Hacker News Reader

Comment by smokeyj | Hacker News Reader

> I highly suspect Assange is actually just trying to avoid jail time, if he's going to these lengths to avoid going to Sweden for questioning on unrelated accusations of sex crime.

He offered to be interviewed from the embassy. Isn't it suspicious that Sweden won't accept that, given that this man hasn't been charged with anything?

View on HN

This is something to remember: Assange hasn't been charged of anything yet, and still Interpol issued a red notice against him (while not even Gaddafi had a red one). Something smells fishy here.

Where is this meme from? Most Interpol notices are red (3 out of 4). The color codes are not a ranking of severity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpol_notice#Notice_types

http://www.interpol.int/fr/Expertise/Notices

(while not even Gaddafi had a red one)

Under what nation's police jurisdiction? Gaddafi was a head of state! (Although Interpol did issue a red notice at one point, at the request of the ICC...

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2011/09/201199949503933...

But according to Swedish law Assange cannot be charged until after this second round of questioning. If you search this document [0] for 'charge' you'll see that Swedish law is very different from US and UK laws where being formally charged happens very early in the legal process. From what I've gather in Swedish law once you are charge formally you go very quickly to court.

0. http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgment...

This is pretty much irrelevant. They have two alternatives:

- They can interview him where he is now, and move things forward at least a little bit. - They can wait - possibly forever - to interview him, and not get justice for anyone.

What changes if they interview him now?

They claim there are legal issues with it, but this would not be the first time someone had been questioned on foreign soil, and it would not be the first time someone has been charged in absentia if they were to go down that route.

He won't magically gain superpowers and fly away from the Ecuadorian embassy if they charge him before they have him in custody. All that realistically changes is that they have to publicly make a decision whether to file charges or not.

So the question the is why is that a problem? The cynic in me tells me that the most likely reason is that they don't believe they have a strong case, and that his dogged insistence on not going to Sweden suits the prosecutor perfectly.

It is relevant, because people are implying the case is much much less further along than it actually is. It is the opinion of the English courts (§153 of http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2011/2849.html) that "there can be no doubt that if what Mr Assange had done had been done in England and Wales, he would have been charged". So the case is far enough along that he would be charged (were this England).

He would be charged were this England and the Swedish prosecutors representation is backed up by evidence. In fact, he can be charged in absentia in Sweden if those representations can be backed up by evidence. Yet they keep stalling with their nonsense about not being able to interview him abroad. Which does raise the question of whether they do have sufficient evidence to get him charge in Sweden at all.

Oh, I didn't know about that. That could be suspicious, but I'd have to know more.

It isn't the first time. The offer to have him face interviews in the UK have been given regularly ever since they first wanted to talk to him after he'd arrived in the UK. Instead they went ahead with the EAW, and then refused several more offers while sending representatives to London for the extradition hearings instead.

That is, unless Assanges British barristers are lying in ways that'd risk them disbarment.

No, it's in accordance with Swedish bureaucracy.

Except it isn't really. They regularly interview suspects outside of Sweden. One of the most recent well known cases is a pair of Polish nationals interviewed in Poland on suspicion of carrying out a double homicide in Sweden. So apparently it's ok to interview alleged murderers outside Sweden, but not Assange.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com