Hacker News Reader

Comment by boomboomsubban | Hacker News Reader

I don't see how anybody could read this and then pretend that Assange has any chance of a fair trial in America. Not only were his communication constantly monitored for years, already a breach of client attorney privilege, the US considered flagrant assassination as a potential way to handle him.

I've heard many people say that Assange committed actual crimes and it's time for him to face the consequences of those actions. While I personally disagree about whether he's done anything illegal, even if he has it impossible for him to get a fair trial and justice to be served. Everything being done to him is an effort to get revenge on the person who embarrassed the military and intelligence communities.

View on HN

So what's the alternative? Don't make people you like stand trial?

Don't flagrantly violate an accused's right to a fair trial. My opinions on the person aren't relevant, though I hardly like Assange.

How were they violated?

> Not only were his communication constantly monitored for years, already a breach of client attorney privilege, the US considered flagrant assassination as a potential way to handle him.

Not sure how OP could be more clearer

Considered*

Did they try? The US also "considers" invading Canada. Consideration means nothing. And the US monitors people suspected of crimes all of the time. I'm tired of hearing about hypothetical "unfair" trials.

Once again, the alternative you guys seem to want is a world where people that you like can do whatever they want. You like Assange and because of his celebrity status no trial can be fair- very convenient. Nobody famous has ever stood trial?

My 2 cents

>And the US monitors people suspected of crimes all of the time.

Even when they have a warrant allowing them to monitor a suspect, which they do not seem to have acquired here, those do not allow the breaking of attorney–client privilege.

My "alternative" is that the US obeys the limits placed on them, and conducts fair trials of alleged criminals.

And again, I don't like Assange. What I like is the right to a free press and a fair trial.

Consideration means planning.

If you caught a policeman planning to shoot an innocent African American, or if a neo-nazi was found to be planning to blow up a synagogue, would you not suggest taking legal action?

If I planned to kill someone just like the us govt did, I would be in prison the next day.

Assange should be given a fair trial. But the government spying illegally and planning to kill him doesn't give anyone confidence in that.

> But the government spying illegally and planning to kill him doesn't give anyone confidence in that.

Planning to kill him is terrible, but was the spying actually illegal? With all the permissions the government has on spying, I have such a hard time determining if any single instance of spying is illegal or not, regardless of whether it's ethical.

They presumably violated Ecuadorian law, very likely violated international law, and arguably US law. I am not 100% certain that attorney-client privilege applies to someone facing sealed indictment, though I suspect it does. IANAL

Also "illegal" may not be the right term. Similar actions by intelligence operatives led to the Ellsberg case being dropped, but no charges were filed as a result of those actions.

The alternative is to let people stand trial when they've violated legitimate laws, in front of a jury of their peers. The Unconstitutional, Orwellian Espionage Act that Assange is accused of violating is a stain on the US "justice" system and an affront to everyone who believes in free speech and the Constitution.

Isn't it claimed that he assisted people who were committing cybercrimes? That's not journalism. If only there was a way to figure out the truth- a trial perhaps.

What he supposedly did isn't relevant in the arguments being made. His right to a fair trial has already been compromised, and there's ample reason to suspect the US will continue to ignore that right.

It’s ridiculous to this non-US person that the United States thinks they should have jurisdiction here. This is an Australian citizen who published in the UK and Europe. The whole case is baseless, he’s not subject to the US’s Espionage Act. And of course the ‘assisting hackers’ stuff is nonsense that was tacked on when it looked like the initial indictment wouldn’t stick because of the rules about not extraditing for political crimes.

But the core point still stands - the general consensus remains that it would be impossible for Assange to have a fair trial in the US legal system.

IANAL but I've been told by a lawyer that international law is messy. The US has jurisdiction if your host country says that they do. Countries are also free to tell the US to pound sand.

I'd just like some answers. I'd like it to be tried in court. I don't think the trial would necessarily be unfair. These conversations go in circles because we are all denied the truth so we argue hypotheticals.

What answers do you want? The "assisting people with cybercrimes" shit you brought up was already covered in Manning's trial. Manning asked Assange to crack a generic Windows account so she could theoretically access data she already had access to more secretly.

Assange said he'd try. The only answer unknown is whether he did try, and I doubt the US has any evidence showing that he did. That's it.

The trurth to all his charges is basically already out there.

Well, now that he’s been capture by the USA, we’ll soon know whether he committed anything thanks to his trial, right? Wait, has it been more than a year without trial already?

Erm, last I checked the U.K. justice system wasn’t the “USA”.

The U.K. just denied the US extradition request, so the US isn’t even close to “capturing” Assange.

Even if Assange's extradition request is granted, his court case won't show whether he has committed anything. I suspect much of the prosecution's argument would be secret, and like in Ellsberg's case Assange would not be permitted to present a defense.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com