UK police to 'raid' Assange's embassy refuge

[soloooooo]

Maybe they can get a helicopter on the roof?

The consulate only rents one story (the ground floor) of the building (which is 3/4 stories high) and only have 10 small rooms in total.

The diplomatic bag would be the best way.

[townie]

Graney's saying that he has actual allegations to answer for. There is a case for wrongdoing in Swedish law that he should answer for.

Assange is not simply being sent to Sweden because he's a part of WikiLeaks.

You've got to read the context of the whole conversation br8,

All I'm saying is nothing extralegal has happened so far, the allegation and extradition are normal and legit, and the assange circlejerk glosses over the fact he is accused of doing some horrible things for which investigation is justified.

Oh right I geddit. On that point I do agree he should go to Sweden and face trial (I think I said that somewhere), it wouldn't even particularly suprise me if he was guilty.

What concerns me that he then might be subsequently be extradited to the US for more dubious charges. Apparently one of the conditions Sweeden itself places on extraditing one of their citizens is that the country seeking extradition agrees not to then extradite them to another third country. I don't see why it is so difficult for Sweeden to give such a assurance. Assurances are routinely placed on extradition (e.g. around the death penalty etc.). The fact that such assurances can't or won't be given just seems a bit off to me.

[Azure]

http://www.smh.com.au/national/us-in...817-24e1l.html

He's done for.

[funkshen]

http://www.smh.com.au/national/us-in...817-24e1l.html

He's done for.

there is literally nothing revelatory about that article

[Azure]

there is literally nothing revelatory about that article

Obviously.

[ZombieApocalypse]

An embassy isn't in itself sovereign. In other words, it would be incorrect to say it is technically Ecuadorian soil. It's just that the embassy gets immunity and is therefore not bound by local laws.

But what if they get the soil from EQUADOR.

[soloooooo]

But what if they get the soil from EQUADOR.

Would cost a lot.

[ZombieApocalypse]

Would cost a lot.

but if they ship it over, and get him to sit in a cart of it. Wouldn't he technically be on Ecuadorian soil? :P

[Rixon]

that's not how it works

[Graney]

This article is good, 'legal myths about the Assange extradition'.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/da...ge-extradition

Apparently one of the conditions Sweeden itself places on extraditing one of their citizens is that the country seeking extradition agrees not to then extradite them to another third country. I don't see why it is so difficult for Sweeden to give such a assurance.

Three: “Sweden should guarantee that there be no extradition to USA”

It would not be legally possible for Swedish government to give any guarantee about a future extradition, and nor would it have any binding effect on the Swedish legal system in the event of a future extradition request.
By asking for this 'guarantee', Assange is asking the impossible, as he probably knows. Under international law, all extradition requests have to be dealt with on their merits and in accordance with the applicable law; and any final word on an extradition would (quite properly) be with an independent Swedish court, and not the government giving the purported 'guarantee'.
(See extradition and criminal lawyer Niall McCluskey for further detail on this.)
Also Sweden (like the United Kingdom) is bound by EU and ECHR law not to extradite in circumstances where there is any risk of the death penalty or torture. There would be no extradition to the United States in such circumstances.

[soloooooo]

Why do people care so much about Assange? There are bigger problems in Australia and the world.

[townie]

This article is good, 'legal myths about the Assange extradition'.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/da...ge-extradition



Three: “Sweden should guarantee that there be no extradition to USA”

It would not be legally possible for Swedish government to give any guarantee about a future extradition, and nor would it have any binding effect on the Swedish legal system in the event of a future extradition request.
By asking for this 'guarantee', Assange is asking the impossible, as he probably knows. Under international law, all extradition requests have to be dealt with on their merits and in accordance with the applicable law; and any final word on an extradition would (quite properly) be with an independent Swedish court, and not the government giving the purported 'guarantee'.
(See extradition and criminal lawyer Niall McCluskey for further detail on this.)
Also Sweden (like the United Kingdom) is bound by EU and ECHR law not to extradite in circumstances where there is any risk of the death penalty or torture. There would be no extradition to the United States in such circumstances.

The state requesting for extradition must show that there is reason for extradition in the specific case. The outcome of the crime investigation in the requesting state - generally a conviction or a detention order - must be enclosed with the request for extradition. When extradition is granted, certain conditions may be laid down. For example, without the consent of the Government in the particular case, the person who is extradited may not be prosecuted or punished in the other state for any other offence committed prior to extradition (the "principle of speciality"). Nor may he or she be re-extradited to another state without the consent of the Government. Furthermore, nor may the person who is extradited be sentenced to death.

Source: http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/2710/a/15435

Edit:

1) Whilst I'm sure extradition is covered by international laws, ultimately it is governed by domestic law and if domestic law says such a garuntee can be given, then it can
2) even if such an agreement weren't necessarily enforceable in an international court of law, a lot of this diplomatic is done on convention and one state wouldn't go against another
3) still not sure how accurate that article is, I know (even recently) people in Australia have been extradited to a state in the US for a crime that can carry the death penalty (it was the diver guy isho killed his wife) and Aus sought assurances that the death penalty wouldn't be imposed before extraditing him (even though the death penalty *could* have been imposed)

[Learned]

Why do people care so much about Assange? There are bigger problems in Australia and the world.

You're not serious

[Dash8]

Why do people care so much about Assange? There are bigger problems in Australia and the world.

Because Assange and Wikileaks actually deal with the big problems?

[soloooooo]

You're not serious

I am serious.

[soloooooo]

Because Assange and Wikileaks actually deal with the big problems?

You know he is to be extradited on rape charges right? Nothing to do with wikileaks at all.

[Dash8]

You know he is to be extradited on rape charges right? Nothing to do with wikileaks at all.

That has everything to do with WikiLeaks. The whole thing is most probably a massive set up because countries like the USA don't want Assange leaking their horrific, secret information. Then again, I don't like speculating as he hasnt actually had a trial to prove him innocent or guilty (if that ever happens...)

[Lolsmith]

That has everything to do with WikiLeaks. The whole thing is most probably a massive set up because countries like the USA don't want Assange leaking their horrific, secret information. Then again, I don't like speculating as he hasnt actually had a trial to prove him innocent or guilty (if that ever happens...)

*speculates to a ridiculous degree*

"I don't like speculating"

[Dash8]

*speculates to a ridiculous degree*

"I don't like speculating"

Exactly