Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom News

Julian Assange Extradition To US Blocked by UK Judge (bbc.com) 156

Posted by msmash from the breaking-news dept.
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange cannot be extradited to the United States, a court in London has ruled. From a report: The judge blocked the request because of concerns over Mr Assange's mental health and risk of suicide in the US. The 49-year-old is wanted over the publication of thousands of classified documents in 2010 and 2011. The US claims the leaks broke the law and endangered lives. Mr Assange has fought the extradition and says the case is politically motivated. The US authorities have 14 days in which to lodge an appeal and are expected to do so. Mr Assange will now be taken back to Belmarsh Prison -- where he is being held -- and a full application for his bail will be made on Wednesday. His lawyer Ed Fitzgerald QC told the court there will be evidence to show Mr Assange will not abscond. District Judge Vanessa Baraitser ruled that while US prosecutors met the tests for Mr Assange to be extradited for trial, the US was incapable of preventing him from attempting to take his own life.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Julian Assange Extradition To US Blocked by UK Judge More

Julian Assange Extradition To US Blocked by UK Judge

Comments Filter:

  • Good (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @11:28AM (#60894618)

    The UK can hand over Assange when the US hands over this woman https://www.npr.org/2020/01/24... [npr.org]

    • That's a case of diplomatic immunity. Haven't you ever seen Lethal Weapon 2 [imdb.com]?

      • Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Viol8 ( 599362 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @11:57AM (#60894746) Homepage

        Diplomatic immunity retrospectively applied which is twisting the reasons for it to breaking point.

        • Diplomatic immunity is a status of the person, not an affirmative defense. You can't have diplomatic immunity regarding specific acts at specific points in time, you either have it here and now or you don't, and it doesn't exonerate you from any actual crimes.

      • Re:Good (Score:4, Informative)

        by JaredOfEuropa ( 526365 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @12:09PM (#60894818) Journal
        Nothing stops a country from extraditing a diplomat in cases like these. The US does have an extradition treaty with the UK.

        Also, she no longer has diplomatic immunity, and she's on an Interpol wanted list.

        • There is a case where a Georgian diplomat was extradited to the US for a murder he committed in the US. No country will ever do that again now the US has shown its double standards. Personally I would have made that very clear to the US ambassador in the UK. Had we not left the EU I would have also been drumming up support for the rest of the EU to make it very clear to the US that they will be following suit as well.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Shaitan ( 22585 )

      Is there some reason they would? She has immunity from prosecution under treaty so it is odd they are even asking.

      • Re:Good (Score:5, Informative)

        by Viol8 ( 599362 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @12:02PM (#60894776) Homepage

        They gave her immunity AFTER she commited the crime. Prior to that only her husband had it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jythie ( 914043 )
        Diplomatic Immunity does not give you blanket protection, it just ads more paperwork for the prosecutor. A country can not arrest and hold someone locally, so requesting extradition from the holder's country of origin is the appropriate next step.

    • What goes around comes around (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Viol8 ( 599362 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @12:00PM (#60894762) Homepage

      When the Trump administration retroactively gave Sacoolas diplomatic immunity going against all convention (but whats new, its Trump) I imagine the orange halfwit didn't see this coming. Reap what you sow pal. Its time the USA learnt that honouring international arrest warrants is a 2 way street - the system wasn't just set up for the US's excusive us.

      • Biden (Score:2)

        by JBMcB ( 73720 )

        So, I'm assuming Biden will rescind diplomatic immunity and turn her over? I'm waiting with baited breath.

      • What's even more insane is that she likely would have been charged with manslaughter but been given the lightest sentence possible (foreign driver on the wrong side of the road). It is likely she would have been handed a 2 year community order (serving your custody in the community).

    • Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tragedy ( 27079 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @12:16PM (#60894868)

      That case s just a travesty. That's not how diplomatic immunity is supposed to work It's supposed to protect diplomats from unjust arrest and prosecution by foreign countries. Diplomats are not supposed to be above the law, they are just supposed to be protected from official shenanigans. Diplomatic immunity is just supposed to mean that diplomats are under the jurisdiction of their home country rather than the jurisdiction of their home country. When there is evidence that a crime has been committed, the subject should either be extradited to face trial in the country the crime was committed or face trial for the crime in their own country. Basically, the moment that the US state department refused to hand over Sacoolas, the US Justice department should have stepped in and convened a grand jury to decide whether to prosecute her in the USA. She should only walk away free and clear if she actually faces the justice system either in the US or in the UK.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tragedy ( 27079 )

        Ugh. Just reread what I wrote: "Diplomatic immunity is just supposed to mean that diplomats are under the jurisdiction of their home country rather than the jurisdiction of their home country." Hopefully the error is obvious enough that everyone gets it, but the second "home country" is supposed to be "host country".

        • I suggest you look up the case of Giorgi Makharadz, to see the rank hypocrisy of the USA. They expect people with diplomatic immunity to be extradited to the US for prosecution, but apparently it does not work the other way around.

      • "he US Justice department should have stepped in and convened a grand jury to decide whether to prosecute her in the USA"

        That sounds reasonable, but what jurisdiction does the US Justice department have over someone who causes a traffic accident outside of the US? Are there US laws that cover US citizen's driving habits in other nations? Could a US citizen be charged in the US with a DUI while driving drunk in Cambodia? Or for running a red light in North Korea?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by tragedy ( 27079 )

          There are federal laws for manslaughter and vehicular. The laws are flexible enough to take all kinds of factors into consideration, that includes the local laws of various US jurisdictions and can certainly extend to the local laws of jurisdictions outside the US. The accused does not need to be tried under a foreign statute, it just has to be shown that they killed someone with their car, which is not being denied by anyone in this case that I'm aware of, and that it was done negligently.

          • So you believe that if a US citizen murders anyone anywhere, the US court system has jurisdiction? Or if a citizen violates ANY federal law anywhere, the Federal Court system can try them for that violation?

    • Two things about this:

      1. The woman has diplomatic immunity. Even if she was handed over, she cannot be tried. I think a settlement should suffice in the eyes of justice.
      2. I'm very sorry the young man was killed by her driving, I think it was simply an accident and that she had no intention of harming him. People in US and UK drive on opposite sides of the road and I think this was the mistake she made.

      • I suggest you look up the case of Giorgi Makharadz to understand why you view of diplomatic immunity is incorrect.

  • However, the U.S.A. is perfectly capable of preventing him from actually killing himself in prison. It merely lacks the will to do so.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Z80a ( 971949 )

      After the Epstein fiasco, not sure if we can trust em with that.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by shanen ( 462549 )

        You [JeffOwl] say "perfectly capable of preventing" suicide? Someone responds with Epstein...

        I should have predicted the conversation would go in this direction. Diplomatic wording of "fiasco", eh? Speculating on assisted suicide is the next step? Epstein's suicide was certainly extremely convenient for some folks. As would be Assange's.

        However I was actually wondering if it was going in a different direction... Should I?

        Okay, I'll confess. I thought the judge might cite the recent call to Georgia as eviden

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by ytene ( 4376651 )
          Much as I think it would be in the interest of justice to do so, I'm not sure that a pardon for Snowden is going to help resolve matters for him.

          for example, before writing this post I checked to see if I could find out whether or not he was filing his tax returns, which, as a US citizen, he is required to do by law. The closest I could get to an answer was here [forbes.com] but they don't make a claim either way.

          Snowden is far too smart to fall for the "trap", but I wouldn't put it past Trump to pardon him for *s

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by shanen ( 462549 )

            What makes you think that anything Trump does is about anyone else? Trump certainly won't think of helping Snowden as a consideration in granting a pardon.

            However a Snowden pardon most likely means that a puppeteer decided Snowden should be pardoned, and the strings the puppeteer will pull to make Trump sign the pardon will most likely be "Think of what a mess it will make for Biden" and "Think how pissed Obama will be."

            The situation around Assange is basically similar with similar strings waiting to be plu

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        Don't be silly. Epstein demonstrates that the US is a bit shit at faking suicides, not that they can't prevent them if they wish.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DrXym ( 126579 )
      In the appeal I think the US should commit to make every effort to prevent his suicide but if he succeeds then big deal. Just because someone has a sad about the shit they have coming to them should not mean they escape the consequences of their actions.

      But probably Assange will get a pardon. Because Trump knows full well he also acted as a conduit for stolen Dem emails and participated in other 2016 tricks e.g. Nigel Farage and Randy Credico (Roger Stone's proxy) were both exchanging messages with him. A

      • should not mean they escape the consequences of their actions.

        So where's Assange medal of honor? That'd be an adequate consequence of his actions: revealing a massive amount of wrongdoings.

        (Oh yeah, only US servicemen can receive that medal -- but it's not like the US cares about jurisdiction anymore.)

    • ... there's a nice bridge for sale just waiting for you to open your wallet.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      However, the U.S.A. is perfectly capable

      Wikileaks leaked Hillary's e-mail. I don't think there's anything the US can do to protect his life anymore. In fact, I doubt he's safe in the UK.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by cusco ( 717999 )

      Nominal "suicide" has a long and disgusting history in the US, especially among the politically connected and those willing to embarrass the ruling class. An Enron figure shot himself in the back of the head, twice, and then dropped the gun three meters away, for example.

  • Say whatever else you want about the guy, but I don't see how they can provide anything substantive to demonstrate that he won't flee the country if they let him out on bail, given that he just spent the better part of a decade hiding in another country's embassy to avoid being captured.

    • That's the judge's plan.
      Newsflash, almost the whole world sides against the NSA, and similar literal Gestapos.

      • Re: Evidence he won't abscond? (Score:4, Informative)

        by green1 ( 322787 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @12:14PM (#60894852)

        The whole civilian world you mean. Unfortunately the "similar literal gestapos" side with the NSA, and they exist in pretty much every country.

        Looking at the decision the judge made, it's for all the wrong reasons. It's not because exposing government corruption is wrong, in fact the judge specifically stated that he thinks that part should be prosecuted. His reasoning is that if someone has committed a crime, we should worry more about their feelings than about justice.

        Basically the entire decision is completely backwards and shows what's wrong with the judiciary in so many places. Right outcome in this case, but all the wrong reasons for it.

    • Say whatever else you want about the guy, but I don't see how they can provide anything substantive to demonstrate that he won't flee the country if they let him out on bail, given that he just spent the better part of a decade hiding in another country's embassy to avoid being captured.

      He actually skipped bail in the UK. He was on bail to appear in court when he fled to the Ecuadorian Embassy and everyone who put money towards his bail lost it. He's facing a prison sentence for breaking bail when it finally goes to court.

      • This seems like a regurgitated post from what.. almost two years ago... coincidental or incompetent copy/pasting?

        He's already served the prison sentence - 52 weeks. that ended early 2020.

        I wouldn't think twice about skipping bail on an illegally issued European Arrest Warrant (that the UK will now NEVER accept again after this came to light) just before being extradited to a country with a known history of Extraditing innocent people to the US where they were tortured. He'd be an idiot not to seek political

  • Or at least they wish.

    Because that time is over, dear TLAs. Snowden kicked it in the back of the knee, and while it tried to hit back the Air next to Assange, Trump broke its neck. ;)

  • ... did the Judge impose to prevent him from committing suicide in the UK?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by LostOne ( 51301 )

      Presumably the theory is that if he isn't extradited, he's less likely to commit suicide.

      • And our prisons, while often horrific, arenâ(TM)t as bad as the ones in the US usually are.

        • I get the impression that prison in the US is expected to be inhumane. It's what the public want, and they would be upset if they thought that prison was not properly dehumanising and featured at least the threat of some rape, maiming and eyes gouged from sockets. There is a sense that justice has not been done until the 'bad people' have felt a bit of torture;

      • That assumes that the threats of suicide are genuine.

        I know people who are emotionally unstable and threaten to kill themselves whenever some obstacle they cannot deal with presents itself. Whether the obstacle is removed or remains, they do not do anything to endanger their lives, let alone terminate them.

        There are others that commit suicide with little or no warning.

        In this case, assuming the threats were real, the willingness to kill himself still exists, and should be taken into account, regardless of e

  • If a case if overly political then extradition isn't supposed to happen AFAIK, IANAL etc. So IDK why they don't let him go since the case is obviously very political.

    • If a case if overly political then extradition isn't supposed to happen AFAIK, IANAL etc. So IDK why they don't let him go since the case is obviously very political.

      It doesn't matter (under US law) that the investigation and prosecution are politically motivated; Assange broke the law and should be appropriately punished.A trial is needed to see if his actions are protected by whistleblower laws, and if not what is an appropriate consequence.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by MrL0G1C ( 867445 )

        It matters to the UK side with regards to extradition, if the case is too politically motivated then extradition is not supposed to happen because Assange will not get a fair trail. IMO the UK judge saying that Assange is a suicide risk in the US is a polite way of saying the US prison system is too harsh which is another reason not to extradite.

  • Justice or revenge? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Aethedor ( 973725 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @12:21PM (#60894892)
    Of course he should not be extradited to the US. The US government isn't looking for justice. It's simply looking for revenge and to warn those who are about to leak information about crimes and law breaking done by the US government in the future. A government that has broken so many laws in such a vast way has no right to judge the common man about breaking the law to expose the crimes done by that government. That's abuse of power.

  • Surely there has to be some aspect of this story that is worth a laugh. Isn't Assange an albino? Maybe it's illegal to laugh at albinos?

  • But your Honor, I might try to kill myself, and they can't stop me.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by cusco ( 717999 )

      I think the "suicide" the judge is referring to isn't something that he would carry out himself. The US has a long history of "suiciding" people who are inconvenient.

  • We should be worried we have a third world teapot moron pretending to be our president asking an elected official to change the number of votes. 18 times the con artist called Georgia to have the votes changed, something which is a criminal offense [tumblr.com]. The elections board in Georgia is even being asked to consider an investigation [lawandcrime.com] of this criminal activity [justia.com].

    What happened to all the help Assange gave to the con artist in 2016? Shouldn't the con artist be considering giving the guy a full pardon because he's

  • good decision (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @01:06PM (#60895136)
    I am no fan of Assange. He's a tool of the Russians, he carefully timed the release of Russian information in a way that was deliberately designed to meddle in our elections, and he's pretty much declared himself an enemy of the state. In essence, he decided to get into the espionage business and sided against the US. Fine, but that's like stepping into the ring with Mike Tyson. You do that, you're gonna take a pounding.

    However, the UK is right to prevent his extradition. Law enforcement in the US is the executive branch, and our executive branch is in an absolute shambles. There is ABSOLUTELY NO way of telling what sort of treatment Assange would get in the US right now. Disappearing into a black site? Torture? "mysterious death" in a jail cell? Neglect in a jail cell leading to suicide? With the leadership we currently have, all bets are off.

    I personally believe that Assange should face the music in the US, and he probably deserves a long prison sentence for his espionage activities, but it needs to be done correctly. He deserves due process, and the current US administration doesn't give a rats ass about much of anything.

    Maybe in 2022.

    Down-mod in 3...2..1

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dasunt ( 249686 )

      I am also not a fan of Assange, but I'm not seeing how anyone, who is not in a specific country and not a citizen of that country, can be charged with violating a law of that country.

      It seems like a really bad idea to let any country to decide that a certain act is illegal regardless of your citizenship and your location, and be able to extradite people.

    • I still can't decide if it's a case of useful idiots, or national security employees, that keep repeating this sort of nonsense.

      On one hand you have the people who have swallowed the smears and lies, on the other those perpetuating the smears and lies.

      Thankfully, even here on slashdot where there certainly seems to be a 'national security employee' presence, the real people outweigh the idiots and sock puppets with their ideas and arguments so departed from reality that there is no actual approachable argum

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by cusco ( 717999 )

      sided against the US.

      He's "sided" against pretty much every government that exploits secrecy to carry out illegal actions, which is all of the major ones at this point. He published documents embarrassing the Russians, French, and a number of other countries as well. Of course in some small minds the US is the **only** country worth considering, so I don't expect a change in your opinion.

  • I have a couple of questions for our British Colleagues:

    Can Assange be required to get care for his mental health issues in England?

    If he does, and is judged to no longer be in danger, can then be extradited to the US?

    I'll also point out that the judgement against extradition does not apply to other countries. All he needs to do is take a short trip to the EU or anywhere else and the extradition process can start all over again.

    We should be happy we are not in his shoes. He has come to the attention of po

  • Late, but here's a link to the judgment (Score:5, Informative)

    by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite ( 721679 ) on Monday January 04, 2021 @02:13PM (#60895480)

    I'd really like if stories concerning court cases had a link to the court documents... Well here they are: https://www.judiciary.uk/judgm... [judiciary.uk]

  • I'm no law enforcement and I have no idea how to handle a suspect with suicidal tendency, but actual law enforcement agencies must have dealt with this all the times and have ways to prevent a suspect from killing himself right? And so if that was the case, the judge's decision is quite baseless. But again, I have absolutely no knowledge so I'm just speculating.

  • Julian's Spanish has been coming along swimmingly while in little Ecuador.

    Mexico have offered Assange political asylum.

Slashdot Top Deals

1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.

Close