How it Works1 min ago
Assange.....
If Sweden just wanted to question him then why didn't they come to London rather than launch this whole extradition charade? Even now I'd say that Ecuador would probably let Swedish officials into the Embassy if they wanted to question him. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ZedBloke. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Why should they? since when are police investigators subject to the whim of the person they wish to question in connection with a range of potentially serious cases?
A european arrest warrant has been issued. He is a suspect in some allegations of sex crimes. He has challenged the validity of the extradition, has had his chance to appeal, and has been turned down.
He does not get a free pass simply because of some vague concern that the US might extradite him.Those who have allegedly suffered at his hands have the absolute right to see him face justice in Sweden.
A european arrest warrant has been issued. He is a suspect in some allegations of sex crimes. He has challenged the validity of the extradition, has had his chance to appeal, and has been turned down.
He does not get a free pass simply because of some vague concern that the US might extradite him.Those who have allegedly suffered at his hands have the absolute right to see him face justice in Sweden.
If, as he claims, he didn't do it and it's Swedish girls lining up to blackmail him (which is what the Swedish police first thought too), why doesn't he seek an absolute assurance that Sweden won't bounce him to the States and then go back to face the music, prove he's innocent and then walk free (apart from the States).
The one thing that the Swedes are is honourable.
Or does Mr Assange know that he committed the crime and is guilty?
The one thing that the Swedes are is honourable.
Or does Mr Assange know that he committed the crime and is guilty?
You evoke the spectre of conspiracy.
I do not see it that way. Charges have been made. The authorities in Sweden deem them sufficiently serious and valid that they have issued a formal extradition warrant. He has appealed that extradition, and lost his appeal. He then legs it to the ecuadorian embassy, claiming diplomatic protection and avoiding returning to Sweden to face the charges.
You can speculate all you like as to whether there is a conspiracy or not. What you cannot claim any knowledge of is the verity of the charges against him - only a court can do that.
And this is my speculation. Everything he does says to me that he is someone who considers himself above the law, convinced of his own self-importance,arrogant and lacking empathy, raising the spectre of a US-led conspiracy where no evidence exists to support such a conspiracy in order to avoid facing charges of serious sexual misconduct.
Those women who have made the charges have a right to have their greivances put to the alleged perpetrator, and have as much right as anyone else for justice and closure.
And Sweden is not a banana republic - Sweden has a democratic and legal process to be proud of.
I do not see it that way. Charges have been made. The authorities in Sweden deem them sufficiently serious and valid that they have issued a formal extradition warrant. He has appealed that extradition, and lost his appeal. He then legs it to the ecuadorian embassy, claiming diplomatic protection and avoiding returning to Sweden to face the charges.
You can speculate all you like as to whether there is a conspiracy or not. What you cannot claim any knowledge of is the verity of the charges against him - only a court can do that.
And this is my speculation. Everything he does says to me that he is someone who considers himself above the law, convinced of his own self-importance,arrogant and lacking empathy, raising the spectre of a US-led conspiracy where no evidence exists to support such a conspiracy in order to avoid facing charges of serious sexual misconduct.
Those women who have made the charges have a right to have their greivances put to the alleged perpetrator, and have as much right as anyone else for justice and closure.
And Sweden is not a banana republic - Sweden has a democratic and legal process to be proud of.
It was reported that one of the alleged rapes was not that at all. In fact he had consentual sex earlier in the evening with the woman but decided to try his hand again the next morning. It was this second episode that makes up the charges. The likely scenario was the drink had worn off but his desire had not.
"its been reported". "Its been alleged". Yes, these things have been alleged. Does not mean that the allegations are true, any more than the original allegations of sexual assault are true.
Or are you saying that women making claims of sexual assault should just be ignored?
The true test of such claims comes from investigation, discussion with prosecutors and legal experts, and if the assertions are deemed sufficiently serious and likely on the basis of evidence and statement, such claims should be tested in court. This is the principle upon which democracy is enshrined.
Test the allegations in court, and since the allegations stem from behaviour in Sweden, against individuals who are swedish, the proper court to test such allegations is in Sweden.
The more he hides away in the Ecuadorian Embassy, shouting the odds, asserting conspiracy, making impossible demands, the more it seems he is merely trying to evade justice.
Or are you saying that women making claims of sexual assault should just be ignored?
The true test of such claims comes from investigation, discussion with prosecutors and legal experts, and if the assertions are deemed sufficiently serious and likely on the basis of evidence and statement, such claims should be tested in court. This is the principle upon which democracy is enshrined.
Test the allegations in court, and since the allegations stem from behaviour in Sweden, against individuals who are swedish, the proper court to test such allegations is in Sweden.
The more he hides away in the Ecuadorian Embassy, shouting the odds, asserting conspiracy, making impossible demands, the more it seems he is merely trying to evade justice.
If Swedish police were to question him, what then ?
They would presumably want to put him on trial , so what then ?
If there was a trial, where would it take place , and if he was found guilty, what then ?
If in the UK, would he then willingly return to Sweden and serve his sentence ?
Zed Bloke # This whole thing stinks to high heaven. #
What precisely stinks ?
They would presumably want to put him on trial , so what then ?
If there was a trial, where would it take place , and if he was found guilty, what then ?
If in the UK, would he then willingly return to Sweden and serve his sentence ?
Zed Bloke # This whole thing stinks to high heaven. #
What precisely stinks ?
"Decided to try his hand again the next morning."
Sadly, according to the lady's claim, it wasn't just his hand!
ZedBloke, if the woman concerned was your sister or daughter, would you be perfectly happy that the suspect be questioned in a hidey-hole in Denmark, say, rather than returning to Britain to face her in court?
Sadly, according to the lady's claim, it wasn't just his hand!
ZedBloke, if the woman concerned was your sister or daughter, would you be perfectly happy that the suspect be questioned in a hidey-hole in Denmark, say, rather than returning to Britain to face her in court?
I asked a simple question, the alleged crime and other associated debates are irrelevant as are my own views of same, that's why I've not expressed them. Why do people find it so difficult to answer the question. Our own police force regularly travells abroad to question people, we don't try to extradite them first. I just wondered why Swedish authorities appear unable to ask questions outside their borders. It's a valid query.
ZedB, you choose not to answer the question in my first contribution here on the basis that it is emotive. Fair enough, but why did you not answer the other two questions I asked in my second either? Here they are again...
a. Why should they do that in London?
b. Are suspects in crime to be allowed to lay down the conditions in which they are prepared even to BE questioned?
I can see no emotion whatsoever involved in either.
a. Why should they do that in London?
b. Are suspects in crime to be allowed to lay down the conditions in which they are prepared even to BE questioned?
I can see no emotion whatsoever involved in either.
//If Sweden just wanted to question him then why didn't they come to London rather than launch this whole extradition charade?//
He was initially questioned in Stockholm about an alleged offence that had taken place in Sweden. He had also applied for a residency permit to live and work in Sweden at the time.
When, after a lot of faffing about, the Swedish authorities decided he faced an arrestable matter - not questioning, arrest - he was out of the country, so they issued an international arrest warrant, which would require extradition as standard procedure regardless of who the warrant was for.
As far as I can see, it's due process, marked by cock ups <<sorry>> on the Swedes' part and some adept smoke and mirrors from Assange.
For instance, although his residency permit was denied, I do find it strange that having once viewed it as somewhere very convenient to live and work because of it's laws on whistleblowing, Assange now has terrible doubts about the robustness of Sweden's judicial system.
He was initially questioned in Stockholm about an alleged offence that had taken place in Sweden. He had also applied for a residency permit to live and work in Sweden at the time.
When, after a lot of faffing about, the Swedish authorities decided he faced an arrestable matter - not questioning, arrest - he was out of the country, so they issued an international arrest warrant, which would require extradition as standard procedure regardless of who the warrant was for.
As far as I can see, it's due process, marked by cock ups <<sorry>> on the Swedes' part and some adept smoke and mirrors from Assange.
For instance, although his residency permit was denied, I do find it strange that having once viewed it as somewhere very convenient to live and work because of it's laws on whistleblowing, Assange now has terrible doubts about the robustness of Sweden's judicial system.
