No Right Turn on Assange

June 20th, 2012 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

Idiot/Savant blogs at No Right Turn:

Faced with the prospect of extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault, has done a runner, hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy and applying for political asylum.

Its a very weak case. Assange is not facing persecution in Sweden; he is facing justice for his alleged crimes. There’s no suggestion that he won’t receive a fair trial or that he would face cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. As for the fear that he will be subsequently extradited to the US, he will have the full protection of the ECHR on that. And the ECHR will not allow him to be extradited to face the death penalty or torture. Finally, despite his claims today, Assange has not been “abandoned” by the Australian government; they have made it clear that they will continue to offer consular assistance in the normal manner [PDF].

It is of course up to Ecuador who they grant asylum to and on what terms. But under the normal international law criteria, Assange wouldn’t qualify. He’s not a refugee with a well-founded fear of persecution; he’s just an alleged criminal trying to escape justice.

I can only agree with I/S on this issue.

Incidentally I did not think the case against Assange in Sweden was that strong, and that he would have a reasonable chance of an acquittal if or when trial proceeds. His behaviour, while deceptive, was not necessarily criminal.

Tags: ,

16 Responses to “No Right Turn on Assange”

  1. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    Mmmmm

    And the case against DotCom isnt that strong either. With the way the US authorities are acting these days (theyve taken over the nasty business from the KGB) I wouldnt be assuming that they would in anyway act reasonably or legally – as they have already broken court orders.

    I dont blame Assange one little bit – and I hope they give him asylum – and I hope Assange continues to expose the deciet and lies of those who decied that the middle east neede cleaning up. Theyre going to leave it in a bigger mess than they found it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. PaulL (5,977 comments) says:

    Assange shouldn’t have sought asylum, nor be granted it, he’s an egomaniac.

    As for the charges, he lied his way into the bed of two different women. They slept with him willingly so far as I can tell (maybe the evidence will say otherwise), and then regretted it later when he turned out to be a cad. I’m pretty sure it’s not the last time that will happen to someone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. scrubone (3,081 comments) says:

    What PaulL said.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    it’s all about the long/end-game of getting assange to america….

    phillip ure whoar.co.nz

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. boredboy (250 comments) says:

    So why are they waiting for him to be extradite to Sweden? Why don’t they just take him from England?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. KH (693 comments) says:

    The Yanks win both ways.
    One was to bring him into a Swedish Airport and then out the back onto an American plane and ‘rendered’ straight off to the USA. Behind a wall and never seen again.
    Two was to tie him up in some much tape that he would not be able to run the Wikileaks. That’s working.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Bevan (3,965 comments) says:

    Assange is just proving his guilt. FFS he is accused of a low end crime in Sweden! …… That’s right Sweden! Hardly the lackey of Uncle Sam! His crime basically comes down to not telling the chick he’s about to shag that he was also shagging another bird. Not exactly a crime that would see him do jail time, or be extradited to the US over.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Mr_Blobby (133 comments) says:

    Smart man, concur with Barry, and look at how Dotcom was treated. The only surprise is that British didn’t allow the Americans to take him. He is right about his own Government there head is so far up American backside they have forgotten what the sun looks like, same with our own Government. If America says shit, in unison across the Tasman it is yes sir, how high and what color.
    Lucky he didn’t pick Pakistan. An ally in the war on terror but all they have achieved is to terrorize themselves. Not to mention the humiliation, of a sovereign nation, having your ally come into your back yard and bomb at will.
    No in the land of the Free. They love whistle blowers, as long as they are not whistle blowing on them. What are the chances of, holding themselves accountable for there own criminal action. Yeah Right.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. scrubone (3,081 comments) says:

    Funny how, with all these memos that have been published, none of them reveal the “true” motives for the war as described by the left.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. cows4me (248 comments) says:

    Perhaps he enjoys bananas.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. mara (750 comments) says:

    Funny. If he had been shagging around in Ecuador, he might well have had cause for concern, only not from the authorities.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. metcalph (1,401 comments) says:

    His crime basically comes down to not telling the chick he’s about to shag that he was also shagging another bird. Not exactly a crime that would see him do jail time, or be extradited to the US over.

    The crime which the Swedish seek to question him over would, if committed in the UK, be a criminal offence. The Swedes wouldn’t be able to extradite him otherwise.

    For what it’s worth, Ecuador has an extradition treaty with the States. Meaning that if Julian were to get asylum from the Swedes (a remote if), the US could still seek his extradition.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Bob R (1,355 comments) says:

    He should have sought asylum in Ireland. They seem to grant it to pretty much anyone regardless of their reasons.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Chris2 (767 comments) says:

    If Ecuador decide to grant asylum, what are the practical implications for getting him from their Embassy in London, to South America?

    Wouldn’t the UK authorities simply be able to detain him once he leaves the embassy, or arrives at Heathrow for his flight?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. PaulL (5,977 comments) says:

    Agree Metcalph, but the key question seems to be what he did v’s what he’s accused of. All the reporting (which should be taken with a grain of salt) appears to suggest he’s an arsehole to women. Which isn’t a crime in either country (although some people would like it to be). What he is accused of I think is some variant of rape that is based around deception or false pretenses? Which probably is illegal but rarely prosecuted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. metcalph (1,401 comments) says:

    What he is accused of I think is some variant of rape that is based around deception or false pretenses? Which probably is illegal but rarely prosecuted.

    What he is accused of can easily be read in the judgment and I quote it below.

    ==begin quote==

    There are four allegations as set out in box (e) of the warrant:
    1.
    On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange, by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.
    2.
    On 13th – 14th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.
    3.
    On 18th August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.
    4.
    On 17th August 2010, in the home of the injured party [name given] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state.
    It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.

    ==End quote==

    Let’s see. Allegation 1 is assault, Allegation 2 is sex through fraudulently obtained consent, allegation 3 is indecent assualt and allegation 4 is rape, all serious offences.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.