When did Rape and jumping Bail become OK?

[TheAnimus]

This is a question I find myself asking lately. My immediate reaction in such scenarios is to blame the Guardian, but I've been stewing this issue for longer now.

We've seen posts, a lot recently, defending criminal actions because they find that person to be some kind of hero. The defense of a convicted pirate, who skipped country, been deported back I find shocking, the guy has been found guilty by a court of law, protest that, don't abscond.

But then we get to the real one. Assange:
- The man is wanted for molestation and rape.
- He gave his word he would appear before the courts.
- He (apparently) didn't tell the people putting up the £250k he was going to run away.
- I can't understand the reason he would need to.

I'm a lay person of the law, but I know the UK is apparently a better friend to the USA than Sweden is. Why is he at risk of been deported from Sweden, but not the UK, when the US haven't even made any charges against him (and I'm not sure what they could? Copyright infringment?).

So why are people outraged when a man who has jumped bail, is been pursued by the police?

Why are people saying he can claim asylum when the UK are not persicuting him, well except for jumping bail. I hate the idea any country could allow any citizen to be harboured for absconding on bail, how long before its anyone with a big enough cheque book. Luckily we have laws that prevent crimes being commit.

Anyway, the staggers (yes I was shocked) has a good write up on it
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/me...julian-assange

But if one of the assange fan brigade could come and explain a bit, I'd appreciate it!

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Maybe he does not like the abstinence drive in the US??

[pctech2012]

For a kick off let me make my position clear, I don't like the guy at all, I think he has a god complex and is in danger of disappearing up his own backside.

However, it does appear odd this came to light during the media storm surrounding the leaked cables or to flip it round, he made it known to create a distraction.

In my view yes he should go and 'face the music' in Sweden.

[TheAnimus]

The one I just can't understand is the whole "its an CIA/FBI/NSA/USA/Reptilian Plot"

I mean first off, picture the scene, a black gulfstream has just been scrambled from Langley Falls, its on route to Sweden. A team of people in poorly fitting polyester suites are around a whiteboard, a man walks in from the private conference room.
"Gentlemen, what do we have" he says, never making eye contact with a single one of them, after all, he is the guy in $3,000 suit.
"Well... erm, Sir we'v" a young one starts to mutter, looking down at the floor
"We've this brilliant idea, we were thinking really hard for like the last half hour." a slightly older one interrupts, asserting his dominance in the heard. "We'll get two girls to lay minor sexual molestation charges against him, and maybe even a date rape"
"Brilliant, Smith, your promoted" the $3,000 suit guy says, a slight smirk appearing on his face, "Once those charges are laid against him, he will have no credability and all the existing information about this will disapear instantly, justice will have been done, well done guys"
As he orders the pilot to change course, back to langly, the plane flies off in to the setting sun.

I mean seriously, how batcrap dumb do you have to be to think that idea is pluasable, or the best they could come up with?

[TeePee]

As individuals we don't have to agree with the law. We have a right to disagree, and can exercise that right in several different ways. One of which is Jury Nullification. If you are on a jury, and the defendant is charged with something you don't believe is wrong, then you can return a not-guilty verdict even if you have no doubt they committed the actions for which they are charged.

The court is not the be all and end all of right and wrong. Which is why I would absolutely defend the Pirate Bay founder.

Assange is a different issue. He is carefully crafting this into a political issue. He wants people to believe that he will be deported to the Sweden and from there to the US to be charged with Treason (An impossibility under US law). He should face a fair trial for the rape allegations.

[pctech2012]

I agree its not and the two Swedish females could have brought it to a head now in the hope of gaining a bit of notoriety.

I have no doubt though that if he did set foot on American soil now he would be in cuffs within 10 minutes as he definitely agitated them to put it mildly.

[pctech2012]

Assange is a different issue. He is carefully crafting this into a political issue. He wants people to believe that he will be deported to the Sweden and from there to the US to be charged with Treason (An impossibility under US law). He should face a fair trial for the rape allegations.

He would probably be charged under terrorism or threatening the national security of the US by divulging classified info.

[TheAnimus]

He would probably be charged under terrorism or threatening the national security of the US by divulging classified info.

But does Sweden have such a law on their books?

Also lets not forget, when these allegations where first made, he was already in Sweden. If anything it looks like he fled the allegations, rather than out of a sudden fear of extradition, I mean, if there was a credible threat, make it public, because as the link my OP talks about, Sweden is generally considered 'safer' than England.

I personally get the feeling the guy has some complex and is hiding from his comeuppance.

[TeePee]

He would probably be charged under terrorism or threatening the national security of the US by divulging classified info.

I don't believe a US court has jurisdiction over actions committed by a non-citizen in a foreign country. Isn't that why Guantanamo exists?

[TheAnimus]

I don't believe a US court has jurisdiction over actions committed by a non-citizen in a foreign country. Isn't that why Guantanamo exists?

Also it would have to be a law in Sweden too, to be extradited I mean.

[TooNice]

[...]because they find that person to be some kind of hero[...]

I think that you have your answer there. I do not think that anyone likes to see their "hero" / beneficiaries locked up and see trials as a risk they are keen to avoid.

[Larkspeed]

Also it would have to be a law in Sweden too, to be extradited I mean.

Extradition does not require that the charges laid against the accused also have to be a law in the country that will extraditing them.

As far as Assange goes he can be charged with offences under the terrorism act if he lands on US soil and those charges can net him the death penalty.

He is not refusing to face the charges in Sweden what he is concerned about is being extradited from Sweden to the US.

The UK has a policy that they will not extradite anyone where they face a death penalty if extradited, essentially sending someone to their death.

Sweden as far as I am aware has no such policy.

He has already stated that he is perfectly willing to face the charges in Sweden as soon as they can give him an official guarantee he will not be extradited to the US.

[TheAnimus]

Extradition does not require that the charges laid against the accused also have to be a law in the country that will extraditing them.

My understanding was that yes, yes it does. This is why in the article I linked to, the lawyer explains why he was able to be found guilty under UK laws of the rape and molestation.

As far as Assange goes he can be charged with offences under the terrorism act if he lands on US soil and those charges can net him the death penalty.

This I don't know about, because at yet I've not scene a single expert analysis of this law and what he would be convicted under. Let alone how that would work for extradition under Swedish law.

He is not refusing to face the charges in Sweden what he is concerned about is being extradited from Sweden to the US.

Why?! As the article I linked to mentions, why is Sweden un-safe? The only people saying this are Assange, and without any prior expierance, mentions of Swedish law. In fact some experts (as mentioned in article I linked) think Sweden is SAFER than the UK.

Let's also go back to the fact he was already in Sweden when the aligations were made. Looks like he was fleeing the alligations, rather than some extriditoin.

He has already stated that he is perfectly willing to face the charges in Sweden as soon as they can give him an official guarantee he will not be extradited to the US.

I'm guessing you didn't read the link I posted, because as mentioned in there, they can give no such assurances, its a red herring.

[roachcoach]

Why?! As the article I linked to mentions, why is Sweden un-safe? The only people saying this are Assange, and without any prior expierance, mentions of Swedish law. In fact some experts (as mentioned in article I linked) think Sweden is SAFER than the UK.

Sweden had a rather...colourful...past with extraordinary rendition.

They say it is better/stopped now though. Personally if I was in Assange's shoes, I'd take that with a pinch small dumper truck load of salt.


The bigger questions for me are:

How much is this costing? For a bail jumper? (Remember that's the only crime here in the UK) If we put these resources into sweeping up every criminal...

A strange insistence that they need to comply with EU law - that doesn't usually bother them (DNA database anyone?)


Of course, cost shouldn't feature into law enforcement - but we all know full well that it does and I'm pretty damned sure the tax payers money could be better spend than a football team on a stakeout 24/7/365/n.

[pctech2012]

I don't believe a US court has jurisdiction over actions committed by a non-citizen in a foreign country. Isn't that why Guantanamo exists?

I believe so but the UK will toss up anyone to the US at the drop of a hat but it does not work the other way round.

[aidanjt]

My understanding was that yes, yes it does.

Nope. Sweden's extradition treaty with the US is entirely arbitrary.