Comments on: WikiLeaks’ Assange Flees to Ecuadorian Embassy Privacy, Crime and Security Online Sat, 09 Feb 2013 12:45:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Omniogignes Sun, 01 Jul 2012 08:36:00 +0000 Dylan, Sweden could charge Assange in absentia but that would be consider a
violation of his rights. There are exceptions but the accusations have
to more grievous.

There is a misunderstanding of the term “wanted for questioning.”

It is correct that it is possible to question a suspect in the jurisdiction that they are in, before transferring them to the jurisdiction where the criminal investigation is occurring. That would to be correctly identifying that the individual sought and to verify that they understand the reasons. This has already occurred for Assange.

For the criminal investigations to be completed the arrested suspect needs to be in the jurisdiction the the alleged crimes were committed.

Your question isn’t about how the Dow Jones is going to do next week, but how did it do yesterday.

By: Charles Edward Frith Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:17:00 +0000 Bravo Ecuador and President Correia for shaming our spineless European leaders and revealing them as US client states.

By: FelixKrull Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:40:00 +0000 Okay, ‘accused’ was not the right word. He’s not been charged and he’s not accused of rape but of sexual harrasment, which in Sweden is a pretty broad category.

By: Dylan Lindgren Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:27:00 +0000 There you go, now you’re speaking the truth rather than making “honest mistakes” that give your argument the credibility it lacks without them.

My point is, if it’s only “questions” that he is wanted for, then why do they need him in Sweden? It can’t be just for “questioning” as (apparently) they have accepted the questioning be done in the UK in many prior cases. Why do they want Assange in Sweden so bad if he hasn’t yet been charged with committing a crime? And if you can answer that, please tell me what the Dow Jones is going to do next week so I can get rich, as you must obviously be prophetic.

By: StipMan Thu, 21 Jun 2012 03:32:00 +0000 I know the difference between accusation and criminal charges.Dont patronize me. It was my bad for saying criminal charges in previos post. The fact of the mater is he is seeking POLITICAL asylum because he does not want to answer questions. He has been spending tons of time, money, and resources not to answer questions. Now he seeks POLITICAL asylum. That, in my opionion, is a complete perversion of what POLITICAL asylum is all about. And if Australia wants to extridite me plaease begin the process! (my wife will thank you for doing it!!!!)

By: Dylan Lindgren Thu, 21 Jun 2012 02:07:00 +0000 Mate, you’re not doing yourself any favours. Every post you make is reducing the possibility that your previous posts were made by someone with any logical reasoning. How does it make it “even worse” if he hasn’t been charged, only accused? It makes it better!!

Just to further your knowledge about what an “accusation” is, as you obviously don’t understand, I will say this…

StipMan raped me!

There you go, now you’re in the exact same situation as Julian Assange. I think you better come to Australia for some “questioning”.

By: StipMan Thu, 21 Jun 2012 00:19:00 +0000 True… and that makes it even worse.

By: cbatty Wed, 20 Jun 2012 22:08:00 +0000 there are no charges Stip… only questions.

By: cbatty Wed, 20 Jun 2012 22:02:00 +0000 Thanks Dylan for your post.

@MrSkippy, I agree with you that Assange needs to answer any charges brought against him. If he has broken the law, he needs to be held accountable. Sexual assault is extremely serious and is not something to be taken lightly. So if Assange has broken the law, of if there is suspicion that he has broken the law, he needs to be charged so that he can face the charges in court.

As I said in a previous post, Assange is only wanted for questioning, something that Assange has agreed to do at the Swedish embassy in the UK. There are no charges. I find it suspicious that Sweden is extraditing Assange for questioning only. I think if there was enough evidence that Assange committed sexual assault then he would have been charged already. He doesn’t need to be physically present for those charges to be laid does he? Remember also, Assange was allowed to leave Sweden to go to the UK after the initial complaints of sexual assault were made. It was only after the release of the cables that Sweden wanted him back. The timing is a wee bit suspicious.

As an Australian citizen, Assange’s circumstances have been the topic of great debate here. The Prime Minister and other government ministers have been directly asked about whether they have asked the US if there is a move by them to extradite Assange there, Yet they have refused to answer, dodging the question beautifully. The evidence for a conspiracy is circumstantial. However I believe that there is enough of it to suggest that a conspiracy is likely.

If Assange has committed a crime then he should be charged with that crime and he should then have to answer that crime. Until he is charged, Assange should be allowed to stay in the UK.

By: Roger Wed, 20 Jun 2012 15:52:00 +0000 Exactly what crime? I assume your speaking of the one’s constructed around his events? Hmm, Your not the sharpest tool in the shed are ya?