WikiLeaks founder on Interpol's most wanted list... for rape?

Pages

Yeah, it's just utterly ludicrous that they'd have 24x7x365 guards and surveillance on an embassy for a rape case. And not even one where charges have been brought, just where someone is wanted for questioning.

Any idea that this is really a rape case should have left your mind long, long ago.

Funkenpants wrote:

Is the relationship with the U.S. government going to be harmed if they turn around and say, "This is getting stupid- we're going to let him head out to Ecuador so the Swedes can deal with extradition from there."

I mean, nobody seems to viewing this as a case about rape, like say, the Roman Polanski case. It's all about worries over the guy ending up in the U.S. secret justice system.

The extradition is over a European arrest warrant regarding him being wanted for questioning. I'm not sure that's something Ecuador has any obligation to honour.

Also: in the case of Polanski he actually entered a guilty plea and absconded to avoid sentencing. In this case, Assange is merely wanted for questioning. He's offered to be questioned in the UK, which Sweden has declined. They also declined to question him while he was still in Sweden. As I said, I'd be gobsmacked to see this go to trial in Sweden.

Maq wrote:

The extradition is over a European arrest warrant regarding him being wanted for questioning. I'm not sure that's something Ecuador has any obligation to honour.

Extraditions are usually governed by treaties, I think. It would depend on what agreement is in place between Sweden and Ecuador. Which is really a problem for Sweden to tackle.

Maq wrote:

Also: in the case of Polanski he actually entered a guilty plea and absconded to avoid sentencing. In this case, Assange is merely wanted for questioning. He's offered to be questioned in the UK, which Sweden has declined. They also declined to question him while he was still in Sweden. As I said, I'd be gobsmacked to see this go to trial in Sweden.

My point was that Polanski's extradition was purely a local criminal matter. It had nothing to do with national security or the desire of a third government to get its hands on him so it could accuse him of a different crime.

Maq wrote:
Funkenpants wrote:

Is the relationship with the U.S. government going to be harmed if they turn around and say, "This is getting stupid- we're going to let him head out to Ecuador so the Swedes can deal with extradition from there."

I mean, nobody seems to viewing this as a case about rape, like say, the Roman Polanski case. It's all about worries over the guy ending up in the U.S. secret justice system.

The extradition is over a European arrest warrant regarding him being wanted for questioning. I'm not sure that's something Ecuador has any obligation to honour.

No, I don't think the US-UK relationship would be materially harmed as I think that the US would have an easier time sending in an extraction team into Ecuador than most "western european" countries to take him away if they wanted to. Secondly, as I've probably stated time and time before in this thread.... the extent they are pursuing a possible rapist is completely out of proportion to any other rape claim ever founded by any woman in a western society. They're complete hypocrites.... and I expect it to come and bite them back in their political assess long after this is settled in any form or function.

Wrong thread.

That's unexpected. Or are they dropping the warrant so he'll walk out of the embassy just so they can reissue it later. Like when he's surrounded by burly British bobbies.

Sweden dropped the arrest warrant?

Weird. Really old article with a recent update.

Funkenpants wrote:

Or are they dropping the warrant so he'll walk out of the embassy just so they can reissue it later. Like when he's surrounded by burly British bobbies.

That's where my money is. Where's an Ecuadorean extraction team when you need one?

That article is more than two years old. Does anyone know what was edited?

Not sure. The Wikileaks Twitter account posted it this morning with an archive tag, but the time stamp on the article shows an edit. I almost deleted it but decided to just leave it.

Apparently, the Swedish arrest warrant was pulled a day after it was issued in 2010, but then the case was reopened a few months later and an *international* arrest warrant was issued, to bring him in on questioning about several charges. The article above was about the Swedish warrant going away; the Interpol one was issued the following October.

Weird that Wikileaks floated it out again. Must be a slow news day for them.

US calls Assange 'enemy of state'

Yep. People that tell the truth are now enemies of the United States.

Pages