Swedes Offer to Question Julian Assange in London/NYT

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

Yay for the whistle blower.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/14/world/europe/julian-assange-sweden-london-sexual-assault-allegations.html?_r=0

LONDON — In a move that could unlock years of stalemate, Swedish prosecutors on Friday offered to travel to Britain to question the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange over allegations of sexual assaults in 2010.

The Swedish officials had previously refused to conduct interviews in London, where Mr. Assange has taken refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy since June 2012.

But with some of the crimes under investigation set to reach their statute of limitations in August, the officials said that they had changed their minds, and that they had also asked for permission to take a swab of DNA from Mr. Assange.

One of Mr. Assange’s defense lawyers, Per Samuelson, welcomed the initiative and suggested that it would most likely be accepted. He said he had spoken to Mr. Assange early on Friday. “This is what we have been asking for, for years, so finally the prosecutor is speaking the same language,” Mr. Samuelson said. “We are a little irritated that it has taken her so long to do.”

[riderinthestorm]

1. But wait, anonymous internet experts have assured us the prosecutor can't do that!!

[hack89]

2. This is not good news for Assange

because after they question him they will want to arrest him. All this does is put the ball firmly in Assange's court.

[riderinthestorm]

4. That is all Assange has asked for! You're presuming his guilt

No surprise there I guess...it's the authoritarian way, forget about due process.



You do know Swedish law has the presumption of innocence right? Unlike those here on DU who have already pronounced him guilty.

[hack89]

6. The prosecutor has said for years that the interview was the last step before arrest

and that she planned to arrest Assange.

Assange went in to the embassy because he knows he can't be arrested there. Do you really think that when the prosecutor tells him "you are under arrest" that Assange will surrender and walk out of the embassy?

[msanthrope]

7. You are misunderstanding a basic legal fact of the case--this interview is the due process given in

Sweden, prior to charging and arrest.

Sweden has already said they want to arrest him. That has not changed.

That's why Sweden issued the EAW.....they don't want to just question him...they want to arrest him.

[riderinthestorm]

22. No. I'm not. I know all of that perfectly well. Nt

[msanthrope]

5. It also puts Ecuador in an awkward position.. Although one wonders if Ecuador arranged this to

get rid of Assange.

[msanthrope]

3. No--no one told you that. The prosecutor was under no obligation to do that. And the only

reason this is being offered is because Sweden's court suggested that the prosecutor give Assange a final chance.

Which, so far, he's stalling on.

[riderinthestorm]

21. Oh FFS, plenty of DUers said she couldn't go. I'm not rehashing that old argument

"it's futile"

"She can't arrest him at the embassy and this interview is the final step before arrest"

Blah, blah, blah.

This prosecutor has had years to resolve this by simply going to London. She's doing it now because the statute of limitations is due to expire.

If I were Assange, knowing I simply had to wait til August, I would think hard about my options as well. Can he even get a fair trial in Sweden now? After all this?

Time will tell.

[msanthrope]

23. So you advocate him running out the clock rather than

fac ing Justice?

Can he get a fair trial in Sweden? Why wouldn't he?

[riderinthestorm]

25. I'm not advocating anything. Simply pointing out the logical calculations

and please spare me the disingenuous naïveté about whether a person in Assange's situation wouldn't wonder just a wee bit about whether he'd get a fair trial.

You know, it's shit like this that makes me doubt you're an attorney in RL and just play one on the internets.

[msanthrope]

28. A person in Assange's situtation would get a fair trial. Unfortunately, he's also guilty as Hell...

Is there any indication to you, from Sweden, that he would not get a fair trial?

Didn't he get fair hearings in Britain?

[riderinthestorm]

29. It's already a fact that the prosecutor engaged in serious lies about his case

I certainly wouldn't trust her. She's now exposed as a liar.

[msanthrope]

32. Care to cite that? Because the British courts heard Assange's

allegations and thought they were bullshit.

[pa28]

19. Yes, I seem to recall that line of reasoning.

A random guy on the internet patiently explained the vagaries of Swedish law to me. This legal eagle assured me that any such interview would be impossible. (scoff)

[Nye Bevan]

8. Interesting that he did not immediately accept the offer (nt)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Even more interesting they didn't make the offer 3 years ago.

[msanthrope]

16. Why would they? After he fled Sweden to avoid his scheduled interview, why would they

offer such a thing?

The only reason this is being offered now is because Sweden's court suggested that Assange be given one more chance to come forward. This is not what the prosecutor wants, so much as she's appeasing the court.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. No. They are alleging it is because the statute of limitations is running out.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/13/us-sweden-assange-idUSKBN0M90NH20150313

The main reason for prosecutors' change of heart is that several crimes Assange is suspected of are subject to a statute of limitations expiring in August.

Prosecutor Marianne Ny said she still believed questioning him at the embassy would lower the quality of the interview and he would need to be in Sweden should the case come to a trial.

"Now that time is of the essence, I have viewed it therefore necessary to accept such deficiencies to the investigation," she said in a statement.

Sweden's Supreme Court is currently weighing whether to hear his request to lift the warrant for Assange's arrest and has asked the prosecutor to submit an opinion before a decision can be taken.

[msanthrope]

20. Did you even read your whole source??????

A Swedish appeals court late last year upheld a detention order on Assange, but said prosecutors had not made enough effort to question him.

And here----

(Reuters) - A Swedish court rejected on Thursday an appeal by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to revoke a detention order issued over allegations of sexual assault, but called on prosecutors to make more effort to question him.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/20/us-sweden-assange-idUSKCN0J41EU20141120

[LittleBlue]

31. Per the BBC, it appears he has accepted

A lawyer for Mr Assange, Per Samuelson, welcomed the move. "He is willing to co-operate fully now in conducting this interrogation - this is a great victory for him," he told the BBC World Service.

"We've been waiting for this for over four years."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31867829

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. Cheerleading for rapists is sickening.

Having exposed US state secrets does not make having had sex with people without their consent OK.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Alleged. There's been no trial or even charges filed.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

12. Well, no. That happens when a criminal goes on the run...

This looks like it's at least a step in the right direction, though.

Assange is an alleged rapist. He is also, almost certainly, a rapist. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[msanthrope]

14. He's not an alleged rapist, though....he's already testified that he did the acts listed on the EAW.

His defense wasn't that he didn't do the acts--merely that the acts alleged are not crimes.

[LiberalLovinLug]

33. You be the judge

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

"We understand that both complainants admit to having initiated consensual sexual relations with Mr Assange. They do not complain of any physical injury. The first complainant did not make a complaint for six days (in which she hosted the respondent in her flat [actually her bed] and spoke in the warmest terms about him to her friends) until she discovered he had spent the night with the other complainant.

"The second complainant, too, failed to complain for several days until she found out about the first complainant: she claimed that after several acts of consensual sexual intercourse, she fell half asleep and thinks that he ejaculated without using a condom – a possibility about which she says they joked afterwards.

"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."

[msanthrope]

34. I think I'll take court evidence over some unverified leak. The EAW stands. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. Criminal? Sweden is finally offering to meet with Assange after

3 years of ducking it. Yes, it is a step in the right direction.

[msanthrope]

17. Bail-jumping makes you a criminal. You might dismiss the rape, but he is a bail-jumper. nt

[Cayenne]

24. There is no bail. He left (not fled) with Sweden's permission.

[msanthrope]

27. Um....you really want to claim there's no bail on Assange? nt

[msanthrope]

13. The 4 charges, as listed in the EAW, are filed after this interview, in keeping with Swedish law.

Sweden is not a common law country, so when you make the claim that no charges have been filed without clearly defining how Sweden files charges, I think you misstate the legal facts of the case.

[pa28]

26. Well, that wasn't so hard now was it?

[LittleBlue]

30. But I was told this could never happen

Right here on DU. Sweden simply can't compromise on this, they said. He has to go to Sweden to be questioned, they said.

Where are they now?