Assange to go!

Tingtangmakadingdong · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:09

It seems "Team GB" can legally storm the building as the Secretary of State determines the status of a premises as diplomatic or consular...

Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 Part 1
1 Acquisition and loss by land of diplomatic or consular status.
(3)In no case is land to be regarded as a State’s diplomatic or consular premises for the purposes of any enactment or rule of law unless it has been so accepted or the Secretary of State has given that State consent under this section in relation to it; and if—
(b)the Secretary of State withdraws his acceptance or consent in relation to land,it thereupon ceases to be diplomatic or consular premises for the purposes of all enactments and rules of law.

There's a but to this thou...

(4)The Secretary of State shall only give or withdraw consent or withdraw acceptance if he is satisfied that to do so is permissible under international law.

estebanrey · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:09

There's too many liberal conspiracy theorists on here. Assange is accused of rape and assault and it is a LEGITIMATE claim which he should answer. If he didn't do it then he shouldn't have anything to fear.

Collider · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:11

estebanrey said:
There's too many liberal conspiracy theorists on here. Assange is accused of rape and assault and it is a LEGITIMATE claim which he should answer. If he didn't do it then he shouldn't have anything to fear.

There is also the argument that he is accused and will be tried in a country with an excellent legal system.

Ironically I would suggest he'd have more to worry about if he was hiding in the Swedish Embassy avoiding deport to Ecuador for a sex offence.

Zbornak · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:12

OldCoals said:
Surely one nation invading the sovereign territory of another is an act of war?

Depends who's doing what. If the Ecuadorian government invaded our embassy we'd go crazy but we can do what we like with their embassy because we're on the UN Security Council. So, ha!

Cosimo · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:12

I’m looking forward to tomorrow when they drag him out screaming and stick him on a plane to Sweden.

RomanNose · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:12

estebanrey said:
There's too many liberal conspiracy theorists on here. Assange is accused of rape and assault and it is a LEGITIMATE claim which he should answer. If he didn't do it then he shouldn't have anything to fear.

He has loads to fear, strong Sweden and US relations mean that it's likely that he might face extradition to the US.
The head of the US senate said that they want him, it's really not a liberal conspiracy theory at all.
The Americans really do hate him due to their Media, same with a lot of people in the UK as well.

Xordium · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:13

estebanrey said:
There's too many liberal conspiracy theorists on here. Assange is accused of rape and assault and it is a LEGITIMATE claim which he should answer. If he didn't do it then he shouldn't have anything to fear.

Whilst I think he is a slimy ******* it is rather suspicious in the timing and it is hardly not like the US are averse to using character assassination. I suppose you can look at that one of two ways: one, he is being framed by the accusations; two, the stress of the leaks caused him to behave even more slimy than usual.

Sweden has been getting very close to the US for a few years now. I am not wholly convinced of it either way and I'd rather we weren't involved.

Tefal · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:15

taintedlove69 said:
It seems "Team GB" can legally storm the building as the Secretary of State determines the status of a premises as diplomatic or consular...

There's a but to this thou...

international law only applies if the country you're picking on is bigger and stronger than you.

Collider · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:15

It is likely he would face the case for US extradition but he has the chance to oppose that in the Swedish courts and the Swedes are interested in seeing him face justice for the alleged offences there. Despite all the conspiracy ideas I don't think Sweden is going to trump up a load of charges to do the US a favour, the US would get him anyway.

I don't hate him (I actually find the sex allegations the most offensive thing about him if he did it I hope they give him a very stern sentence) but he does have to live with the consequences of his actions.

Xordium · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:23

I don't think people are suggesting Sweden are the one trumping the charges ...

Collider · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:25

Xordium said:
I don't think people are suggesting Sweden are the one trumping the charges ...

Well they would have to be in on it to state clearly they intended putting him on trial, they have said he isn't just wanted for an enquiry they have enough to charge him with.

Xordium · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:28

Collider said:
Well they would have to be in on it to state clearly they intended putting him on trial, they have said he isn't just wanted for an enquiry they have enough to charge him with.

Yes, and none of that evidence or allegations needed to have originated from Swedish authorities. If we were to plant a load of stuff on your harddrive and inform the police who would have set you up - people here or the British government?

Collider · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:31

Xordium said:
Yes, and none of that evidence or allegations needed to have originated from Swedish authorities. If we were to plant a load of stuff on your harddrive and inform the police who would have set you up - people here or the British government?

I don't believe he is being accused on the basis of stuff on a hard drive. I am not sure why people believe the rape claim would be false and a setup just because he happens to have run wikileaks. Does that automatically make him not a sex offender and the woman a liar?

I'd say call it in court.

Xordium · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:34

Collider said:
I don't believe he is being accused on the basis of stuff on a hard drive. I am not sure why people believe the rape claim would be false and a setup just because he happens to have run wikileaks. Does that automatically make him not a sex offender and the woman a liar?

I'd say call it in court.

That was an analogy.

You don't think it is a slight coincidence in the timing? You don't think it is the ideal way to smear someone? You don't think the stories of the women are rather inconsistent? You don't think the past histories of the women and their associations are relevant? None of these things raise any element of doubt whatsoever?

estebanrey · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:35

Xordium said:
You don't think the stories of the women are rather inconsistent? You don't think the past histories of the women and their associations are relevant? None of these things raise any element of doubt whatsoever?

Then it won't stand up in court will it?

Xordium · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:37

estebanrey said:
Then it won't stand up in court will it?

Well it depends on how well the job was done in the fabrication if it was fabricated and the political pressure applied. You are making a rather naive assumption that the truth is found in a trial. It is not. An outcome is found on the basis of the evidence provided.

Collider · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:40

Xordium said:
That was an analogy.

You don't think it is a slight coincidence in the timing? You don't think it is the ideal way to smear someone? You don't think the stories of the women are rather inconsistent? You don't think the past histories of the women and their associations are relevant? None of these things raise any element of doubt whatsoever?

I don't think past histories should be a factor or its undermining every rape case that might ever be brought, it shouldn't become about the victim in these things. I feel uneasy about that sort of premise because it assumes the women are liars and he is not and I wouldn't make that judgement based on him running Wikileaks any more than them having whatever associations they have.

If you apply the same principle then you must surely not believe he cannot be a rapist because he ran a website.

I do think there is some doubt and there are some timing issues but he's not going to be tried in Ecuador (where I would have issues with the justice system) it is in Sweden where they have a decent enough criminal justice system and where the evidence would, in my view, be properly tested. And it should be and then he'd be found innocent if it was all trumped up (rightly) or convicted if it were not (also rightly).

I guess I am not sure what the problem with being tried in Sweden is. If the Swedes are not in on it, as you suggest, then his chances of being found innocent, if he is, are good I would have thought.

fini · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:40

This isn't what European arrest warrants are supposed to be used for in the first place - they assume a relative parity of definition of what is a serious crime, which isn't the case here. Sweden's pretty much the only country where what he is being accused of doing would be classed as rape.

Collider · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:47

Interesting article on how that 'isn't rape' here

The allegations against Assange are rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. He's accused of pinning one woman's arms and using his body weight to hold her down during one alleged assault, and of raping a woman while she was sleeping. In both cases, according to the allegations, Assange did not use a condom.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/10/AR2010121002571.html

I think the 'its not rape' says more about the views on sex offences held by people who support Assange than it does about Swedish law on consent withdrawal.

Xordium · 15 Aug 2012 at 23:48

Collider said:
I don't think past histories should be a factor or its undermining every rape case that might ever be brought, it shouldn't become about the victim in these things. I feel uneasy about that sort of premise because it assumes the women are liars and he is not and I wouldn't make that judgement based on him running Wikileaks any more than them having whatever associations they have.

If you apply the same principle then you must surely not believe he cannot be a rapist because he ran a website.

I do think there is some doubt and there are some timing issues but he's not going to be tried in Ecuador (where I would have issues with the justice system) it is in Sweden where they have a decent enough criminal justice system and where the evidence would, in my view, be properly tested. And it should be and then he'd be found innocent if it was all trumped up (rightly) or convicted if it were not (also rightly).

I guess I am not sure what the problem with being tried in Sweden is. If the Swedes are not in on it, as you suggest, then his chances of being found innocent, if he is, are good I would have thought.

So you don't think the fact that Ardin allegedly has links with an agency that represents the government which would most likely profit from his detention is relevant? Or suspicious?

Not it does not excuse him of the crime but it also casts extreme doubt when added with everything else.

Again his chances are good if he is not-guilty or if the evidence fabricated against him is poor - we can assume the US would not fall afoul of the later. So we are no wiser but should not discount either possibility lightly.