Re: Assange seeks asylum....in Ecuador Embassy

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 1:29 pm

Sabot wrote:
It would be possible to get him out using submarines and or private boats, but a huge amount of trouble.

You still have to get him out of the embassy, ma petite, and the moment he steps through the gate he is off Ecuador land and back on UK soil. And I don't think the Embassy is anywhere near the Thames or over one of its underground subsidiaries! LL

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:17 pm

Found this on the BBC website re barriers to possible US Assange prosecution. LL

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11952817

**Sabot** Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:20 pm

Lamplighter wrote:
Sabot wrote:
It would be possible to get him out using submarines and or private boats, but a huge amount of trouble.
You still have to get him out of the embassy, ma petite, and the moment he steps through the gate he is off Ecuador land and back on UK soil. And I don't think the Embassy is anywhere near the Thames or over one of its underground subsidiaries! LL

Ah Ha! But have they got Secret Tunnels? Or they could take him out over the roof. For all we know, he's gone already. He could even be hiding somewhere else in UK.

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:23 pm

Sabot wrote:
Lamplighter wrote:
Sabot wrote:
It would be possible to get him out using submarines and or private boats, but a huge amount of trouble.
You still have to get him out of the embassy, ma petite, and the moment he steps through the gate he is off Ecuador land and back on UK soil. And I don't think the Embassy is anywhere near the Thames or over one of its underground subsidiaries! LL

Ah Ha! But have they got Secret Tunnels? Or they could take him out over the roof. For all we know, he's gone already. He could even be hiding somewhere else in UK.

Personally, I think the sooner they get him out of the UK, as far away as possible the better. He's serving no useful purpose there, he's using up precious oxygen and is a total waste of space! LL

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:26 pm

Thanks, LL, that's an interesting read. I don't think for one minute that the US is going to find grounds to extradite and prosecute Assange - Manning is, IMO, going to be left to carry the can in the States.

I really do suspect that this is just a smokescreen; it's one thing being seen as a martyr to the Great Satan, it's entirely another ending up on the Swedish sex offenders' register?

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:30 pm

A thoughtful piece on the subject:

http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/assange-assiduities/

**Sabot** Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:34 pm

Lamplighter wrote:Found this on the BBC website re barriers to possible US Assange prosecution. LL

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11952817

Interesting, LL. And perfectly put. But they could get him to The US first. This could result in serious hardship and ill treatment while they fight it out.
I guess I am just tired of The US riding rough shod with The Extradition Laws. And not just The US. Britain is making me feel sick over their refusal to protect it's own Citizens. If Julian Assange was in Australia The US and Sweden would stand no chance, by implication of possible end results.

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:54 pm

Sydney Morning Herald:

Roxon letter spurs Assange flight to Ecuador embassy
Philip Dorling
June 21, 2012

Ecuador to judge Assange 'on principle'
Ambassador to Ecuador Raul Gangotena says his country won't bow to the demands of other nations when deciding Julian Assange's application for asylum.

JULIAN ASSANGE decided to seek political asylum in the Ecuadorean embassy in London because he felt abandoned by the Australian government, WikiLeaks insiders say.

Mr Assange's closest confidants say they were surprised by his move but have no doubt that it was triggered by a letter from the Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, that Mr Assange's lawyers describe as an ''Australian declaration of abandonment''.

In the letter to one of Mr Assange's legal representatives, Australian human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson, Ms Roxon made it clear that Australia would not seek to involve itself in any international exchanges about his future.

Ms Roxon wrote: ''Australia would not expect to be a party to any extradition discussions that may take place between the United States and the United Kingdom or the United States and Sweden, as extradition is a matter of bilateral law enforcement co-operation.''

She also took the opportunity to advise Ms Robinson that ''should Mr Assange be convicted of any offence in the United States and a sentence of imprisonment imposed, he may apply for an international prisoner transfer to Australia''.

Mr Assange's lawyers characterised Ms Roxon's reply as a ''declaration of abandonment''. Some of his closest associates first learnt of his decision to seek political asylum when journalists rang them seeking comment overnight after the WikiLeaks publisher sought the protection of the Ecuadorean government.

''I didn't know about it, it came as a complete shock,'' one of Mr Assange's small WikiLeaks team told the Herald.

Earlier, Mr Assange said in a short statement: ''I can confirm that today I arrived at the Ecuadorean embassy and sought diplomatic sanctuary and political asylum. This application has been passed to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the capital Quito.''

The affair took another turn last night when the BBC reported Mr Assange faced arrest by Scotland Yard for breaching bail conditions. The conditions required Mr Assange to live at a friend's house in Norfolk, the BBC reported.

Mr Assange failed last week to persuade the British Supreme Court to reopen his appeal against extradition to Sweden to be questioned about sexual assault allegations.

Mr Assange, who has not been charged with any offence in Sweden, has expressed grave fears extradition to Stockholm will facilitate his ultimate extradition to the US on espionage and conspiracy charges relating to the alleged leaking of hundreds of thousands of classified military and diplomatic documents.

The Ecuadorean Foreign Ministry issued a statement that said Mr Assange's application for asylum referred to a ''regrettable factual statement of abandonment'' by the Australian government that made ''it impossible to return to my home country and put me in a state of helplessness to be requested for questioning by the Kingdom of Sweden … and investigation for political crimes in the United States of America, a country where the death penalty for such offences is still in force''.

The Foreign Affairs Minister, Bob Carr, and the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, have repeated that the government ''has no evidence'' of any US intention to charge and extradite Mr Assange, though Ms Gillard added the qualifying words ''at this stage'' in answer to a parliamentary question from the Australian Greens deputy leader, Adam Bandt.

The Australian embassy in Washington reported in December 2010 that WikiLeaks was the target of an ''unprecedented'' US criminal investigation ''into whether Julian Assange can be charged under US law, most likely the 1917 Espionage Act''.

Ecuador offered Mr Assange residency in late 2010 but rescinded the offer after controversy erupted and the US government reportedly made diplomatic representations against such action.

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 3:55 pm

Zoe has a novel take on the matter:

Rothley Pillowcase ‏@RothleyPillow
@ECUADOR_IN_LDN Don't allow Assange into Ecuador until he retracts his supportive comment re the #mccann s WHO SUE PEOPLE FOR LIBEL #Amaral

rofl

Remember when he was the forkers' darling? Morais was just about swooning at his feet - which was, of course, a sue sign that he was a wrong 'un.

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:18 pm

JULIAN ASSANGE decided to seek political asylum in the Ecuadorean embassy in London because he felt abandoned by the Australian government, WikiLeaks insiders say.

Mayhap he shouldn't have been spreading himself all over the world, then? He's shown about as much loyalty to Australia as he has to Manning, or anyone else who has been used and then dropped by him.

**lily** Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:30 pm

It's all about him, isn't it? Never anyone else. Another wimpy victim type who looks to others to take the fall then scarpers off.

I cannot stand him no way, no how. He will never act like a man and take any kind of responsibility. mad

**Sabot** Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:46 pm

Perhaps America should look at it's Death Penalty Laws. Although far be it from me to insist. But The Death Penalty does still exist in certain States for this sort of supposed Crime.
Which State would he be extradited to, and does this State have The Death Penalty?

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:50 pm

Just to refresh memories about how this all started. LL
Timeline: sexual allegations against Assange in Sweden
Key dates in the case of sexual allegations against the founder of Wikileaks, Australian journalist and activist Julian Assange.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11949341

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 4:52 pm

Sabot wrote:
Perhaps America should look at it's Death Penalty Laws. Although far be it from me to insist. But The Death Penalty does still exist in certain States for this sort of supposed Crime.
Which State would he be extradited to, and does this State have The Death Penalty?

As there is no evidence the US wants him anyway, who can answer that? LL

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:01 pm

How the Swedish sex allegations law works:

Tough laws

Sweden has one of the toughest laws on sexual crime in the world - lawyers sometimes joke that men need written permission first.

"It is not necessary to have a lot of violence. That is what people usually think, but in practice if you force someone to have sex with you against their consent you don't have to use much violence at all. Or you can take advantage of a difficult situation for the woman in question."

Assange knows that this case is simply a matter of what happened with the two women rather than a bigger conspiracy.

Three categories

The sexual allegations

'Unlawful coercion' against Miss A - pinning her down
'Sexual molestation' by refusing to wear a condom with Miss A
'Deliberate molestation' of Miss A
'Rape' of Miss W: had sex with her while she was sleeping and without a condom
Source: Gemma Lindfield, lawyer acting for the Swedish authorities

Under Swedish law, there are legal gradations of the definition of rape.

There is the most serious kind, involving major violence.

But below that there is the concept of 'regular rape', still involving violence but not violence of the utmost horror.

And below that there is the idea of 'unlawful coercion'. Talking generally, and not about the Assange case, this might involve putting emotional pressure on someone.

The three categories involve prison sentences of 10, six and four years respectively.

The lawyer for the two women who have complained against Mr Assange will not spell out the details because he says that would give too much away to the accused man.

But he does indicate that it is a four-year sentence that Mr Assange could expect, indicating that he is suspected of this third, less serious category.

Questions to answer

The case may turn on if or when consensual sex turned into non-consensual sex - is a male decision not to use a condom a case of that, for example?

Under Swedish law, Mr Assange has not been formally charged. He has merely been accused and told he has questions to answer.

The process is for the prosecutor to question him to see if a formal criminal accusation should then be laid before a court.

There would then be a hearing in front of some lay people to see if that formal charge should go to a formal trial.

The attitude towards rape in Sweden - informed by a strong sense of women's rights - means that it is more likely to be reported to police.

Some 53 rape offences are reported per 100,000 people, the highest rate in Europe.

The figures may reflect a higher number of actual rapes committed but it seems more likely that tough attitudes and a broader definition of the crime are more significant factors.

I have edited this as some of it is not relevant to the actual sex laws. LL

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:02 pm

According to this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/9346865/Julian-Assange-will-be-arrested-regardless-of-Ecuador-asylum-decision.html

his only way out is as Ecuador's representative in the UN. But that's in New York.....

**Sabot** Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:29 pm

Lamplighter wrote:
Sabot wrote:
Perhaps America should look at it's Death Penalty Laws. Although far be it from me to insist. But The Death Penalty does still exist in certain States for this sort of supposed Crime.
Which State would he be extradited to, and does this State have The Death Penalty?
As there is no evidence the US wants him anyway, who can answer that? LL

Not the point, LL. However unlikely, it is still possible. And once in America there wouldn't be much than anyone could do about it. And to commute a Death Sentence, or even to take it off the Table would be an insult to Countries that long ago gave up this barbaric practice.
The fact that certain States still subscribes to this tells me that America fast needs to alter it's perspective on Human Rights, and Human Decency.
It is a known fact that certain Crimes are attributed to certain States wherein The Death Penalty is still in force, if they have the means to cross States by virtue of where the Crimes were committed.

I have hoped that I wouldn't need to get involved with this again, since UK rescinded The Death Penalty years ago. But I am increasingly finding myself drawn back in. Obviously due to The Internet. I can no longer pretend that it doesn't affect me because it isn't happening in Britain or France. Or even Portugal. Now there's a laugh. No, Not funny.

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:39 pm

If the US had really wanted Assange, then they would have tried to have him extradited from the UK, IMO - the UK has handed over UK citizens, never mind non-Brits.

I am sorry, I think all this 'extradited from Sweden' nonsense is just another excuse to avoid a court date.

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:55 pm

Two interesting pieces in the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/21/julian-assange-asylum-wikileaks

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jun/20/julian-assange-drama-third-act?intcmp=239

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:30 pm

Okay, let's consider a few things if he were to be extradited to the USA:

1. What is he accused of? Possibly treason
2. Where did the offence take place? On the Internet
3. Which state has jurisdiction? None if the answer to 2. is correct
4. If no state, what other jurisdiction is there?
5. He is not a US citizen, what is the actual position of the government?
6. He is not in the US Military, what is his position re them?
7. If the government/military, how does the situation stand re the death penalty?

I expect there are many more Q and A, but there's a few for starters. Perhaps tony or lily can give us an insight into nos 4, 5 6 and 7. LL

**Sabot** Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:32 pm

Any Country's Hierarchy who persistently tries for several years to extradite a young man with obvious mental health issues, isn't fit for purpose. Especially since UK have agreed to deal with any Legal Infractions. It is obvious that this boy is not a Terrorist, and would suffer serious mental harm if he was taken to America. But still The UK Government appears to be willing for this to happen. Or at least not willing to prevent this, which they can do. They just have to say, "No" to this unreasonable demand.
This is when I finally decided that I had had enough of America and it's blindingly stupid arrogance. And Britain's obvious obsequience.
And, No, I wouldn't trust them to deal with Julian Assange fairly, no matter what he deserves.

**bb1** Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:42 pm

He can't be charged with treason, due to being an Aussie, not an American. End of. Though Her Maj may well feel like sending him to the Tower for being so irritating.

I find the whole thing ridiculous, frankly. He isn't being threatened with extradition to some third-world banana republic run by generals in the pay of the CIA, he is required to appear in court in Sweden on sex charges. Sweden has protected US conscientious objectors, all sorts of people; if there is one democracy on earth where he is safe from extradition, it's Sweden.

And what could he possibly be charged with, anyway? A couple of Republican congressmen breathing fire do not an extradition make. They did the same over Al-Megrahi and were seen off by East Renfrewshire Social Work department, for Heaven's sake.

Meanwhile, Private Manning and a few of the Anons who got involved in this are in REAL trouble in the States. Where are all the luvvies defending them? Or do they not have the glamour and headline-appeal of Julian the Martyr?

**greenink211** Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:46 pm

Sabot wrote:
Lamplighter wrote:
Sabot wrote:
It would be possible to get him out using submarines and or private boats, but a huge amount of trouble.
You still have to get him out of the embassy, ma petite, and the moment he steps through the gate he is off Ecuador land and back on UK soil. And I don't think the Embassy is anywhere near the Thames or over one of its underground subsidiaries! LL

Ah Ha! But have they got Secret Tunnels? Or they could take him out over the roof. For all we know, he's gone already. He could even be hiding somewhere else in UK.

Funny you should mention tunnels. There is actually a massive private tunnel, directly beneath the Ecuadorian and Colombian embassies. It goes from Harrods store (which is about fifteen metres from the embassy to their massive store in the old converted Knightsbridge Crown Court at 1 Hans Crescent. A certain Mr Al Fayed might be willing to annoy the UK government by opening it up. LOL

**Lamplighter** Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:50 pm

He's actually required to answer the allegations prior to a decision whether to take him to court. All this came out of his refusing to stay and answer those questions and doing a runner to the UK, then saying the Swedes could go to the UK and ask their questions there, or he would do a video interview. Had he not bunked off, all this would probably have been settled long ago, which brings me back to the original query - if he had nothing to hide, if he is, as he keeps saying, innocent why didn't he answer them there and then? LL

**Sabot** Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:56 pm

Good one, Greenink.

And if Renfrewshire Social Services told The US to bog off, why hasn't England told them to bog off in the case of Gary KcKinnon?

Sponsored content