London Police threatens to storm Ecuador's Embassy

[Malbec]

After all, that would set a dangerous precedent. Remember how thousands of East Germans sought refuge inside West German embassies in Warsaw Pact countries before the Berlin Wall fell, because they knew them to be safe havens? Imagine the outrage that would have followed if they had been forcibly removed.

This is the biggest issue at stake here and is a massive error by the FCO IMO. I'm sure they are right that the Vienna treaty can be suspended or disregarded in certain situations but I believe that the scenarios envisaged were along the lines of a massive terrorist outrage being coordinated from within an embassy rather than a situation where someone has claimed asylum within one.

If the FCO's interpretation of the Vienna treaty is used worldwide we shouldn't complain if North Korea or China decides to raid the British or American embassies because some dissident has claimed asylum. This is a dangerous precedent to set and Assange simply isn't worth it.

[janvanvurpa]

more to read: Helene Bergman: The Assange Case goes to JO,the Swedish Ombudsmen for Justice

yeah, good ol JO. My dealings with JO were like most dealings with Swedish bureaucracy: totally and utterly useless and in screaming contrast to their stated mission.
I just re-read the specific charges and the crucial point is while the sex with the 2 wimmins was consensual, but he didn't wrap his wiener up in an old inner-tube and the wimmins intent was to force Assange to take an HIV test.
All this to force him to take a HIV test..
The enormity of the stupidity of the Swedish authorities continuing their nonsense more than 2 years after is unimaginable when, if the stupid wimmins were so worried and fearful, maybe sometime in the intervening years THEY could take an HIV test so they can get back to their normal fretful level of fear of everything different.

[Malbec]

How is it possible that a European country, UK or Sweden, can even think about turning over a person to the USA where the death penalty can be pronounced or even worse torture by government agents is not illegal?!

This is where the conspiracy theory about Assange gets derailed.

The idea that the US is getting Assange deported to Sweden so it would be easier for them to have him extradited again to the US is ridiculous. It is far far easier for the US to have someone deported from the UK than just about anywhere else in the world. The US doesn't even have to reveal the accusations levelled against that person and the evidence against them has only to be shown to the home secretary. Babar Ahmed and the three Natwest executives who are fighting or tried to fight extradition demonstrate this perfectly.

I'm sure Assange knows this, he has had very good legal advice paid for by his supporters. This is why I'm afraid I simply don't buy the reasons he has given for fighting extradition to Sweden.

Now Janvanpurna's portrayal of Swedish society and their attitudes towards rape is something I agree with and its quite probable that Assange used his fame to get his end away without realising the consequences. The fact is though that ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it and he should face his prosecutors in a court of law.

[janvanvurpa]

From Bleviano's link:
The comments:

1. 
   GalaxyCurse3 augusti 2012 00:21
   Då detta är ett politiskt mål, precis som t.ex The Pirate Bay målet, så har jag svårt att se vad en politiskt tillsatt justitieombudsman bryr sig om att göra.
   
   (Translation; Since this is a political case (goal) precisely like for example The Pirate Bay case, so have I difficult to see what a politically appointed Justice Ombudsman (will) bother themselves to do.)
   
   Svara
   [/*:m:3pq3cmy2]
2. 
   valens4 augusti 2012 08:44
   Case to the Swedish Ombudsman for Justice?
   Is this some kind of joke?
   
   As long as in Sweden the Swedish Ombudsman for Justice (JO) agreed that a former prosecutor who has decided in a dispute between some private people, may notwithstanding act as a court judge involving the same opponents in the same dispute, we cannot be trusted anymore in this so-called Swedish Ombudsman for Justice, in the Swedish low and order unfortunately.
   These are cases for the European Court. Of course the rights according to the European Convention have been violated!
   
   The most interesting is that involved law firm is precisely the same… “Borgström&Bodström”!
   
   (See Swedish JO case no. 4782-2010 subversively changed/added again to case no.5960-2010)
   
   [/*:m:3pq3cmy2]

Doesn't see very welcome news to those who know the system.

[BDunnell]

I just re-read the specific charges and the crucial point is while the sex with the 2 wimmins was consensual, but he didn't wrap his wiener up in an old inner-tube and the wimmins intent was to force Assange to take an HIV test.

As far as I know, the lack of a condom is not mentioned anywhere in the European (as opposed to Swedish) arrest warrant, which is surely the important one in terms of his extradition from the UK to Sweden.

[BDunnell]

This is where the conspiracy theory about Assange gets derailed.

The idea that the US is getting Assange deported to Sweden so it would be easier for them to have him extradited again to the US is ridiculous. It is far far easier for the US to have someone deported from the UK than just about anywhere else in the world. The US doesn't even have to reveal the accusations levelled against that person and the evidence against them has only to be shown to the home secretary. Babar Ahmed and the three Natwest executives who are fighting or tried to fight extradition demonstrate this perfectly.

I'm sure Assange knows this, he has had very good legal advice paid for by his supporters. This is why I'm afraid I simply don't buy the reasons he has given for fighting extradition to Sweden.

I would tend to agree with you, but this article presents quite a reasonable counter-argument:

Julian Assange's right to asylum | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

The fact is though that ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it and he should face his prosecutors in a court of law.

I don't see how this can be achieved without his leaving the embassy, and thus being extradited to the US on charges far more trumped-up than the rape ones. It has, as I said before, become an impossible situation.

[BDunnell]

This is the biggest issue at stake here and is a massive error by the FCO IMO. I'm sure they are right that the Vienna treaty can be suspended or disregarded in certain situations but I believe that the scenarios envisaged were along the lines of a massive terrorist outrage being coordinated from within an embassy rather than a situation where someone has claimed asylum within one.

If the FCO's interpretation of the Vienna treaty is used worldwide we shouldn't complain if North Korea or China decides to raid the British or American embassies because some dissident has claimed asylum. This is a dangerous precedent to set and Assange simply isn't worth it.

Exactly.

[BDunnell]

How the F' can you storm an embassy in the 21 century?
Whatever happened to the Vienna treaty?
Are we talking about the same country that just hosted the Olympic Games and bragged and boasted about the Olympic spirit = fairness?! Did it roll over in front of it's big brother?

Where will this USA crap influence end?
I guess that next Assange shall move over to the Chinese or Russian Embassy, I bet the UK police will never even dream about raiding any of those two.

How is it possible that a European country, UK or Sweden, can even think about turning over a person to the USA where the death penalty can be pronounced or even worse torture by government agents is not illegal?!

Modern society totally lost it's compass. :\

The UK hasn't actually done anything yet! I suspect it won't, either, now the letter has been revealed. The precedent would be just too dangerous.

[BleAivano]

Malbec from what i understand Sweden and USA have signed some sort ofagreement about the lending
of arrested people. the USA and UK does not have this type of agreement.

Also 8 years ago two Egyptian asylum seekers were extradite from Sweden to Egypt with the help of CIA.
These two were later tortured in Egypt during interrogation and sentenced to long prison sentences by a military tribunal.

Repatriation of Ahmed Agiza and Muhammad al-Zery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[janvanvurpa]

This is where the conspiracy theory about Assange gets derailed.

The idea that the US is getting Assange deported to Sweden so it would be easier for them to have him extradited again to the US is ridiculous. It is far far easier for the US to have someone deported from the UK than just about anywhere else in the world. The US doesn't even have to reveal the accusations levelled against that person and the evidence against them has only to be shown to the home secretary. Babar Ahmed and the three Natwest executives who are fighting or tried to fight extradition demonstrate this perfectly.

But the difference is in the basic presumptions of law in the English Speaking countries versus those which law descended directly from old Church Law as in the case in one way or another in all the rest of Europe all the way past the Urals.
English law, and it's descendants concentrate on the exact letter of the law, and a presumption as ancient as the old Angles and Sachens on the presumption of innocence, and the burden of proof place on the accuser. Those systems descended from church law have at their center the intention of redemption of the accused, the "return to the fold" of those who have wander astray--and an implict presumption that we are all guilty of some transgression, the only question is what transgression (see further Kafka "I am accused of a crime which i do not know as they will not tell me", cf the inquisition and the so called Moscow Show trials forcing confessions so that the accused can be burned or shot with a clear conscious.)

In the link to the life-time serious feminist journalist she has a quote from one of the accusers:

the woman A's words from the detention memorandum in the case Assange echoed inside me.

As she says:
"I was proud as shít, to get the world’s coolest man in bed and living in my apartment."

Swedish Police, proscecutors and the whole system is notorious for mainly monumental inaction, endless utredningar (vi ska reda ut detta----investigations---vi shall figure out this...one day) , and then occasionally vendetta like fixation on some notable person, and routinely violate Svenska Grundlagen and their own administrative rules on what seems like mere whim---and then after the whim, to prosecute, will fight with all the power of their position..

You see in the details of the accusation that they played bouncie bouncie on some date in mid August, the women were gossiping or bragging and were surprised to hear they they both had boffed him and both mentioned he hadn't used a condom, only then did they decide to talk to the Polis..and then same day a warrant was issued AND the Stockholm evening tabloid Expressen splashed headlines of the accusations--same day---.
Then when it was "kicked upstairs" another prosecutor review the protocol and decided there were no grounds for charges and the warrant was cancelled. THEN somebody squawked and a yet different prosecutor decided (to make political hay peut'etre)
This is not how a sane legal system works

I'm sure Assange knows this, he has had very good legal advice paid for by his supporters. This is why I'm afraid I simply don't buy the reasons he has given for fighting extradition to Sweden.

Now Janvanpurna's portrayal of Swedish society and their attitudes towards rape is something I agree with and its quite probable that Assange used his fame to get his end away without realising the consequences. The fact is though that ignorance of the law is not an excuse for breaking it and he should face his prosecutors in a court of law.

I imagine he has been advised that extradition from Sweden can be done at the merest whim of any low level bureaucrat on unknowable grounds however flimsy or legally weak, where in England there must be some sort of established procedure, and reasonable grounds of a serious felony having been committed...or so they say...

So i do not agree that he should face his prosecutors in a court IN SWEDEN as their legal system is a farce..

I have actually had dealings with the system, and at the advice of a good cop Gunnar Holm, studied the book on Swedish law and comparative law they he suggested (I was the victim of serious theft (my race motorcycle--the entire reason for living there---and the Police did nothing, so I tracked down the gang, gathered evidence, phone numbers, work numbers, confessions etc and then I was run in to the District Police HQ and I was grilled and when I directly asked why I was hauled in the Detective Superintendent said "I think you're trying to make us look bad" so i answer.."Oh I would never, you're doing far too good a job at that yourselves" and later dealt with JO using internal Police documents supplied to me by Holm showing the gross incompetence and clear shirking of responsibilities of the Police patrol that actually laid hands on the stolen bike and decided to ignore the pleadings of the 2 guys that had caught the thieves to secure the bike. The "Incident report read "called to scene at 21.20. probably stolen motorcycle. No blocking traffic. No action taken" Holm was appalled, and became advisor/protector.. official channels denied they had ever seen or been called---even after presenting them with copies on official forms of the incident report...And they followed me...seriously no conspiracy BS, you know in a very small town the unmarked Volvo 245s with 2 burly guys sitting for long time isn't normal so I'd walk over say Hi! and even asked once if they wanted coffee.
JO was a JO-ke. And all I wanted was an equivalent KTM 250

The system is insane...if there is ever justice in Sweden it is mere coincident.