ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Julian Assange

Reply
Old 13th April 2019, 07:55 AM   #1001
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 72,823
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
It was not different prosecutors; it was Ny....
The initial prosecutor declined to charge Assange. It was later that Ny got involved.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 07:59 AM   #1002
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
The initial prosecutor declined to charge Assange. It was later that Ny got involved.
Yes, but my question was why Assange was told by Ny that he was free to go. No other prosecutors were involved in that decision.

Eta: to be clearer, why didn't Ny tell the truth and respond 'well, it would be best if you stayed in the country till the investigation is complete, otherwise we will put out an EAW and have you thrown in solitary confinement for a while. We good'?

But no: he was 'free to go and not a wanted man'. Not exactly the case when he was in the UK.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 13th April 2019 at 08:11 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:37 AM   #1003
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,540
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Honestly, I don't think the Dem email releases influenced 70 voters, much less 70,000. And a Sanders supporter would be far too fundamentally opposed to Trump to switch to him.
....

Not so.
Quote:
Fully 12 percent of people who voted for Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries voted for President Trump in the general election.
https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/54581...p-survey-finds

Also,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.4a7249fc4f2f

More important, if some Sanders supporters stayed home on election day -- and there is evidence that they did -- that would be enough to turn the election.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:38 AM   #1004
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,678
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Yes and no. There was a series of unfortunate events, no single one was likely responsible on its own. This was one of those unfortunate events, however.


I agree with this. There is just too much that we will never know, especially the impact of the Facebook voter-suppression efforts in the upper Midwest. But yeah, the stolen Podesta emails had an impact for sure.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:48 AM   #1005
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Not so.

https://www.npr.org/2017/08/24/54581...p-survey-finds

Also,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.4a7249fc4f2f

More important, if some Sanders supporters stayed home on election day -- and there is evidence that they did -- that would be enough to turn the election.
Damn. Suprise the hell out of me for the figures to be that high. But I'm not sure that Wikileaks had much, if anything, measurable to do with the Sanders turnout.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 10:22 AM   #1006
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,096
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Damn. Suprise the hell out of me for the figures to be that high. But I'm not sure that Wikileaks had much, if anything, measurable to do with the Sanders turnout.
I've mentioned this before but you should checkout what Jimmy Dore was saying around election time 2016. He is/was very influenced by the Russkie propaganda and told everyone to not vote for Shillary or stay home. Check out how many views he was getting around this time.
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 11:36 AM   #1007
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,540
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Damn. Suprise the hell out of me for the figures to be that high. But I'm not sure that Wikileaks had much, if anything, measurable to do with the Sanders turnout.
What was pretty clear in 2016 is that a lot of people felt left behind, and they wanted to see big changes. Trump and Sanders were the only candidates who appeared to offer them. When their first choice fell behind, they went with the other guy. I continue to believe that many people voted for Trump as a protest against Clinton and the Establishment, secure in their certainty that Trump couldn't win -- at least that's what everybody was telling them. Clinton made a lot of mistakes, but her biggest was that she thought she couldn't lose.

Last edited by Bob001; 13th April 2019 at 11:40 AM.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 11:55 AM   #1008
jeremyp
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Assange did not live in Sweden. He was invited there to speak at a conference.
Sorry, I was unaware that, under Swedish law, you cannot commit rape unless you are a resident.

/sarcasm.

Quote:
The rape accusation happened when the two women found out he was shagging them both and it pissed them off. What they wanted was for Assange to get an HIV test. He refused. That pissed them off more. They went to the prosecutor to force the test.

Everyone seems to have forgotten that prosecutor declined to prosecute.
If the stories presented by the women are true, he unquestionably raped at least one of them. She claims she consented to sex only with a condom and that she woke up in the morning to find him having sex with her without a condom. If that is all true, he is a rapist.

Quote:
As for the HIV test, the women's pursuit went longer than the incubation period. At that point they only needed to get tested themselves if they were truly worried about Assange's HIV status.
It still counts as rape even if you don't give them HIV.

Quote:
It wasn't until the politically motivated Ny got involved that any of the rest happened.

Assange said the US had a sealed indictment for him. He believed Ny's attempts to get him back to Sweden were because she had made a deal with the US.
Is there any evidence whatsoever that Ny really had made a deal with the USA?

Quote:
So all this business about the UK vs Sweden is full of holes. If he was afraid of extradition before Ny went after him why accept the speaking invitation instead of fleeing somewhere safer?
Huh? My claim is that he was not afraid of extradition to the USA at all, but he was afraid of being convicted of rape.

Quote:
Apparently none of the sure-he's-a-rapist crowd want to admit that his beliefs Ny had made a deal with the US had some substance whether it was true about Ny or not.
His beliefs about Ny have no substance as far as I can tell. Nobody has presented any evidence that such a deal ever existed.

Between February 2011 and the end of May 2012, Assange was fighting the Swedish extradition request in the British courts. During that period Assange was on bail in Britain. During that period of more than a year, the USA made no request to extradite Assange. If that is not evidence that they didn't want him at that time, what is?

Furthermore, during that period, Assange made no attempt to seek political asylum until he was about to be sent back to Sweden. If that's not evidence that he was not concerned about extradition to the USA but was concerned about extradition to Sweden, what is?
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 12:07 PM   #1009
jeremyp
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Let me ask this, then: why was he free to go and 'not a wanted man', if in fact the prosecutor was actually preparing to lock him up following the interrogation?

Apparently he left Sweden on the same day that his lawyers were informed that an arrest warrant was going to be issued for him.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001...29703079523420
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 03:40 PM   #1010
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Posters here keep sweeping this under the rug: Ny would not interrogate him, would not let anyone else do so, and said he was free to leave Sweden. That's why Assange panicked at the EAW and subsequent 10 day solitary lockup. I would panic, too. It was not clean pool.
So he panicked for a year whilst he was fighting the extradition? That as soon as he landed in Sweden he'd be whisked away to a black site and be tortured to death?

He should've had plenty of time to cool his head and recognize that it was in his best interest to consent to the extradition instead of fruitlessly fighting it in court and, after all of his appeals failed as expected, jump bail. This is irrespective of how flawed the prosecution was.

If anything he had a good chance of being acquitted in a trial and his chances of avoiding extradition to the US would absolutely be higher in Sweden than in the UK, which makes his behavior even more questionable. Objectively speaking it comes off as a very desperate attempt to avoid being held to account for his actions, even to the point of acting against his own self-interest.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 13th April 2019 at 03:43 PM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:59 PM   #1011
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,540
Originally Posted by jeremyp View Post
Apparently he left Sweden on the same day that his lawyers were informed that an arrest warrant was going to be issued for him.
.....
Just curious. Was he living in the UK at the time? He might have been smarter to go home to Australia. Most countries try hard not to extradite their own citizens.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 09:18 PM   #1012
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,092
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Most countries try hard not to extradite their own citizens.
Australia doesn't - or, at least, not when the US is doing the asking.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 11:38 PM   #1013
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,092
Back to Sweden?

There are now calls for Assange to be extradited to Sweden instead of the US.
Quote:
Seventy British MPs have urged the government to prioritise WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's extradition to Sweden if prosecutors reopen an investigation of an alleged rape there.

Stella Creasy of the opposition Labour Party said the group wanted to "stand with victims of sexual violence" amid concerns the Swedish case could be sidelined as the Conservative government focuses on a US extradition request for Assange.
https://www.thecourier.com.au/story/...harges-uk-mps/
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 04:27 AM   #1014
jeremyp
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Just curious. Was he living in the UK at the time? He might have been smarter to go home to Australia. Most countries try hard not to extradite their own citizens.
That I don't know. According to Wikipedia, before the rape case thing happened, he put in an application to become a resident in Sweden, so we can probably assume he had intended to live there. The application was denied, but not until after Assange came to Britain.
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 04:36 AM   #1015
jeremyp
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
There are now calls for Assange to be extradited to Sweden instead of the US.

https://www.thecourier.com.au/story/...harges-uk-mps/
Yes, but it won't happen if Sweden doesn't reissue the European Arrest Warrant.

If they do, I'm not sure who takes precedence out of the USA or Sweden. I would assume it is first come first served which would probably mean Sweden since there is likely to be a long court battle over the US extradition request.
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 04:55 AM   #1016
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 33,201
More irony: Sweden reopening the rape case is probably the best thing that could happen to Assange right now now.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 06:04 AM   #1017
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by jeremyp View Post
Apparently he left Sweden on the same day that his lawyers were informed that an arrest warrant was going to be issued for him.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001...29703079523420
Article you link is behind paywall, but IIRC: only the Wall Street Journal reported that, and the claim has not been heard publicly in any other time or place by anyone. Likely erroneous early reporting.

But assume it was true: is that the normal thing in Sweden, to notify a suspect's lawyers of an arrest before the warrant is secured? And then what happened? Assange got on a plane and everyone forgot to tell police at the airport to hold him? What happened to the record of this arrest warrant? Why does it not exist anywhere but presumably in this article?
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 06:22 AM   #1018
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
So he panicked for a year whilst he was fighting the extradition? That as soon as he landed in Sweden he'd be whisked away to a black site and be tortured to death?

He should've had plenty of time to cool his head and recognize that it was in his best interest to consent to the extradition instead of fruitlessly fighting it in court and, after all of his appeals failed as expected, jump bail. This is irrespective of how flawed the prosecution was.

If anything he had a good chance of being acquitted in a trial and his chances of avoiding extradition to the US would absolutely be higher in Sweden than in the UK, which makes his behavior even more questionable. Objectively speaking it comes off as a very desperate attempt to avoid being held to account for his actions, even to the point of acting against his own self-interest.
Can you tell me what specifically Sweden would take issue with in extraditing a common criminal? No strawmen about the history of political refugees, please. JA is charged with mundane computer crimes. What is the problem?
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 06:32 AM   #1019
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Just curious. Was he living in the UK at the time? He might have been smarter to go home to Australia. Most countries try hard not to extradite their own citizens.
no, he was applying for residency in Sweden when this stuff unfolded, which was denied. Wikileaks servers in Sweden were going to be the home base and Ju-Ju it's new resident. I'm sure Sweden was very excited to have him, too

Assange did a lot of couch surfing in the UK, where many of his supporters still are. IIRC, he actually didn't 'live' anywhere
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 06:43 AM   #1020
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
More irony: Sweden reopening the rape case is probably the best thing that could happen to Assange right now now.
Why? Are you suggesting something really bad would happen if the States get ahold of him? Because otherwise the statute runs out on the Swedish charges next year. Reopening the case would just add more expenses, litigation, and possible incarceration...and the States would still be there waiting when it was over. You are implying something very ominous
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 07:21 AM   #1021
jeremyp
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Article you link is behind paywall,
But not the bit that says Assange's lawyers were informed of his impending arrest on the same day he left.

Quote:
but IIRC: only the Wall Street Journal reported that, and the claim has not been heard publicly in any other time or place by anyone. Likely erroneous early reporting.
I haven't heard your claim from anybody at any time except here.

Quote:
But assume it was true: is that the normal thing in Sweden, to notify a suspect's lawyers of an arrest before the warrant is secured?
You'll have to ask the Swedish that. I'm not completely au fait with the Swedish legal system and I suspect you aren't either. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the Swedish are quite civilised with people who are apparently cooperating with them, as Assange seemed to be right up till the moment he went to England and decided not to come back.

Quote:
And then what happened? Assange got on a plane and everyone forgot to tell police at the airport to hold him? What happened to the record of this arrest warrant? Why does it not exist anywhere but presumably in this article?
What arrest warrant? On the day he left, nobody had raised one. The EAW was raised in November.
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 07:32 AM   #1022
jeremyp
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Can you tell me what specifically Sweden would take issue with in extraditing a common criminal? No strawmen about the history of political refugees, please. JA is charged with mundane computer crimes. What is the problem?
He wasn't even charged with mundane computer crimes at the time. Assange spent more than a year in the UK courts fighting the EAW. During that time, the USA made no application to extradite him from the UK at all. A rational person would conclude that he was in no danger from the US authorities. We are therefore forced to conclude that Assange became a fugitive from the law so as to avoid going to Sweden and face rape charges.
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 07:37 AM   #1023
Here_to_learn
Master Poster
 
Here_to_learn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 2,351
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Article you link is behind paywall, but IIRC: only the Wall Street Journal reported that, and the claim has not been heard publicly in any other time or place by anyone. Likely erroneous early reporting.
The timeline can be read here: https://www.scribd.com/document/8091...s-Assange-Case. That document is part of the High Court case, and was agreed by both parties.

#13 and forward describes what happened.
Here_to_learn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 07:50 AM   #1024
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by jeremyp View Post
But not the bit that says Assange's lawyers were informed of his impending arrest on the same day he left.
Yes, it says that. I don't see a link to a source or anything, though. I also have not seen Sweden confirming this claim. You took the time to snip out that it was likely erroneous early reporting, being in Feb of 2011. You have some evidence that this claim still stands, yes? Does Sweden affirm it? Seems like that would be significant to their case for Assange fleeing justice. Slipped their minds since then, did it?

Quote:
I haven't heard your claim from anybody at any time except here.
Wut? My claim is that this alleged notification only appears once, in this 2011 article, which I cant read. There is some other support somewhere? Swedish authorities would be smashing support.

Quote:
You'll have to ask the Swedish that. I'm not completely au fait with the Swedish legal system and I suspect you aren't either. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the Swedish are quite civilised with people who are apparently cooperating with them, as Assange seemed to be right up till the moment he went to England and decided not to come back.
He continued to cooperate in the UK, turning himself in voluntarily rather than making a break for it. After the solitary confinement thing, he got a little antsy. I don't blame him on this one. If he was free to leave, the arrest and solitary lockup was completely out of proportion. If Sweden was so civilized, as you say, why didn't they contact Assange duing one of his speaking engagements in the UK? or contact his lawyers there? Or email the main Wikileaks site? Or hell, even tweet the brother?


Quote:
What arrest warrant? On the day he left, nobody had raised one. The EAW was raised in November.
If, as you claim, a warrant was about to be put out for his arrest, why stop it? Why wouldn't it be executed, to substantiate that Assange was fleeing justice? The EAW hit Assange out of the blue. No documented attempt to reach him at all.

As I said upthread, I don't like Assange, and I think he should have dealt with the Swedish claims right away. But I sympathize with his position. The United Nations does, too, although the UK and Sweden are flipping off the UN working groups resolution. Innocently, I'm sure.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 07:54 AM   #1025
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by jeremyp View Post
He wasn't even charged with mundane computer crimes at the time. Assange spent more than a year in the UK courts fighting the EAW. During that time, the USA made no application to extradite him from the UK at all. A rational person would conclude that he was in no danger from the US authorities. We are therefore forced to conclude that Assange became a fugitive from the law so as to avoid going to Sweden and face rape charges.
He wasn't in danger from the US at that time, IMO. The States were still in the process of making their case. What Assange feared was being on lockdown in Sweden while the US finished stretching out and moved in.

eta: I was talking about extradition now, with reference to computer crimes, responding to Arcade22's claim that extradition would be difficult

eta 2: As I've said, the US didn't need to do a damn thing while Assange was tied up. You'll note that the US didn't do anything recently either, till Assange was out of the Embassy, right? The States are being more prudent now, in case the UK waives sentencing for skipping bail, as the UN resolved, and assuming Sweden does not liven up. The only reason he was arrested for the States now was in case a short window opened where the UK and Sweden had no immediate claim on him. Speculation, of course.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 14th April 2019 at 08:37 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 08:18 AM   #1026
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Here_to_learn View Post
The timeline can be read here: https://www.scribd.com/document/8091...s-Assange-Case. That document is part of the High Court case, and was agreed by both parties.

#13 and forward describes what happened.
I linked that Agreed Facts doc pages ago, but it is under a subscription thing now, I see
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 09:03 AM   #1027
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Can you tell me what specifically Sweden would take issue with in extraditing a common criminal? No strawmen about the history of political refugees, please. JA is charged with mundane computer crimes. What is the problem?
The Sweden-US extradition treaty explicitly states that:

Quote:
Article II
(1) An offense shall be an extraditable offense only if it is punishable under the laws of both Contracting States by deprivation of liberty for a period of at least two years. However, when the request for extradition relates to a person who has been convicted and sentenced, extradition shall be granted only if the duration of the penalty, or the aggregate of the penalties still to be served amounts to at least six months.
link

The general law on extradition because of crimes requires that the crime would result in prison sentence of a year or more. The relevant Swedish offence doesn't have a minimum sentence of at least 2 years, not even the aggravated offence. Although I'm not absolutely certain, I'm fairly certain that only helping someone by "cracking a password" would not result in a prison sentence of 1 year or more either.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 09:34 AM   #1028
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
The Sweden-US extradition treaty explicitly states that:



link

The general law on extradition because of crimes requires that the crime would result in prison sentence of a year or more. The relevant Swedish offence doesn't have a minimum sentence of at least 2 years, not even the aggravated offence. Although I'm not absolutely certain, I'm fairly certain that only helping someone by "cracking a password" would not result in a prison sentence of 1 year or more either.
5 years for conspiracy to break into classified gov't computers, posted upthread
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 10:29 AM   #1029
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
5 years for conspiracy to break into classified gov't computers, posted upthread
It requires that the sentence for said crime is sufficiently high in both states. This is a common feature of extradition agreements that is refereed to as "double criminality".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_criminality
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 14th April 2019 at 10:31 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 11:44 AM   #1030
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
It requires that the sentence for said crime is sufficiently high in both states. This is a common feature of extradition agreements that is refereed to as "double criminality".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_criminality
Great. We don't need the definition of double criminality. The actual sentence for the crime under Swedish law would be helpful, though. The US sentence has been posted. Do you have support for what the comparable crime and sentence would be in Sweden, or are you arguing that it would be a difficult extradition based more on a feeling?

eta: not that it matters much anymore, now that the Brits have made the arrest and rendered Sweden's extradition terms unimportant.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 14th April 2019 at 11:46 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 12:54 PM   #1031
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Great. We don't need the definition of double criminality. The actual sentence for the crime under Swedish law would be helpful, though. The US sentence has been posted. Do you have support for what the comparable crime and sentence would be in Sweden, or are you arguing that it would be a difficult extradition based more on a feeling?
I already stated that. The equivalent Swedish criminal offence would be the one found in the 4th chapter under paragraph 9 in the penal code:

Quote:
Anyone who unlawfully prepares access to information intended for automated processing or unlawfully changes, erases, blocks or registers such information is sentenced for data breach to a fine or imprisonment for a maximum of two years. The same applies to those who unlawfully interfere with any other similar action or impede the use of such information.
That's google translate with my corrections. Since the offence has a maximum sentence of at most 2 years in prison he could not be extradited under the Swedish-American extradition agreement. This is of course ignoring how politically unpopular it would be, at least at the time.

Quote:
eta: not that it matters much anymore, now that the Brits have made the arrest and rendered Sweden's extradition terms unimportant.
And he has no one to blame for that other than himself. He could've left the embassy at any point while the Swedish criminal investigation was ongoing but he was apparently holding out for a miracle.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 14th April 2019 at 12:59 PM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 12:58 PM   #1032
jeremyp
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Posts: 592
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yes, it says that. I don't see a link to a source or anything, though. I also have not seen Sweden confirming this claim. You took the time to snip out that it was likely erroneous early reporting, being in Feb of 2011. You have some evidence that this claim still stands, yes? Does Sweden affirm it? Seems like that would be significant to their case for Assange fleeing justice. Slipped their minds since then, did it?
Here_to_Learn has now linked the British court document. I think it clears things up considerably.

You are correct that Assange's lawyers were told (on 15 September) that Assange could leave the country but they also advised that the investigation was ongoing.

On 21 September, the prosecutor advised Assange's lawyers that they wanted to interview Assange on the 28th. On the 27th the lawyers informed the prosecutor that they had been unable to contact their client. In fact, that was the day he left Sweden (but nobody involved knew that except Assange). The Swedish arrest warrant was issued that day and Assange's lawyer informed on the 30th.

So you were factually correct that he was told he could leave Sweden, but the implication that Assange had nothing to worry about is false.

Quote:
Wut? My claim is that this alleged notification only appears once, in this 2011 article, which I cant read. There is some other support somewhere? Swedish authorities would be smashing support.
No. That's not your claim. Your claim is that Assange was told he could leave the country, which I now agree is true.

Quote:
He continued to cooperate in the UK, turning himself in voluntarily rather than making a break for it.
He did make a break for it once he had exhausted all of the legitimate courses of action open to him.

Quote:
After the solitary confinement thing,
When was he in solitary confinement?

Quote:
If Sweden was so civilized, as you say, why didn't they contact Assange duing one of his speaking engagements in the UK? or contact his lawyers there? Or email the main Wikileaks site? Or hell, even tweet the brother?
He had a lawyer in Sweden. The expectation is that all communication should go through the lawyer. That's what they are for.

Quote:
If, as you claim, a warrant was about to be put out for his arrest, why stop it? Why wouldn't it be executed, to substantiate that Assange was fleeing justice?
The Swedish warrant was raised on the day he left Sweden, although even his own lawyer did not know that at the time.


Quote:
The EAW hit Assange out of the blue. No documented attempt to reach him at all.
That's all incorrect. Assange's lawyers were informed that the prosecutor wanted to interview him on 21 September. They were unable to contact him before he buggered off to England. Subsequently, there was a lot of communication about when Assange would attend interview with no resolution. on 12th October, Assange's lawyers were informed that the EAW would raised. There were more legal goings on and the EAW was actually raised on 26th November.

Quote:
As I said upthread, I don't like Assange, and I think he should have dealt with the Swedish claims right away. But I sympathize with his position. The United Nations does, too, although the UK and Sweden are flipping off the UN working groups resolution. Innocently, I'm sure.
Why sympathise with his position? It was his choice to become a fugitive from the law. He ran away from accusations of rape and he **** on the people that tried to help him (almost literally, if some reports are to be believed).
jeremyp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 04:33 PM   #1033
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,759
First move in US and Aus extradition agreement?

What a coincidence that, after 8 months of stalling negotiations that the US executed an extradition deal from the US to Australia of a man accused of murder in NSW.

A little sweetener to help with Australia’s decision process when considering whether or not to support an Australian facing extradition to the US?
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
Prayer: "a sophisticated way of pleading with thunderstorms." T.Pratchett
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
Forum Birdwatching Webpage

Last edited by EHocking; 14th April 2019 at 04:35 PM.
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 04:53 PM   #1034
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
I just read an article that stated that "people feared Assange would face the death penalty" in the US. I should note here that, as far as Sweden is concerned, there was never any risk of him being sentenced to death, let alone being executed, if he was extradited from here.

Swedish law prohibits extraditing people if they risk the death penalty, torture or corporal punishment. In the event that someone was accused of a criminal offence carrying a potential death sentence the US would have to give a guarantee that they would not be sentenced to death. Failure in doing so would result in the extradition request being denied.
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 14th April 2019 at 04:54 PM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 08:21 PM   #1035
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Arcade22 View Post
I already stated that. The equivalent Swedish criminal offence would be the one found in the 4th chapter under paragraph 9 in the penal code:
Chapter four is largely concerned with telegrams and mail as telecommunication. Assange is charged with conspiracy to hack into classified military databases. Qualitative problem, there.

Quote:
That's google translate with my corrections. Since the offence has a maximum sentence of at most 2 years in prison he could not be extradited under the Swedish-American extradition agreement. This is of course ignoring how politically unpopular it would be, at least at the time.
I get how you would interpret that as the applicable statute, but I think conspiracy to break passwords and hack into classified military databanks would also fall under fraud, which carries penalties of up to four years. This would all be more in the wheelhouse of lawyers, but I think it is safe to say it is not the slam-dunk dilemma you are framing it as.

https://www.government.se/contentass...penal-code.pdf

Quote:
And he has no one to blame for that other than himself. He could've left the embassy at any point while the Swedish criminal investigation was ongoing but he was apparently holding out for a miracle.
Assange's concern was exactly what happened. One foot out in the streets and suddenly the US pulls a sealed indictment out of their back pocket. It happened in the UK, because he didn't go to Sweden. Had he gone to Sweden, a similar ending would have been inevitable, in his view.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 08:36 PM   #1036
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by jeremyp View Post
Here_to_Learn has now linked the British court document. I think it clears things up considerably.
Let me stop you right there. This is not new information...well, not to me or the thread. I linked exactly the same doc last June. it has been long cleared up.

Quote:
You are correct that Assange's lawyers were told (on 15 September) that Assange could leave the country but they also advised that the investigation was ongoing.

On 21 September, the prosecutor advised Assange's lawyers that they wanted to interview Assange on the 28th. On the 27th the lawyers informed the prosecutor that they had been unable to contact their client. In fact, that was the day he left Sweden (but nobody involved knew that except Assange). The Swedish arrest warrant was issued that day and Assange's lawyer informed on the 30th.

So you were factually correct that he was told he could leave Sweden, but the implication that Assange had nothing to worry about is false.
Huh? He was being investigated for sex crimes. He had something to worry about. I don't know what you are talking about. What he was told not to worry about was whether or not he was free to leave the country...you know, without being thrown in jail. That's what free kind of means.

Quote:
No. That's not your claim. Your claim is that Assange was told he could leave the country, which I now agree is true.


He did make a break for it once he had exhausted all of the legitimate courses of action open to him.


When was he in solitary confinement?
Is this a joke?

Quote:
He had a lawyer in Sweden. The expectation is that all communication should go through the lawyer. That's what they are for.

The Swedish warrant was raised on the day he left Sweden, although even his own lawyer did not know that at the time.
You just got done claiming his lawyers were notified. Now you say they didn't know. Excuse my confusion, but which are you saying?

eta: forgot: was the warrant raised, as you now claim, or were they just planning on it? There is a difference.

Quote:
That's all incorrect. Assange's lawyers were informed that the prosecutor wanted to interview him on 21 September. They were unable to contact him before he buggered off to England. Subsequently, there was a lot of communication about when Assange would attend interview with no resolution. on 12th October, Assange's lawyers were informed that the EAW would raised. There were more legal goings on and the EAW was actually raised on 26th November.


Why sympathise with his position? It was his choice to become a fugitive from the law. He ran away from accusations of rape and he **** on the people that tried to help him (almost literally, if some reports are to be believed).
His choice was to be a publisher of leaked documents. That can make you some very, very powerful enemies. So I am willing to excuse some paranoia, especially when things are playing out quite oddly. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention agrees, btw, so I consider myself in good company.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet

Last edited by Thermal; 14th April 2019 at 08:40 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th April 2019, 11:20 PM   #1037
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,155
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Assange's concern was exactly what happened. One foot out in the streets and suddenly the US pulls a sealed indictment out of their back pocket. It happened in the UK, because he didn't go to Sweden. Had he gone to Sweden, a similar ending would have been inevitable, in his view.

Maybe not inevitable, but also not unlikely: Kan Assange utlämnas från Sverige till USA? (Åklagarmyndigheten)
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 14th April 2019 at 11:21 PM.
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 12:49 AM   #1038
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,099
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Chapter four is largely concerned with telegrams and mail as telecommunication. Assange is charged with conspiracy to hack into classified military databases. Qualitative problem, there.
No it's absolutely positively the Swedish equivalent to the criminal offence he was charged with by the grand jury in the US. Hacking, spreading viruses, ddos attacks are examples of acts that constitute a crime under that offence. This includes unlawfully accessing data on an computer system.

Quote:
Assange's concern was exactly what happened. One foot out in the streets and suddenly the US pulls a sealed indictment out of their back pocket. It happened in the UK, because he didn't go to Sweden. Had he gone to Sweden, a similar ending would have been inevitable, in his view.
The second he touches down in Sweden, instead of trying him for his criminal charges, he'd be sent off to the US?
__________________
Freedom you all want, you want freedom. Why then do you haggle over a more or less? Freedom can only be the whole of freedom; a piece of freedom is not freedom. You despair of the possibility of obtaining the whole of freedom, freedom from everything - yes, you consider it insanity even to wish this? - Well, then leave off chasing after the phantom, and spend your pains on something better than the - unattainable. - Max Stirner

Last edited by Arcade22; 15th April 2019 at 12:51 AM.
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 12:55 AM   #1039
Wudang
BOFH
 
Wudang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: People's Republic of South Yorkshire
Posts: 11,558
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Article you link is behind paywall, but IIRC: only the Wall Street Journal reported that, and the claim has not been heard publicly in any other time or place by anyone. Likely erroneous early reporting.

But assume it was true: is that the normal thing in Sweden, to notify a suspect's lawyers of an arrest before the warrant is secured? And then what happened? Assange got on a plane and everyone forgot to tell police at the airport to hold him? What happened to the record of this arrest warrant? Why does it not exist anywhere but presumably in this article?
Read the judgement. link
Hurtig's claims did not stand up well in court.
__________________
"Your deepest pools, like your deepest politicians and philosophers, often turn out more shallow than expected." Walter Scott.
Wudang is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th April 2019, 06:20 AM   #1040
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,067
Originally Posted by Wudang View Post
Read the judgement. link
Hurtig's claims did not stand up well in court.
Thanks for that link. It confirms that the UK courts were convinced that attempts were made to contact Assange via Hurtig in Sweden, and that Hurtig was squirrelly, to use the technical term.

It also confirms that at the end of September, Assange claimed to be returning to Sweden in early October for a speaking engagement, and Ny refused to schedule the interrogation with him then, saying 'it was too far away'. It was about a week and a half out. I can think of no reason for that to have been some kind of unreasonable delay to flat refuse (the court could not come up with one either). Were I in Assange's position, things like that would be sounding off every alarm bell in my head, and I would be avoiding this by any means at my disposal, even weak arguments.

Whether Assange was just being paranoid or cowardly, or believed his unique line of work was causing him unique treatment can be debated indefinitely. My take is that I sympathize, and no more. Things like the UK and Sweden essentially telling the UN to go to hell with their findings are deeply concerning. And of course, the States did in fact whip out a sealed indictment as soon as Assange hit the street again. He was more or less right that the US was laying low in wait, specifically for the 2010 events. He didn't predict it perfectly, but on the main point he was correct. The States were waiting with a little secret.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:53 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.