Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Monday June 20 2022, @04:27AM   Printer-friendly

Julian Assange's extradition from UK to US approved by home secretary

Priti Patel has approved the extradition of the WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange to the US, a decision the organisation immediately said it would appeal against in the high court.

The case passed to the home secretary last month after the supreme court ruled there were no legal questions over assurances given by US authorities over how Assange was likely to be treated.

While Patel has given a green light, WikiLeaks immediately released a statement to say it would appeal against the decision.

"Today is not the end of fight," it said. "It is only the beginning of a new legal battle. We will appeal through the legal system; the next appeal will be before the high court."

Also at NYT.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 4, Informative) by bradley13 on Monday June 20 2022, @02:41PM (3 children)

    by bradley13 (3053) on Monday June 20 2022, @02:41PM (#1254612) Homepage Journal

    My analysis was simplistic, yes. However, see this lovely summary of applicable law [justice.gov], especially the section on jurisdiction on page 113. The relevant bits from the Patriot Act, which is likely the relevant law applicable here:

    Any person who, outside the jurisdiction of the United States, engages in any act that, if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States, would constitute an offense under subsection (a) or (b) of this section, shall be subject to the fnes, penalties, imprisonment, and forfeiture provided in this title if—

    (1) the offense involves an access device issued, owned, managed, or controlled by a financial institution, account issuer, credit card system member, or other entity within the jurisdiction of the United States; and

    (2) the person transports, delivers, conveys, transfers to or through, or otherwise stores, secrets, or holds within the jurisdiction of the United States, any article used to assist in the commission of the offense or the proceeds of such offense or property derived therefrom.

    Summarized: As I understand this legalese, Assange would have to have (1) accessed a sensitive device in the US (he didn't, Manning did), and (2) stored data in the US (unlikely, but possible - where was his storage located).

    AFAIK, the plan of the prosecution is to claim that he helped Manning to steal the documents, by providing technical advice. Unlikely, since Manning simply had to copy documents to which he had access - no hacking necessary.

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=1, Informative=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 20 2022, @02:52PM (1 child)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday June 20 2022, @02:52PM (#1254616) Journal

    (1) accessed a sensitive device in the US (he didn't, Manning did),

    The allegation is that he did exactly that. Manning did as well but the legal case against Assange is based on his own access to that secured device.

    I posted the indictment here, it is alleging he accessed the system directly and without authorization. [soylentnews.org]

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 20 2022, @03:53PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday June 20 2022, @03:53PM (#1254644) Journal

      Yikes, the attempt to mod objective reality onto oblivion in this thread is egregious!

      Please, mods and posters, actually look at the indictment I have posted before repeating/modding as fact things that have not been established as facts yet.

  • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Monday June 20 2022, @05:49PM

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday June 20 2022, @05:49PM (#1254685) Journal

    2) the person transports....within the jurisdiction of the United States, any article used to assist in the commission of the offense or the proceeds of such offense or property derived therefrom.

    Sending data from a US server to an external server doesn't count as "transporting" the data within the jurisdiction of the US?