Assange is a "straightforward" criminal

[patman post]

I do understand, and you give exactly the reasons as to why I put more weight on the decision of a judge or magistrate presiding over a hearing than a collection of tweets — and their decisions can be challenged.



As to an  earlier question on why Assange is always accompanied — he has been held in Belmarsh prison since last September after a judge said there were "substantial grounds" for believing he would abscond ahead of the hearing.



I've been following journalists' own takes on the case. Many support your views, so you may find their observations interesting...

https://www.nuj.org.uk/tags/wikileaks/">https://www.nuj.org.uk/tags/wikileaks/

[Nalaar]

My personal experience is one term of jury duty for two  Crown Court cases, both involving foreign nationals, and attendance at Magistrates' Court as a witness.

I suggest one person giving an opinion on the basis of quoted tweets is unlikely to invalidate a magistrate's or judge's decisions...

The tweets are a matter of verifiable record of the actions, and statements made in Court, including verbatim quotations of both the Magistrate and prosecutor.



Expecting that these tweets are an accurate record of the events, I would put more weight in the opinion of legal professionals, with current and direct expertise of extradition proceedings, over someone who once had a term of Jury duty, I'm sure you understand why.

[patman post]

I was at a Law Society event the day that this was happening - one person I described it to (who does a lot of work in European Extradition) didn't believe what I was describing (thinking I had misunderstood) until I showed them them the actual Tweets, they described the situation as outrageous.



I don't know what your background or basis for knowledge on matters like this is, but the very clear message from people that I know are educated in the matter is that this is not ordinary.

My personal experience is one term of jury duty for two  Crown Court cases, both involving foreign nationals, and attendance at Magistrates' Court as a witness.

I suggest one person giving an opinion on the basis of quoted tweets is unlikely to invalidate a magistrate's or judge's decisions...

[Nalaar]

I'm not convinced Assange is being treated differently from any other bail absconder — either in the dock or where his legal advisors are situated in the courtroom...

I was at a Law Society event the day that this was happening - one person I described it to (who does a lot of work in European Extradition) didn't believe what I was describing (thinking I had misunderstood) until I showed them them the actual Tweets, they described the situation as outrageous.



I don't know what your background or basis for knowledge on matters like this is, but the very clear message from people that I know are educated in the matter is that this is not ordinary.

[patman post]

You think they are concerned that he and his legal council are going to run out of Westminster Magistrates Crown Court and so are denying him privacy with his legal council?

I'm not convinced Assange is being treated differently from any other bail absconder — either in the dock or where his legal advisors are situated in the courtroom...

[Nalaar]

Perhaps if Assange had not absconded from bail he might be regarded as more trustworthy and not need guards beside him during hearings...

You think they are concerned that he and his legal council are going to run out of Westminster Magistrates Crown Court and so are denying him privacy with his legal council?

[patman post]

Perhaps if Assange had not absconded from bail he might be regarded as more trustworthy and not need guards beside him during hearings...

[Barry]

^^ That's quite insightful, Nalaar, and shows he is being treated prejudicially. Obviously the State do not trust him or his lawyers. No doubt the Yanks are in court, too. Thanks for finding that.   :hattip

[Nalaar]

A remarkable scene during his trail yesterday -

Assange is asked is he is ok to continue, he says he cannot speak to his legal team confidentially as he is flanked by guards, "I have very little contact with my lawyers."



For several months, the press has heard complaints from Assange and his legal team that he has very, very limited time to consult with and speak to his attorneys. And when he does, he has no privacy for privileged communications.



Defense says it will make application for bail so Julian Assange can sit with defense attorneys.



Prosecutor James Lewis is being more sensible than the judge. He says a security guard could still be on either side of Assange. Judge seems to believe he would no longer be in custody if no longer in dock so dismissive of request.



Prosecutor James Lewis: From prosecution's point of view we take a neutral stance. We're not sure a bail application would be most appropriate



Judge says defendant surrenders to the dock of court and "release from the dock requires an application of bail."



But incredibly, the prosecution disagrees! They're okay with figuring out how it would be permissible for Assange to sit in well of court with attorneys



So we're all supposed to proceed like this is normal and totally reasonable when it is completely preposterous

Information from tweets by Kevin Gosztola @kgosztola

[papasmurf]

But did he?

Precisely.

[Scott777]

The proper charge is that as a hostile alien, he entered into.an act of espionage

But did he?

[johnofgwent]

Another of wild excursion into the world of hyperbole. His co-conspirator (who was actually serving in the military at the time he/she stole the data, got a prison sentence) and the UK does not extradite people who face the death penalty — even under the Conservatives...

I confess I was thinking more of the argentinian bum chum of the (telegraph ??) reporter who used his gay lover of Argentinian citizenship to mule edward Snowden's data out of a London airport and was detained under counter terrorism legislation against which the journalist was apparently allowed to claim press freedom and the right to publish override the law



I have said ever since I heard of the asinine stupidity of the use of that law as the charge that the proper charge was espionage by a hostilexalien, and that this should have been used.



The facts are stark



He was an argentinian



The argentinian president was, even as he did this, still mouthing off about their right to the malvinas, which they took by force in an act of war. That makes him a citizen of a hostile power.



And he was caught red handed ( or red arsed I think, given where he hid it) with classified military information contrary to our own OSA. Information he was planning to take out of the country. A clear act of espionage.

[papasmurf]

This is of course correct.



The proper charge is that as a hostile alien, he entered into.an act of espionage contrary to the best interests of the NATO alliance. And those who furnished him with that data should be charged with breaches of to whatever security legislation we can stick on them.



And then shot.

Sorry John but you appear to have swallowed the American propaganda, hook, line and sinker.

Has anyone seen any evidence to back up the American statements.

[johnofgwent]

The issue I really see here, is that of the yanks trying to make everybody, everywhere, subject to US Domestic Law.



The fact is that Assange is an Australian Citizen, exposing the blatant hypocrisy of the US establishment. He has no loyalty to the US and is therefore not guilty of any form of treason.



He exposed the nefarious actions of a rival/enemy state and many would say that was his patriotic duty.

If Tommy Tugitoff or the Belling Cat outfit did something similar to the Intelligence Services of Russia or China, there would be medals handed out not arrest warrants and extraditions etc.

This is of course correct.



The proper charge is that as a hostile alien, he entered into.an act of espionage contrary to the best interests of the NATO alliance. And those who furnished him with that data should be charged with breaches of to whatever security legislation we can stick on them.



And then shot.

[patman post]

I like the way you say 'can be'.  You're right, of course.  It is if the establishment decide it is, but not if it's not.

The Stock Exchange and SFO can be very firm over stealing sensitive information, using private information for gain, or releasing information too selectively...