Assange placed himself in a secure location because of America getting upset about his exposure of their 'illegal activities' and their interference with other counties 'due process' in law. If Wikileaks were not involved there would not be a problem. Assange is quite right to fear the American input to this situation regardless of the legal requirements of the UK or Sweden.
If America were not involved, this situation of Assange being 'under siege' at the Embassy would not exist.

Alan B wrote:Assange placed himself in a secure location because of America getting upset about his exposure of their 'illegal activities' and their interference with other counties 'due process' in law. If Wikileaks were not involved there would not be a problem. Assange is quite right to fear the American input to this situation regardless of the legal requirements of the UK or Sweden.
If America were not involved, this situation of Assange being 'under siege' at the Embassy would not exist.

And so, because he is fearful of the consequences of his Wikileaks activities, he gets to avoid the consequences of subsequent behaviour?

Presumption of innocence.
Prosecutors have no business persecuting people with allegations they cannot bring before a court.

What?
They want to question him, about an alleged crime, that was alleged to have happened in their country. He doesn't want to go and be questioned. He has fought against going and been told, tough, he will have to go so now he is on the lam and hiding. That's persecution? Wow!

I hope you can maintain this moral position if you're ever a victim of a crime and the person suspected of doing it avoids the police and then starts whining about being persecuted if they diligently pursue their arrest.

monkeyboy wrote:
I hope you can maintain this moral position if you're ever a victim of a crime and the person suspected of doing it avoids the police and then starts whining about being persecuted if they diligently pursue their arrest.

your scare tactics and aren't helping your position either.

I wouldn't want to roll over on fabricated charges, just because "legal"

You don't appear to have much trust on the Equadorian authorities to have looked at the matter in the last three years, to make an informed decision about keeping him in the embassy.

Another high profile case recently that highlights the injustice of keeping a person on bail without indictment or trial is the case of DJ Paul Gambachini. He was accused of sexual assault of underage girls and was on bail for a long time. Ultimately he was released with no charges. This had devastating effects on his life and career. A time limit on bail its to be introduced to prevent that sort of mistreatment.

monkeyboy wrote:What?
... if you're ever a victim of a crime...

Did you read that Observer article based on the police report?

Agi Hammerthief wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:
I hope you can maintain this moral position if you're ever a victim of a crime and the person suspected of doing it avoids the police and then starts whining about being persecuted if they diligently pursue their arrest.

your scare tactics and aren't helping your position either.

I wouldn't want to roll over on fabricated charges, just because "legal"

You don't appear to have much trust on the Equadorian authorities to have looked at the matter in the last three years, to make an informed decision about keeping him in the embassy.

I love how I'm the one with the scare tactics.

Assange is wanted by Swedish police. He isn't in Sweden and won't voluntarily go to Sweden, like when police ask you to attend for an interview but you won't go to them voluntarily. They clearly have enough to go on to arrest him but since he wasn't in Sweden, they ask the UK to pick him up, we do. He appeals being sent to Sweden through every avenue open to him and fails. He then goes into hiding. He does this because apparently, because these allegations in Sweden are all part of some conniving plot by the Americans to sneakily get Assange back to America. His being a fugitive is because he is liable to be subject to some dastardly and untoward plot to unfairly abduct him or something?
And I'm the one using scare tactics?

monkeyboy wrote:

I hope you can maintain this moral position if you're ever a victim of a crime and the person suspected of doing it avoids the police and then starts whining about being persecuted if they diligently pursue their arrest.

Another emotional outburst.

You might also consider how you would handle being pursued by an over zealous , but oh so slow moving, prosecutor for a crime you did not commit and your life is on hold for years and your reputation is publicly shredded. No doubt you will endure it with a smile, patiently complying with whatever the prosecutor demands, for years.


I think you would find that hard, even without a reasonable fear that another state is plotting to exploit your situation to further persecute you for doing your job and serving the public interest.
I

GrahamH wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

I hope you can maintain this moral position if you're ever a victim of a crime and the person suspected of doing it avoids the police and then starts whining about being persecuted if they diligently pursue their arrest.

Another emotional outburst.

You might also consider how you would handle being pursued by an over zealous , but oh so slow moving, prosecutor for a crime you did not commit and your life is on hold for years and your reputation is publicly shredded. No doubt you will endure it with a smile, patiently complying with whatever the prosecutor demands, for years.

Thanks for assuming my emotions for me. Projection much?

Could you, just for my benefit, explain who you think is holding things up and slowing everything down? Only, its a bit difficult to proceed with anything whilst Assange is holed up in an embassy!

I love the use of the phrase, "over zealous" by the way. Like I said above. Would you consider the police over zealous if they continued to pursue a suspect whatever his attempts to avoid arrest? Or is this diligence? Try consider the victim's perspective in this and just who is being so hard done by here.

If he is innocent, then get on with things, go to court if necessary and demonstrate it. That's how you do it! Hiding in an embassy for three yrs then whining about how long it's going on for? Really? Expecting everyone to play it his way and then whining when they don't? "They won't come and question me where I want them to!"? That's all very mean of them I'm sure. What if the Swedes did go question him in the embassy and at the conclusion, they want to take him into custody? Oh that's right, they can't. No jurisdiction in the embassy or even on the pavement outside. Should they just give in then? Is that what you expect of police? Do share your stunning insight as to when diligence to your job and duty becomes being " over zealous"!

GrahamH wrote:

I thump you would find that hard, even without a reasonably fear that another state is plotting to exploit your situation to further persecute you for doing your job and serving the public interest.
I

Sorry, didn't get this edit.

America has a pretty solid extradition treaty with the UK. Why have they not asked for Assange to be picked and sent there? We had ample opportunity before he hid.

Loving your use of language BTW! Persecute for prosecute, love it.

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Loving your use of language BTW!

Oh the irony. You've used pejorative language from the word go.

Briton wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Loving your use of language BTW!

Oh the irony. You've used pejorative language from the word go.

Example?

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

I thump you would find that hard, even without a reasonably fear that another state is plotting to exploit your situation to further persecute you for doing your job and serving the public interest.
I

Sorry, didn't get this edit.

America has a pretty solid extradition treaty with the UK. Why have they not asked for Assange to be picked and sent there? We had ample opportunity before he hid.

Loving your use of language BTW! Persecute for prosecute, love it.

Do you have nothing to say about the failure of the Swedish prosecutor to bring a prosecution in a fair and timely manner?

It seems absolutely disgraceful to me that they have not done what they have done with other cases and get on a plane to ask a few questions.

Do you have a view on the Gambachini case?

It becomes persecution when prosecution is grossly unfair to the innocent.

monkeyboy wrote:

Briton wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

Loving your use of language BTW!

Oh the irony. You've used pejorative language from the word go.

Example?

Constant referral to 'whining' is one.

I notice you didn't answer my previous question but there was another question put to you earlier in the thread that I didn't see a reply to; you do understand the concept of asylum?

GrahamH wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

I thump you would find that hard, even without a reasonably fear that another state is plotting to exploit your situation to further persecute you for doing your job and serving the public interest.
I

Sorry, didn't get this edit.

America has a pretty solid extradition treaty with the UK. Why have they not asked for Assange to be picked and sent there? We had ample opportunity before he hid.

Loving your use of language BTW! Persecute for prosecute, love it.

Do you have nothing to say about the failure of the Swedish prosecutor to bring a prosecution in a fair and timely manner?

It seems absolutely disgraceful to me that they have not done what they have done with other cases and get on a plane to ask a few questions.

And then if they then wish to arrest him and bring him to trial? How does that work?
Yes this has dragged on. Many cases do where there are multiple legal challenges. Many cases over here don't make it to court for well over a year and that is with the accused locked up on remand and readily accessible.
This case is happening in two different jurisdictions, with multiple legal avenues having been pursued extensively and everything put on hold by Assange sitting in an Embassy.
Of course that's all the Swedish prosecutor's fault.

Do you have a view on the Gambachini case?

Simply, no. I had no interest in that case. If it's relevant here, perhaps I shall have a look.

It becomes persecution when prosecution is grossly unfair to the innocent.

That doesn't make sense. You know he's innocent? Have you explained this to his legal team? I'm sure he'd be eternally grateful.

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

I thump you would find that hard, even without a reasonably fear that another state is plotting to exploit your situation to further persecute you for doing your job and serving the public interest.
I

Sorry, didn't get this edit.

America has a pretty solid extradition treaty with the UK. Why have they not asked for Assange to be picked and sent there? We had ample opportunity before he hid.

Loving your use of language BTW! Persecute for prosecute, love it.

Do you have nothing to say about the failure of the Swedish prosecutor to bring a prosecution in a fair and timely manner?

It seems absolutely disgraceful to me that they have not done what they have done with other cases and get on a plane to ask a few questions.

And then if they then wish to arrest him and bring him to trial? How does that work?
Yes this has dragged on. Many cases do where there are multiple legal challenges. Many cases over here don't make it to court for well over a year and that is with the accused locked up on remand and readily accessible.
This case is happening in two different jurisdictions, with multiple legal avenues having been pursued extensively and everything put on hold by Assange sitting in an Embassy.
Of course that's all the Swedish prosecutor's fault.

Do you have a view on the Gambachini case?

Simply, no. I had no interest in that case. If it's relevant here, perhaps I shall have a look.

It becomes persecution when prosecution is grossly unfair to the innocent.

That doesn't make sense. You know he's innocent? Have you explained this to his legal team? I'm sure he'd be eternally grateful.

He is presumed incident until proven guilty. You don't like that, do you?

Looks pretty damn guilty of jumping bail, in fact I don't think you even need a jury to send someone to jail over that just a judge

GrahamH wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:
Sorry, didn't get this edit.

America has a pretty solid extradition treaty with the UK. Why have they not asked for Assange to be picked and sent there? We had ample opportunity before he hid.

Loving your use of language BTW! Persecute for prosecute, love it.

Do you have nothing to say about the failure of the Swedish prosecutor to bring a prosecution in a fair and timely manner?

It seems absolutely disgraceful to me that they have not done what they have done with other cases and get on a plane to ask a few questions.

And then if they then wish to arrest him and bring him to trial? How does that work?
Yes this has dragged on. Many cases do where there are multiple legal challenges. Many cases over here don't make it to court for well over a year and that is with the accused locked up on remand and readily accessible.
This case is happening in two different jurisdictions, with multiple legal avenues having been pursued extensively and everything put on hold by Assange sitting in an Embassy.
Of course that's all the Swedish prosecutor's fault.

Do you have a view on the Gambachini case?

Simply, no. I had no interest in that case. If it's relevant here, perhaps I shall have a look.

It becomes persecution when prosecution is grossly unfair to the innocent.

That doesn't make sense. You know he's innocent? Have you explained this to his legal team? I'm sure he'd be eternally grateful.

He is presumed incident until proven guilty. You don't like that, do you?

I understand and perfectly respect that anyone ought to be considered innocent until found guilty. Do please ask whether I like things or not, it would save you from appearing to be a presumptive ass. I actually do like that he is presumed innocent. The bit I don't understand (do try to keep this about understanding and not personal preference) is how prosecution becomes persecution. It seems that your personal criterion for this is time. That because things have proceeded slowly, Assange has somehow morphed from suspect being sought for questioning into some sort of martyr suffering at the hands of corrupt legal systems, governments and shady underhand deals.

Once again, he has delayed things by multiple appeals which he had the right to. His choice but if an appeal is being heard, prosecutions can't proceed. He did this multiple times, repeatedly stalling the process. He then, once it was clear his appeals had failed, took to the embassy where he remains.

At what point in this process did reasonable prosecution become persecution? When did absconding from bail and him being a fugitive in a known location and contained by police there become him being unfairly "detained"?

Briton wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

Briton wrote:

monkeyboy wrote:

Oh the irony. You've used pejorative language from the word go.

Example?

Constant referral to 'whining' is one.

Sorry. Would you prefer complaining? Assange is complaining that he is being unfairly detained. I contend he isn't being detained but contained, as the police do when they have reasonable grounds to think they know where a fugitive is hiding.

Is that more acceptable to you?

I notice you didn't answer my previous question but there was another question put to you earlier in the thread that I didn't see a reply to; you do understand the concept of asylum?

Yes, yes I do. Sorry to have left you hanging. That was unintentional.

If Assange was so fearful of assassination attempts, abductions by American Secret Services and of being arrested and extradition to America where he might be jailed or even executed!!!!!, then why wait so long to get into a friendly embassy? Why is it only after it appears he is about to be sent to Sweden that the fear becomes so real? Were the Americans too shy to ask the Swedes before the rape case if they could have Assange back? Are relations between the UK and the USA so poor they couldn't ask us?

That he suddenly needed asylum at the same time as his appeals against extradition to Sweden in relation to the rape case was mightily convenient. Why, a cynical type might even suspect he is abusing it to avoid a rape trial.

It's still his choice to be there. An outstanding warrant for arrest for breach of bail still stands and he is liable to be arrested. He doesn't like that and feels detained by his choice of residence and its circumstances? He made his bed.