Sweden drops Julian Assange (creator of Wikileaks) rape investigation

[JEDI]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/19/europe/julian-assange-sweden-charges-dropped/index.html

Assange, who has always denied wrongdoing, has been holed up at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London since 2012, in an effort to avoid a Swedish arrest warrant.

Dropping the investigation is not a result of deciding he is not guilty, prosecutor Ny added -- it's because there's no practical way to continue it.
"The decision to discontinue the preliminary investigation is not because we've been able to make a full assessment of the evidence in this case, but because we didn't see any possibilities to advance the investigation forward.


5years in the embassy is all that's needed to beat rape charges.
How did he even squirm his way into the embassy?

 

[Jhhnn]

Having paid attention from the beginning, I really don't think the rape charge would hold up past the preliminary investigation. I think that Sweden is sincere in their desire to investigate. That's never really been why Assange holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy, anyway. He fears extradition to the US over his involvement in the Manning leaks.

 

[cytg111]

One can hope he gets picked up by a black ops team ... never to be heard from again.

 

[Blackjack200]

Having paid attention from the beginning, I really don't think the rape charge would hold up past the preliminary investigation. I think that Sweden is sincere in their desire to investigate. That's never really been why Assange holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy, anyway. He fears extradition to the US over his involvement in the Manning leaks.

Bullshit. He offered to answer questions from inside the embassy and Sweden refused. Odd thing to do if you're investigating a crime. They wanted him in their custody so they could send him to the U.S.

 

[WelshBloke]

Bullshit. He offered to answer questions from inside the embassy and Sweden refused. Odd thing to do if you're investigating a crime. They wanted him in their custody so they could send him to the U.S.

They dont need to charge him with rape for that. We (the Brits) could seize him the instant he steps foot out of the Embassy and extradite him to the US.

 

[Blackjack200]

They dont need to charge him with rape for that. We (the Brits) could seize him the instant he steps foot out of the Embassy and extradite him to the US.

The U.S. hasn't requested extradition, they would have requested it if Sweden had gotten him in custody.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The U.S. hasn't requested extradition, they would have requested it if Sweden had gotten him in custody.

There is a separate outstanding warrant for failing to appear, and that's one of the Brits. I also learned that said they would not confirm or deny that an extradition request had been made.

We don't know what would happen and neither does Assange. He's not off the hook yet.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

They dont need to charge him with rape for that. We (the Brits) could seize him the instant he steps foot out of the Embassy and extradite him to the US.

Because you guys get shit done my Brother.

 

[DisarmedDespot]

The U.S. hasn't requested extradition, they would have requested it if Sweden had gotten him in custody.

IIRC it's actually a lot easier to extradite someone from the UK than from Sweden. The whole UK -> Sweden -> permanent detainment in the US thing didn't make much sense when they could just go UK -> US.

 

[WelshBloke]

The U.S. hasn't requested extradition, they would have requested it if Sweden had gotten him in custody.

I'm not seeing the logic there. Why would they wait for the UK to enact a European arrest warrant, send him to Sweden for trial then Sweden to drop the trial it had got him arrested on and extradite him to the US when the US could just ask the UK to send him to the US?

IIRC it's actually a lot easier to extradite someone from the UK than from Sweden. The whole UK -> Sweden -> permanent detainment in the US thing didn't make much sense when they could just go UK -> US.

Yeah. Yours is easier to read than mine!

 

[Grooveriding]

Is he just going to rot away in that embassy until he dies ? The guy is done, there is no way he leaves without being dealt with. His only option that involves no jail/execution is going to be a dacha in Russia, but his usefulness to Russia's propaganda campaign is going to be diminished if he moves to the motherland.

 

[woolfe9998]

Assange is sludge.

 

[woolfe9998]

Is he just going to rot away in that embassy until he dies ? The guy is done, there is no way he leaves without being dealt with. His only option that involves no jail/execution is going to be a dacha in Russia, but his usefulness to Russia's propaganda campaign is going to be diminished if he moves to the motherland.

Putin might just give him asylum there anyway, like he did for Yanukovych, out of pure gratitude for how much he's done for Russia, and his opposition to democracy throughout the world.

 

[Blackjack200]

There is a separate outstanding warrant for failing to appear, and that's one of the Brits. I also learned that said they would not confirm or deny that an extradition request had been made.

We don't know what would happen and neither does Assange. He's not off the hook yet.

Right, that's why he's still not leaving the embassy. The fact that the Brits won't drop the "failing to appear" warrant is further evidence that this is not about his legal issues in Sweden.

IIRC it's actually a lot easier to extradite someone from the UK than from Sweden. The whole UK -> Sweden -> permanent detainment in the US thing didn't make much sense when they could just go UK -> US.

I believe the U.S. has a pretty strong agreement with Sweden. The U.K. had no reason to detain him, so he couldn't go UK -> US.

I'm not seeing the logic there. Why would they wait for the UK to enact a European arrest warrant, send him to Sweden for trial then Sweden to drop the trial it had got him arrested on and extradite him to the US when the US could just ask the UK to send him to the US?

The belief is that there is a sealed indictment on Assange, and an extradition request would be sent to either Sweden or the U.K. the moment he's in the custody of either state.

 

[Blackjack200]

If Sweden was serious about prosecuting the rape case, they could have questioned Assange in the embassy, and then published the evidence that they had against him.

That would have transformed Ecuador from an nation protecting a man from political revenge into a nation protecting a rapist. Why didn't they do that?

This was never about a rape investigation.

 

[WelshBloke]

The U.K. had no reason to detain him, so he couldn't go UK -> US.

He doesn't need to have done something that we want to detain him for to get extradited to the US.

 

[Blackjack200]

He doesn't need to have done something that we want to detain him for to get extradited to the US.

You're being pedantic. We don't know why the U.S. didn't indict and request extradition from the U.K. Maybe Downing Street didn't want to appear to be turning over a political prisoner, maybe the U.S. needed more time to prepare its case. Assange and his lawyer clearly believe that the U.S. is trying to get him, and that's why he remains in the embassy.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Bullshit. He offered to answer questions from inside the embassy and Sweden refused. Odd thing to do if you're investigating a crime. They wanted him in their custody so they could send him to the U.S.

They questioned him at the embassy last fall.

 

[DisarmedDespot]

I believe the U.S. has a pretty strong agreement with Sweden. The U.K. had no reason to detain him, so he couldn't go UK -> US.

I'm still not seeing it. Yes, the UK has no reason to detain him - but Sweden has no reason to ship him to the US, and if the US did demand his extrradition, it's still harder to get extradited from Sweden:

Sweden’s extradition agreement with the United States, signed in 1961 and updated in 1983, prohibits extradition on the basis of "a political offense" or "an offense connected with a political offense." The agreement does not specify what constitutes a "political offense." Whether the Swedish supreme court would rule to extradite Assange largely depends on what charges the secret U.S. grand jury brings against him.

If Assange is accused of espionage, Sweden most certainly would not comply, as its courts have consistently determined that espionage constitutes a political offense. For example, in 1992 Sweden refused to extradite Edward Lee Howard, the only CIA agent to defect to the Soviet Union, to the United States. Charged with espionage, Swedish courts ruled that those accusations amounted to the kind of "political offense" specified in the extradition agreement.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/08/18/would-sweden-ever-extradite-assange-to-the-united-states/

That same rule kept a CIA defector to the Soviets from getting extradited from Sweden. The UK apparently has no similar deal.

 

[WelshBloke]

You're being pedantic.

I'm not being pedantic at all. You keep saying that the UK has no reason to hold him therefor we cant extradite him to the US. Thats not how it works.

 

[Blackjack200]

I'm not being pedantic at all. You keep saying that the UK has no reason to hold him therefor we cant extradite him to the US. Thats not how it works.

Okay, let's say that there's no reason for the UK to continue to spending millions of dollars on security for a guy that skipped a bail hearing.

 

[Blackjack200]

They questioned him at the embassy last fall.

Sorry, I missed that when it happened.

 

[WelshBloke]

Okay, let's say that there's no reason for the UK to continue to spending millions of dollars on security for a guy that skipped a bail hearing.

OK, lets say that. Now what?

 

[Blackjack200]

OK, lets say that. Now what?

It seems like you're saying that there was no reason for a politically motivated rape investigation because the U.K. could have extradited him at any time. Right?

edit: changed "charge" for "investigation"

 

[Jhhnn]

Bullshit. He offered to answer questions from inside the embassy and Sweden refused. Odd thing to do if you're investigating a crime. They wanted him in their custody so they could send him to the U.S.

Cops never do things that way. It's all pro forma, by the book, even for Assange. You may well be right that he'd be deported to the US to face charges but that's still true most places in the world. The Brits will likely do the same thing the moment he steps out of the Embassy. He's fukololo unless the US govt relents.