Julian Assange has been released from a British prison and is expected to plead guilty to violating US espionage law, in a deal that would allow him to return home to his native Australia.
Assange, 52, agreed to plead guilty to a single criminal count of conspiring to obtain and disclose classified US national defence documents, according to filings in the US district court for the Northern Mariana Islands.
Wikileaks posted on social media a video of its founder boarding a flight at London's Stansted airport on Monday evening and Australian prime minister Anthony Albanese confirmed he had left the UK.
The release from a UK prison of Julian Assange is a victory for him and his many supporters around the world, but not necessarily a clear win for the principle underlying his defence, the freedom of the press.
The charges Assange is anticipated to plead guilty to as part of a US deal, and for which he will be sentenced to time served, are drawn from the 1917 Espionage Act, for "conspiring to unlawfully obtain and disseminate classified information related to the national defense of the United States".
So although the WikiLeaks founder is expected to walk free from the US district court in Saipan after Wednesday's hearing, the Espionage Act will still hang over the heads of journalists reporting on national security issues, not just in the US. Assange himself is an Australian, not a US citizen.
Live: Father of Julian Assange hints at son's return to Australia after prison release - ABC News:
Nothing is certain until it happens and there's a lot we still don't know about how Julian Assange's case will proceed.
A lot of our understanding at this stage is coming from the court documents, which state that he'll appear before a judge in Saipan at 9am local time tomorrow.
An email from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to the judge in the Northern Mariana Islands states that Assange is expected to plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information, and that he'll be sentenced for that offence.
American media outlets are reporting that the plea deal would need to be approved by the judge, and WikiLeaks has described the agreement as having "not yet been formally finalised."
But Assange's departure from the UK is a massive development in the case, and the court document says the DOJ expects he'll return to Australia "at the conclusion of the proceedings".
(Score: 5, Insightful) by canopic jug on Tuesday June 25 2024, @06:53AM (1 child)
It's understandable. They did put in a lot of effort to break him and it took much longer to break him than it did Reality Winner, the only person to have gone to jail over Russian interference in US elections. Now that Julian has a family he has different priorities and can be more easily cornered, which is what seems to have happened. However, this case is full of distractions, some even stemming from outright lies. But regardless of the distractions, simply put this case is not about Julian. At the end of the day the US was able to charge a foreigner with the (antiquated) Espionage Act, thus undermining the future of journalism everywhere.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @06:01PM
US leaders such as Tricky Dick have a long history of not living up to American ideals. They represent but don't really believe in liberty and freedom for all. For instance, the whole idea of "realpolitik" and "The End Justifies The Means" thinking that it's possible to make very undemocratic and unjust moves that somehow end up supporting justice and democracy. The idea that trust is a commodity that should be spent to achieve some short term goal, such as removing the leader of Iraq from power, and the long term consequences of no one ever trusting America again not even mentioned. Those who did these things ended up demonstrating some very different things than they intended. Like that engaging in real conspiracies is crack cocaine for conspiracy theorists. And that Iraq did not turn out the way post WWII Japan and Germany did, turning into stable, powerful, and friendly democracies. An even worse debacle is Afghanistan. Look at how treacherous dealing worked out for the Byzantine Empire. The conservatives have been by far the worst at pulling these kinds of stunts. They love the taste and feel of authoritarianism far too much, refuse to heed that lesson of WWII.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pTamok on Tuesday June 25 2024, @08:27AM (26 children)
Why did the USA agree to a plea deal?
Why now?
Agreeing to a sentence of 'time served' means that the prosecutors were not confident of winning the case, and instead wanted to set a precedent. It means Assange has agreed to be a convicted criminal, which seems to be the important thing for the prosecutors.
Given that a lot of the relevant records are electronic, I'll guess that the actual history and facts of the case will be lost by the time records are made public some time in the future. Whatever is being served up for public consumption now, by either side, will not be the full story.
Coming from the East side of the Atlantic, I regard plea deals as unreasonable - but then again, I'm just an idealistic socialist.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by janrinok on Tuesday June 25 2024, @09:00AM (17 children)
I agree.
I don't think that the US expected the UK to stick to the rule of law so pedantically - although I am very pleased that the UK did so.
The Australian government could also see that this was an issue that was seen increasingly around the world as being unjust. Assange is not an American, he has not visited America, and US law has absolutely no jurisdiction elsewhere in the world. None whatsoever. The US refuse to participate with any international courts.
Does anyone really think that Assange hasn't been coerced into agreeing to 'admit' to a single charge in order that he can get his life back?
All the US could now hope to achieve is exactly what you have said. It has set a precedent - which will still have no bearing on the rest of the world. But they can boast that 'they brought him to justice'. No, no they didn't. It isn't justice, it is shameful.
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by looorg on Tuesday June 25 2024, @10:16AM (8 children)
I'm not certain they would really need much coercion for him to take the deal. Taking it wouldn't change much, except he would be "free" and could go home again. It was probably the best possible outcome for him, also the best one for the prosecution as they were clearly not going to get more done or had any hopes of getting more to stick. In some regard I would say that Assange have over the years drifted more and more into obscurity.
That said being a convicted criminal probably is going to do wonders for him either, that said I doubt it will change anything much. Except he won't be able to get a visa to the US anymore, or perhaps be able to leave Australia at all, once deported there from the Northern Mariana Islands. Not sure it will matter all that much to him tho, he is finally going to go home for the first time in about a decade or more. Don't think he would want to visit the US even if they invited him.
It will be somewhat interesting to see what he'll do once he is dropped in Australia. I assume there will be a interview or so within a few days of landing. Possibly a very limited one if the deal includes some kind of gag. He'll either fade into obscurity, he'll be like some kind of Snowden that pops up every now and then but amounts to nothing or he'll be back to doing what he did before but now knowing better then last time. It will be interesting to see.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @11:32AM (7 children)
It may be so, but I wouldn't bet on it. See the case of David Hicks, especially the repatriation, release and charges declared invalid [wikipedia.org].
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by looorg on Tuesday June 25 2024, @11:39AM (6 children)
Sounds like what I would imagine is going to or could happen to him. But if I was them I would probably try and keep this as lowprofile as they can. They don't want him to get a lot of news coverage again. It would be something he has not really enjoyed in years. He has in some regard faded into oblivion for the masses. No need to bring him out into the spotlight and give him a platform. Better to just send him home and hope that he just fades away. Not sure he is going to go along with that tho but I doubt he is going to be big ever again either.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @12:41PM (5 children)
Unless he himself wants back in the spotlight, he at least had pangs of vane (even borderline narcissistic) behaviour.
One can expect at least a volume mémoire book, the guy has some kids (with various mothers) and I don't think someone will employ him - so book-writing and/or going into politics shall be.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday June 25 2024, @12:45PM (1 child)
I suspect that the Australian government has agreed to ride herd over Assange. The US government has probably demanded guarantees from the AU government that Assange will not be permitted to do certain things. Politics may be out entirely. Book writing? Maybe. We know that there were a lot of vengeful American politicians involved in all of this. Just what did Australia, the UK, and Assange have to promise? I don't guess we'll know for awhile, if ever.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @01:08PM
I wouldn't bet on it, occasionally Aussies may grow some balls [australiainstitute.org.au] - likely caused by localized latrodectism [wikipedia.org].
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by looorg on Tuesday June 25 2024, @12:54PM (1 child)
I suspect there will be a few interviews, with friendly sources. Something posted on Wikileaks etc to drum up new donations and such. There will probably be some kind of a book or memoire. But beyond that I'm not really quite sure what he will do, or can do cause there will probably be restrictions in the deal as in regard to what he can talk about. Not sure if people are that interested in how it's in British prisons or how it was to live in the Ecuadorian embassy for all those years.
How will his interaction be with Manning? (S)he can't have been to pleased with how their last interaction ended.
The only thing that could change now is that if and when he gets into court on the island for what I assume would be a fairly brief hearing is that he changes his mind and rejects the deal. Otherwise I would say this is probably set in motion and done.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @01:22PM
If you think the political class downunder would risk pressing for whatever conditions to be respected (would Assange decide to eff those conditions), you aren't paying attention to the politics in Australia lately (a thing that I will not blame you for). And, since Assange did break no Australian laws, for anything to bear consequences while Assange is in Australia, the politicians will need to get involved.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @02:05PM
s/vane/vain/g
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Freeman on Tuesday June 25 2024, @02:46PM (7 children)
Which is what extradition treaties are for, essentially.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 25 2024, @03:29PM (6 children)
I thought that usually extradition required the person being extradited to have committed something the extraditing nation considers a crime, though? Does the UK consider "treason against the US" a crime?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Informative) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 25 2024, @03:35PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_criminality [wikipedia.org]
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by canopic jug on Tuesday June 25 2024, @03:39PM (4 children)
I thought that usually extradition required the person being extradited to have committed something the extraditing nation considers a crime, though? Does the UK consider "treason against the US" a crime?
Nice strawman [logicallyfallacious.com]. Assange is neither in the US nor a US citizen so "treason" does not apply. Also, note that neither crimes nor evidence of crimes are eligible for classification. So by law, the videos and other documentation of crimes provided him are not classified material. Basically the "news" has stopped covering that aspect of the trial and waste our time with parroting statements rather than looking at what is going on.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 25 2024, @04:27PM (2 children)
I hate it when people automatically assume I'm arguing "in bad faith" just because they disagree with what they said. Also when people love to whip out logical fallacies at the drop of a hat.
Yeah, well I don't get why they're charging him with anything as, as you pointed out, he's not a US citizen nor been to the US, yet apparently they did.
Okay, although I'm not sure what this has to do with my comment.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Touché) by canopic jug on Tuesday June 25 2024, @05:57PM (1 child)
Okay, although I'm not sure what this has to do with my comment.
The whole case hinges on the assertion that he published classified materials, something he could not have done since the materials were evidence of not just crimes but of actual war crimes.
Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
(Score: 1) by pTamok on Wednesday June 26 2024, @07:10PM
I don't believe it does.
The case, as I understand it, hinged on Assange actively helping/participating in obtaining the information. Something he denies/denied.
As a journalist, you are not responsible for what people put in your 'dead drop'.
However, as a journalist, you are not allowed to break in to (supposedly) secure systems and extract information for subsequent publication/dissemination. That is one step too far. Sometimes, it can be justified by 'public interest', or exposing more serious crimes - but actual unauthorised access to computer systems is illegal. Assange was accused of having provided advice and help to Chelsea Manning.
USA DOJ (Thursday, April 11, 2019)Office of Public Affairs WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy [justice.gov]
A lot of smoke and disinformation has swirled around the case, but as I understand it, Assange was accused of using illegal journalistic methods.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Wednesday June 26 2024, @12:01AM
Indeed, it does not.
This is why the charge [justice.gov] (to which Assange pleaded guilty) is espionage.
And this is the very problem, because the way searching and obtaining classified information by a spy it is similar to how an investigative journalist would act under the same circumstances.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by quietus on Tuesday June 25 2024, @10:46AM (6 children)
Because it has become a vote winner [abc.net.au]? American members of this forum might have insight into whether the Libertarian Party [voter turnout, or not] could be crucial in specific swing states.
As to why with a plea deal, and not a Presidential Pardon? Because members of the military, let alone the security services, wouldn't agree with just letting someone who leaked critical info go free, without any punishment -- if only symbolic -- at all.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday June 25 2024, @12:37PM (1 child)
I don't think you've got the military's view pegged correctly. Remember, the military works for the civilian government. The US military is accustomed to following orders, and to being banned from taking political positions. What's more, most of the military highly values their liberties and freedoms. As a veteran, I can see journalistic freedom being trampled on by the US government. I'm sure that a lot of my younger brothers and sisters still on active duty can see the same thing happening.
Now, if you're speaking of senior officers who are part of the military industrial complex - it could be that you are right.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @12:58PM
Yeah, naaah, you're right, that's a certain Secretary of State that initiated the... ummm... which's hunt for Assange's head.
The weird thing is that the hunt continued even when the witch wasn't an issue any more.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aafcac on Tuesday June 25 2024, @02:08PM (3 children)
They had their opportunity to redact what they wanted to redact. IIRC, they just didn't want anything released. Of course the brass wouldn't be OK with a pardon, he caused the public to find out about crimes against humanity being committed by US forces.
(Score: 2) by quietus on Wednesday June 26 2024, @02:38PM (2 children)
Please explain -- I was under the impression that the problem was him throwing it all out on the Internet, without even checking whether the published documents contained information that could cause risks to operatives: not even other WikiLeaks members had the opportunity to redact.
That, at least, was one of the major points in The Fifth Estate movie. If memory serves me well, the movie indicated that people were effectively executed over that info.
(Score: 2) by aafcac on Wednesday June 26 2024, @03:43PM (1 child)
It was redacted for anything that could be identified as being useful for identifying people. He didn't just toss all of it on the internet and let people at it.
https://www.9news.com.au/world/julian-assange-court-case-london/072d51bb-ebae-4082-9b61-d8c211405d46 [9news.com.au]
So, some knucklehead leaked the password to the original materials, and that may have resulted in sources disappearing.
(Score: 2) by quietus on Thursday June 27 2024, @07:24AM
Thanks for that info. Do you perhaps have some info about how the unredacted but encrypted source materials came to be online?
(Score: 2) by deimios on Wednesday June 26 2024, @03:42AM
Why now?
US Elections. PR move.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 25 2024, @08:45AM
get-out-of-jail-turn-in-your-journalist-card department
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Lester on Tuesday June 25 2024, @10:54AM (10 children)
Are you sure that agreement is not a con?
once you'd be in USA'S soil, they may acuse you of other charges that haven't been mentioned yet.
(Score: 2, Informative) by pTamok on Tuesday June 25 2024, @11:18AM (1 child)
You are right to point this out.
I sincerely hope that it doesn't turn out like that.
If it did, it pretty much stops anyone agreeing to continue with extraditions to the USA, as it would demonstrate 'lack of good faith'. Much as many people would like it to happen, politically/diplomatically, it would not be a good idea.
The USA did not help its image in the UK with the way in which the death of Harry Dunn [wikipedia.org] was handled, and how "[Anne] Sacoolas fled the UK soon after the incident and claimed diplomatic immunity with US support".
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 25 2024, @03:29PM
From the link [wikipedia.org] *you* posted:
It doesn't seem like Ms. Sacoolas got off without punishment. In fact, that seems in line with what *you* would face in a similar situation. So...Your point in bringing this up?
(Score: 2) by looorg on Tuesday June 25 2024, @11:34AM
I would be very surprised if the US tried to do some kind of switcharoo or changing the deal. They could if they didn't care about the rest of the world or their allies and partners. But doing it now would be like shooting themselves in the foot with 12 gauge shotgun. Not good. Not pretty. Fatal in almost every sense. Nobody would ever extradite anyone to the US ever again, nor would they get any help what so ever in any legal matters abroad.
I'm fairly sure he is going to the Island. The hearing will be fairly short. Then back to the airport and a one way trip to Australia for Assange.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday June 25 2024, @11:39AM
That would make the USA look very petty in the eyes of the world. There is an agreement. It has been negotiated between the USA, Australia and the UK. Reneging on that agreement would not be viewed positively by anyone outside the USA.
Could he be charged with some new crimes? Certainly. Would anyone ever agree to extradite someone to the USA again? No. Would anyone ever trust an agreement with the USA in the future? No.
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.
(Score: 4, Touché) by OrugTor on Tuesday June 25 2024, @01:08PM (4 children)
A plea deal in the US system is an agreement between the prosecutor and the defendant. The judge is not a party to it. While judges tend to give sentences less or equal to those requested by the prosecution it's not a given. Let's hope the Marianas judge has not been tampered with by the DOJ.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 25 2024, @04:06PM (2 children)
What, *specifically* do you mean by "tampered with"?
I assume (perhaps incorrectly) that you know Federal judges are not subject to the whims of the DOJ and, at least in the case of the specific judge in question [wikipedia.org], she has another six years left on her term.
Please do be specific about what the DOJ (and who within it) might do to "tamper with" Judge Manglona [wikipedia.org]. Go on. I'll wait.
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Tuesday June 25 2024, @10:41PM (1 child)
To that point, there is every chance that Manglona will reject the deal. Imagine the complexities that would create. From that perspective, let's hope that the Judge is listening to the DoJ.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 25 2024, @11:03PM
Reading the prosecutors' and defenses' briefs, as well as the plea agreement approved by both sides are things that any judge does (or should do) while reviewing such a plea agreement.
That's not "tampering," that's a judge doing their job. GP claimed that the DOJ might "tamper with" the judge.
I asked what, *specifically* the DOJ *could* do to "tamper with" the judge.
Your response is orthogonal to that question. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, even if they are irrelevant to GP's (and my) post.
(Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Wednesday June 26 2024, @11:41AM
the judge is not party to the negotiations, but they certainly review and approve or reject the deal. They are limited in what grounds they can reject the deal on- but they do have a say. Epstein's original plea should have been rejected as clearly corrupt prosecution. he got censured for approving that.
(Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Wednesday June 26 2024, @11:39AM
Any even half-decent lawyer will broker a deal that gives immunity to ALL related or resultant past charges.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday June 25 2024, @12:32PM (11 children)
When Assange actually walks onto Australian soil, then it's all over.
Alright, I'm optimistic enough that I might actually hold my breath. But, I've always been a pessimistic optimist. The US may have some trick up their sleeve here. An "accident", maybe? Maybe a snake in a motel room along the way? When Assange exits the airport in Sydney or Melbourne, THEN it's all over.
Unfortunately, no matter what happens, the US will use this as precedent to squash journalists in the future. I hate the entire business, from start to finish. It's just too bad that Assange wasn't as savvy as Edward Snowden. He could have taken flight to Russia, instead of asking an embassy to harbor him. Sorry, that was just sily.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 25 2024, @02:03PM
Well said: https://www.youtube.com/post/Ugkxl044_Ajn-d9X8eN1W8WHP7y4U3xfW7o0 [youtube.com] (not a vid, just a comment)
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday June 25 2024, @03:25PM (9 children)
I've read that Snowden didn't actually intend to wind up in Russia permanently, but was using it as a stop along the way to South America when the US government strategically revoked his visa so they could pillory him as having defected to Russia.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Tuesday June 25 2024, @07:56PM (1 child)
When flights are forced to land, Belarus style, then seriously, it didn't matter that they "revoked" his Passport (itself illegal act) because he couldn't get where he was going. Also, US cannot revoke a visa, but I guess you meant passport?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident [wikipedia.org]
US used to stand for freedom, but kind of destroyed that image in last 2 decades. Well, as long as they have their guns, I guess, then they will believe this lie.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday June 27 2024, @05:18AM
Yes, passport, sorry. Certain people want to make sure we constantly have immigration on the mind lol.
It was bad enough already, with the NSA crap and the fake vaccinations to find bin Laden etc. etc., even before we had to worry about Trump waking up on the wrong side of the bed one day and pulling us out of NATO or something.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Informative) by Nobuddy on Wednesday June 26 2024, @12:14PM (6 children)
Not quite. The us did not revoke his passport, they invalidated it for travel. The difference means little to you or I but means a LOT legally.
He fled to Hong Kong, where he sought asylum in Canada. That seemed delayed, and Hong Kong honors extradition for espionage- so he was at risk of being arrested and deported back to the US. From there he tried to go to Ecuador because he had gotten asylum travel documents from there. The plane stopped in Moscow.
Why he stayed is up for debate. Several accounts disagree. Snowden says he could not travel on due to the passport, but Russia and Ecuador say his asylum documents were sufficient and he was not officially detained or prevented from travel. Cuba- his next stop- said they would not allow a plane that he was on to land. There were other flight options he could have taken on his travel docs that included a direct flight to Ecuador. The people he hid with in HK, also facing similar charges, remained in HK and was eventually granted Canadian asylum. HK never arrested any of them, and says they never intended to nor did they indicate to Snowden in any way that they would.
It looks, more than anything, that he panicked and made bad choices.
(Score: 2) by quietus on Wednesday June 26 2024, @02:42PM (5 children)
Or that he worked, from the beginning, for the Russian government.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 27 2024, @05:11AM (3 children)
yeah because nobody could possibly honestly object to shady crap the US government does, he *has to* have been working for the Russians
(Score: 2) by quietus on Thursday June 27 2024, @02:21PM (2 children)
Ever heard of Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers? He didn't go and work for the Pravda of the time, did he?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 27 2024, @07:33PM (1 child)
did I say that nobody has ever defected to the russians? you continuing to cite people who have doesn't convince me therefore snowden did as well
(Score: 2) by quietus on Friday June 28 2024, @09:11AM
Ellsberg didn't go over to the Soviets, and we're not talking about Snowden here.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Nobuddy on Thursday June 27 2024, @01:08PM
I do not discard that possibility. However all accounts say he left HK with no documents. He left them all with a reputable journalist from a reputable international news service with instructions to curate and release proof of illegal acts only. Which the reporter did.
As there was likely other legal but damaging info in there, and it has not surfaced anywhere- to me that rules out russia being the instigator of all this.
(Score: 2) by AnonTechie on Tuesday June 25 2024, @03:38PM (2 children)
US denies extradition request for Anne Sacoolas, diplomat's wife who allegedly hit, killed British teen
https://abcnews.go.com/International/us-denies-extradition-request-anne-sacoolas-diplomats-wife/story?id=68495080 [go.com]
Anne Sacoolas, wife of US diplomat, pleads guilty in death of British teen motorcyclist (Over Video Conference)
https://abcnews.go.com/International/anne-sacoolas-wife-us-diplomat-pleads-guilty-death/story?id=91791741 [go.com]
Albert Einstein - "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Tuesday June 25 2024, @08:02PM
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/08/uk/anne-sacoolas-sentencing-harry-dunn-death-intl-gbr/index.html [cnn.com]
Unrelated. She was sentenced to suspended sentence. No jail. She was not extradited because of "diplomatic immunity"
(Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Wednesday June 26 2024, @12:17PM
No, it could not be the reason. She was never extradited. try reading your own articles:
"Sacoolas appeared by video from Washington, D.C.,"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 25 2024, @11:22PM (1 child)
Assange court hearing under way - reports
Assange's court hearing is reported to be under way, according to the Reuters news agency.
He is expected to plead guilty to a single count of conspiracy to obtain and disseminate national defence information as part of a US plea bargain.
In return, he will be allowed to walk free and return to his native Australia.
Stay with us as we bring you all the latest updates.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-69145409 [bbc.com]
(Score: 2) by quietus on Wednesday June 26 2024, @02:45PM
And he is free [bbc.com].