Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority requested for prosecution or interrogation, the alleged crimes qualified as extradition crimes, there was an abuse of process, his human rights would be respected, and he would receive a fair trial if extradited to Sweden. The outcome of the hearing was announced on 24 February 2011, when the extradition warrant was upheld. Senior District Judge Howard Riddle found against Assange on each of the main arguments against his extradition. The judge said "as a matter of fact, and looking at all the circumstances in the round, this person (Mr Assange) passes the threshold of being an accused person and is
Julian Assange according to multiple reporting outlets, in respect to Assange's status, outlines the necessity for "third countries" to allow for "safe passage" out of an embassy. Commentators have noted the near absence of this ruling from the American media. There have been inaccurate reports claiming the opinion does not mention Assange specifically, however there have also been accurate reports that recognise Assange's case is in fact mentioned by name. Among these is an article published by the VIPS Steering Group which concludes "It is imperative[...] that Assange is allowed to make the safe passage to Ecuador demanded by the Court". Jennifer