Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

Breaking News
posted by janrinok on Monday January 04 2021, @01:17PM   Printer-friendly

A UK judge has just announced that Assange cannot be extradited to the USA because his treatment by the US would cause him to be a suicide risk. However, he is not released as the prosecution and the USA may decide to appeal. He remains in Belmarsh prison but the courts still have to decide whether he should be released.

The political arguments were all dismissed by the Judge but her decision is based solely on the treatment he will receive in the USA.


The UK Westminster Magistrates' Court decision is now public, Wikileaks journalist Julian Assange will not be extradited from the UK to the US...

407. The defence complains that the late service of the second superseding indictment has resulted in unfairness in the preparation of its case. Mindful of any potential unfairness flowing from the late service of this amended indictment, on Friday 14 August 2020, I invited the defence to consider applying to adjourn the evidential hearing which was due to commence on 7 September 2020. I gave them the opportunity to consider this invitation over the course of a week but, on 21 August 2020, the defence confirmed that itwould not be seeking to adjourn proceedings. No further applications were made between that date and 7 September 2020.

408. In my judgment the appropriate remedy for any unfairness arising from the late indictment would have been to allow the defence sufficient time prepare its case and advance any relevant arguments. That time was offered in August 2020 and declined.

409. I reject the defence submissions concerning staying extradition as an abuse of the process of this court.

... unless the decision is appealed by either the outgoing US administration or the incoming one.

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by canopic jug on Monday January 04 2021, @02:16PM (2 children)

    by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 04 2021, @02:16PM (#1094474) Journal

    What a hard hearted bitch.

    It's just another question which can be solved by following the money. Her husband was a defence minister hand has links to the British military and intelligence establishment. Early in the case there was a lot of discussion of these ties and the importance of her recusing herself from the case. Because she didn't, it suggests that Julian is still in for a longer ride and that he is a long way from getting out from behind bars.

    Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by driverless on Tuesday January 05 2021, @04:02AM (1 child)

    by driverless (4770) on Tuesday January 05 2021, @04:02AM (#1094830)

    Right, because as a judge she bases her judgement on something her husband did at some random point in the past, and not on applying the law. Silly of me to think that a judge would, you know, be motivated by applying the law rather than being part of some nebulous conspiracy based on her husband's former job.

    If you read the ruling it's legally sound, the conditions in a US supermax are too inhumane for Assange to be sent there, in line with many countries refusing to extradite to countries that practice torture (the UN regards US supermaxes as a form of torture). So he'll either need to be given safeguards that the US is unlikely to give, or the UK won't extradite.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by canopic jug on Tuesday January 05 2021, @12:13PM

      by canopic jug (3949) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 05 2021, @12:13PM (#1094933) Journal

      That's how corruption works. Either way, there are enough ties that it would have been more appropriate for that particular judge to recuse herself than to go on with the case herself.

      Notice in the ruling that she did not take the opportunity to address any of the other aspects she could have. Basically the court took no issue with the US effort to outlaw journalism. Just Julian's current state of bad health, which they have created by putting him in Belmarsh and in solitary++ on top of that. That is just vindictive to put him in with the country's most unstable and violent offenders as an excuse to torture him with solitary and other abuses.

      Money is not free speech. Elections should not be auctions.