Donate SIGN UP

Assange.....

Avatar Image
ZedBloke | 15:36 Fri 30th Nov 2012 | News
27 Answers
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.
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 27rss feed

1 2 Next Last

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.
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 same reason Bradley Manning is on trial at the moment for disclosing confidential info to Wikileaks. Its the yanks that want him, not Sweden, and this round a bout way of apprehending him to do the US bidding. Also Britain is part of this conspiracy to get him packed off to face charges.
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.
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.
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 ?
"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?
Question Author
well thank you all for not answering the question. The validity of the charges are not what I'm asking. Nor am I asking about any sort of conspracy or lack of. The stated reason for extradition is that they want question him. Why can they not do that in London?
Why should they do that in London? Are suspects in crime to be allowed to lay down the conditions in which they are prepared even to BE questioned?

And if you are to accuse us of not answering your question, why have you not answered the question I asked YOU?
Question Author
You mean the standard, "what if it happenned to you/relative/friend question?" Emotive connections are invalid to sensible debate. I was not attempting to debate the alleged offences. Perhaps you could ask that quesion on a thread of it's own.
You ask why the Swedes can not come here and say it is a charade, it stinks to high heaven. Is it not odd that an Australian chooses to go to a foreign embassy rather than his own country's High Commission? Is that not a charade?
Question Author
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.
//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.
Perhaps the question you originally asked has not been answered to your satisfaction, Zedbloke - but it has been answered. The only thing this whole mess stinks of is one man attempting to assert conspiracy as a shield from facing justice.
Question Author
QM a) I would have thought that if they indeed just want to question then it is earsier than extradition. I'm not saying they shouldn't exradite but I really wonder why the chose to.
b) Of course not. I just thought it's a lot of trouble to go to when they could just go to London and question him.
If he is innocent, why is he evading the authorities?
But aren't they past the stage of 'just questioning ' him, ZedBloke?
Question Author
Factor30: They've always said they wanted to question him
TCL: the old nothing to hide nothing to fear argument, I think he's probably worried about ending up in the US who he has managed to upset.

1 to 20 of 27rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Assange.....

Answer Question >>