Wikileaks' Julian Assange seeks Supreme Court hearing

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Which he must not, since he is not formally charged.

Nor should he be, that's how it works in Sweden. The questioning first, the charge comes later, much later than in the UK or US system. Regardless of the allegations at hand, Assange is not at the stage of being charged yet. The fact that he hasn't been charged doesn't have nearly the same argumentative relevance as it would in the UK.

Originally Posted by Skybird

They want to question him on highly dubious claims risen against him, and on basis of a Swedish law that in principle allows any women unsatisfied with the sex she had to sue her lover over claims of rape - becasue she just felt bad afterwards.

How about addressing the actual allegations and not what the law might possibly allow for in theory?

http://www.swedishwire.com/politics/...julian-assange

Originally Posted by SwedishWire

The court heard Assange is accused of using his body weight to hold her down in a sexual manner.
The second charge alleged Assange "sexually molested" Miss A by having sex with her without a condom when it was her "express wish" one should be used.
The third charge claimed Assange "deliberately molested" Miss A on August 18 "in a way designed to violate her sexual integrity".

Those silly Swedes

Originally Posted by Skybird

When I read that law the fist time and read a lawyers explanation of it, I just did not trust my eyes. It is hilarious. But hey, its Sweden, the home of gender-engineering and denial of any biological differences between male and female, so one should not be surprised, maybe.

Again, this has precisely nothing to do with the alleged conduct.

Originally Posted by Skybird

If they only want to question him, they could have met him on neutral territory, or even in London. It would not have been the first time that in this sort of constellation such a solution has been practiced. That the Swedish rules that out shows that this never has been about questioning him, but that they want him in their fangs and this can only be reasonably explained by the US making pressure and wanting to take revenge against him.

This comes up against the issue of "charging" as before. He's not wanted for something so innocent as "only" questioning; the questioning is part of a process, the end result of which may or may not result in a charge. It's not just a chat and I don't see why it should be held over Skype or any other of Wikileaks's silly suggestions. Neither you nor I could play the same games that he is playing if faced with the same kind of allegations.

I don't see why they should go out of their way to accommodate him, to be honest. His defence team have already misled the UK courts over the extradition matter, Assange has tried to put himself out of the reach of both UK and Swedish law. I don't see the point of extending any particular privilege in this case.

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resource...e-judgment.pdf

It would be a lot more difficult to extradite Assange from Sweden to the US than it would be from the UK, and now any such extradition would still require the consent of the UK government.

It is also part of a basic campaign to destroy Wikileaks and reducing if not eliminating Assange's freedom to act, in order to take him out of action. This part of the plot without doubt has worked until here.

Assange has voluntarily reduced his freedom to act by jumping bail and seeking refuge in a political mess that ensures he cannot leave a single building. This is of his own making.