Julian Assange arrested for 'sexual assault'. Are Swedish laws to blame?

[Phanerothyme]

And then a bomb goes off in Stockholm, seemingly planted by a Luton based suicide bomber, who was in Bedfordshire a fortnight ago.

 

Coincidence. Simple, straightforward, common or garden coincidence.

[sccsux]

New bail attempt.

[sccsux]

New bail attempt.

 

Granted bail (pending appeal by persecution).

[Harleyman]

He might be out on bail but he's still going down

[taxman]

Granted bail (pending appeal by persecution).

 

They've appealed

[sccsux]

They've appealed

 

Very, very foolish. Just makes things look even worse (being on remand, he should have access to TV, PC etc, yet they're holding him as if he was bloody Kim Philby) and more political than judicial:(.

[Lotusflower]

I'd endorse all of that post, and more.

 

The UK has a curiously unbalanced extradition treaty with the US, signed by our own David Blunkett some years ago.

 

Sweden does not. Also, in Sweden there is a popular, if diffuse, suspicion of the US administration that has persisted since Vietnam.

 

Although this national feeling has dissipated since the intensities of the Reagan era, it has been aroused again by the US diplomatic cables leaked by none other than Wikileaks, which have revealed members of the Swedish government rolling over and having their tummies tickled by the US administration.

 

It will be far more interesting if Assange faces trial in Sweden for rape - which on the face of it will be a trial almost certain to collapse in an explosive politico-legal row visible to the world through Sweden's almost unparalleled transparency in government and law.

If the case collapses before trial and the US can write a law fast enough, then Assange may well find himself on a flight to New York sooner than he'd like.

 

Do you consider extraordinary rendition to be legal then? Or for that matter, transparent?

[Fartown]

Very, very foolish. Just makes things look even worse (being on remand, he should have access to TV, PC etc, yet they're holding him as if he was bloody Kim Philby) and more political than judicial:(.

 

Remand prisoners do enjoy more privileges than convicted prisoners (and rightly so) but why would a remand prisoner have access to a PC? (I assume you mean a PC with an internet connection.)

 

There's no doubt that Mr Assange has plenty of friends (who are no doubt gathering up the cash to pay his bail) but (given that he is [apparently] wanted in Sweden on rape charges) would he be safe in the 'Main' (as opposed to the sex offenders) part of a prison?

 

Would he be safe in the sex offenders part of the prison for that matter? (Don't drop your soap!)

 

The prison service has at least some duty of care to inmates. They may not be able to guarantee absolute safety, but if there was a real chance that an inmate was likely to be harmed, would they not be obliged to protect that individual as fas as is reasonably possible?

 

One of his lawyers said that Mr Assange was being held in the segregation unit. Perhaps that is so. The lawyer did not say whether Mr Assange had asked to be held in the seg. Perhaps that wouldn't have helped to make him look hard done-by.

[HeadingNorth]

Remand prisoners do enjoy more privileges than convicted prisoners (and rightly so) but why would a remand prisoner have access to a PC? (I assume you mean a PC with an internet connection.)

 

 

Because he is an innocent man. Anyone not yet convicted is an innocent man.

[Fartown]

Prisoners are not allowed access to the Internet. - Just as they are not allowed to have mobile phones and for the same reason. As a remand prisoner he would indeed have more privileges than a convicted prisoner, but he wouldn't have all the privileges that all the unconvicted (innocent) people who are not on remand enjoy.

 

Do you think he would be allowed to order a takeaway curry?

 

How about have a girlfriend round to stay for the night?

 

...Well, perhaps that one might be a bit too close for comfort.