everybody to take in Assange. There is no upside for them, only down.

Things haven't necessarily turned out so well for small countries who follow every beck and call from the US. I just totally disagree with you, but I will agree it could turn out badly. I guess in your mind it is ill-advised for them to even be considering it? I think it shows a lot of wisdom for a small country to be carefully considering this in today's shifting global climate (in terms of power, not temperatures ).

As much as the usual suspects would like it, this isn't Ecuador versus USA. This is Ecuador siding with a private citizen it has no connection with, Assange, while potentially harming relations with the UK, Sweden and the many countries Assange embarrassed with those leaked cables (one of which is the USA). In "today's shifting global climate (in terms of power)" this move would make no sense.

[kerryk]

At the end of the day, Ecuador will not risk bad relations with just about everybody to take in Assange. There is no upside for them, only down.

Things haven't necessarily turned out so well for small countries who follow every beck and call from the US. I just totally disagree with you, but I will agree it could turn out badly. I guess in your mind it is ill-advised for them to even be considering it? I think it shows a lot of wisdom for a small country to be carefully considering this in today's shifting global climate (in terms of power, not temperatures ).

As much as the usual suspects would like it, this isn't Ecuador versus USA. This is Ecuador siding with a private citizen it has no connection with, Assange, while potentially harming relations with the UK, Sweden and the many countries Assange embarrassed with those leaked cables (one of which is the USA). In "today's shifting global climate (in terms of power)" this move would make no sense.

The Australian government has blamed WikiLeaks for a “reckless, irresponsible and potentially dangerous” disclosures of secret information. It is also delaying the release of diplomatic cables on the matter after the US expressed concern.

http://www.rt.com/news/wikileaks-cables-us-assange-905/

[midas]

If he is fleeing persecution, then I don't for a minute believe that Australia would throw one of its citizens to the wolves. I mean, really, is Ecuador known for being more humane or pro-human rights than Australia?

Exactly who is persecuting this guy? He is wanted for questioning in Sweden about alleged sexual misconduct, when he admits to having the sex in question.

The UK government has jumped through the hoops to try and take care of him by all legal means. He chose to repay their gracious actions when he entered the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, causing the forfeiture of his 200,000 pound bond which his supporters so kindly posted for him.

It is doubtful the Australian government would have seen turning him over to the authorities as throwing one of its citizens to the wolves. More likely they would have seen it as doing their legal duty to turn over a citizen that is wanted by the police.

Exactly who is persecuting this guy?

The chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Dianne Feinstein apparently......

US senator calls to prosecute Assange

http://www.brisbanet...0701-21b3n.html

this totally contradicts what Australian Foreign Affairs Minsiter Bob Carr said last week

The Foreign Affairs Minister Bob Carr, claimed last week there was ''not the remotest evidence'' of the US government wanting to prosecute the WikiLeaks founder.

shut up lap dog !

Edited July 2, 2012 by midas

[kerryk]

Is there a chance that Australia may be able to think for itself and not be the lap dogs of America?

Naw.

[Credo]

The link says: Senator Feinstein's call for the Obama administration to move ahead with plans to prosecute Mr Assange

That would seem to indicate that there is no current plan to prosecute him. I think the good Senator would know if there was a sealed, secret indictment somewhere. The remainder of the article talks about going after Wikileaks and that would mean the organization, not necessarily an individual person.

[midas]

The link says: Senator Feinstein's call for the Obama administration to move ahead with plans to prosecute Mr Assange

That would seem to indicate that there is no current plan to prosecute him. I think the good Senator would know if there was a sealed, secret indictment somewhere. The remainder of the article talks about going after Wikileaks and that would mean the organization, not necessarily an individual person.

A lie may take care of the present, but it has no future

Edited July 2, 2012 by midas

[midas]

Hounding Julian Assange

Who Is the Real Criminal?

One of the serious questions raised by the case of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange is just who is a criminal? If an organized crime syndicate commits illegal acts and some outside party reveals its activity, the syndicate might mark the witness for punishment. However, which one is the real criminal?

Lots of governments act like organized crime syndicates. If you ask Rep. King or Sen. Feinstein what they think about the behavior of, say, Russia in Chechnya or China in Tibet, they are likely to describe that behavior as criminal. And, if Assange had just exposed the sins of Russia or China, he would be praised within the halls of Congress.

But what happens when the U.S. government behaves like an organized gang of criminals? After all, a very good case can be made that the leaders of the United States are systematically violating their own Constitution with policies like indefinite detention.

http://consortiumnew...julian-assange/

Edited July 2, 2012 by midas

[Ulysses G.]

Who Is the Real Criminal?

The guy who skipped bail.

[chuckd]

If he is fleeing persecution, then I don't for a minute believe that Australia would throw one of its citizens to the wolves. I mean, really, is Ecuador known for being more humane or pro-human rights than Australia?

Exactly who is persecuting this guy? He is wanted for questioning in Sweden about alleged sexual misconduct, when he admits to having the sex in question.

The UK government has jumped through the hoops to try and take care of him by all legal means. He chose to repay their gracious actions when he entered the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, causing the forfeiture of his 200,000 pound bond which his supporters so kindly posted for him.

It is doubtful the Australian government would have seen turning him over to the authorities as throwing one of its citizens to the wolves. More likely they would have seen it as doing their legal duty to turn over a citizen that is wanted by the police.

Exactly who is persecuting this guy?

The chairwoman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Dianne Feinstein apparently......

US senator calls to prosecute Assange

http://www.brisbanet...0701-21b3n.html

this totally contradicts what Australian Foreign Affairs Minsiter Bob Carr said last week

The Foreign Affairs Minister Bob Carr, claimed last week there was ''not the remotest evidence'' of the US government wanting to prosecute the WikiLeaks founder.

shut up lap dog !

Midas:

How is her calling for his prosecution persecuting him? I have been calling for it for two years and Assange hasn't paid any attention to me!

You do realize Senator Feinstein is not well regarded outside her own constituency? She's from California for crying out loud.

In other words, only you and 13 Australians would believe anything she utters.

[Jingthing]

Senator Dianne Feinstein is an EXTREMELY well respected U.S. senator. Respected at the national level. In the past, she was considered a potential Vice President. Just because a politician is from California, doesn't mean they can't be nationally popular. (Duh.)

[meand]

At the end of the day, Ecuador will not risk bad relations with just about everybody to take in Assange. There is no upside for them, only down.

Things haven't necessarily turned out so well for small countries who follow every beck and call from the US. I just totally disagree with you, but I will agree it could turn out badly. I guess in your mind it is ill-advised for them to even be considering it? I think it shows a lot of wisdom for a small country to be carefully considering this in today's shifting global climate (in terms of power, not temperatures ).

As much as the usual suspects would like it, this isn't Ecuador versus USA. This is Ecuador siding with a private citizen it has no connection with, Assange, while potentially harming relations with the UK, Sweden and the many countries Assange embarrassed with those leaked cables (one of which is the USA). In "today's shifting global climate (in terms of power)" this move would make no sense.

Well then, as I posited, I guess you feel it is ill-advised for them to even considering it then. I disagree.

[Ulysses G.]

In other words, only you and 13 Australians would believe anything she utters.

And Jingthing.

[Jingthing]

In other words, only you and 13 Australians would believe anything she utters.

And Jingthing.

You're just wrong about this. She is very mainstream.

[Scott]

Yes, JT, is right. I met her many years ago on more than one occasion.

[midas]

Senator Dianne Feinstein is an EXTREMELY well respected U.S. senator. Respected at the national level. In the past, she was considered a potential Vice President. Just because a politician is from California, doesn't mean they can't be nationally popular. (Duh.)

yes indeed like the 40th President ( in eight surveys over the last 12 years he was even considered the greatest )