Julian Assange (WikiLeaks) granted asylum

[jimnyc]

Have you read the judgements Drummond? Take the personality out of it, and read them within a 'blind' legal context.

Also, it's is quite clear that if he goes to Sweden of his free will, he will be extradited to America.

I honestly don't know UK law, but can you show us in the law where it allows someone to avoid trial with a decent lawyer, just because they think the charges are trumped up? And do these laws exist in Sweden too? Here in the US, no matter how crappy it all seems, the court of law will straighten it out and determine right from wrong - not the individual.

And if he does get extradited, it will only be under the rule of law. If he qualifies to be extradited to Sweden, he should be sent there. If Sweden has a treaty with the US, and he qualifies to be extradited, he should be sent. If it's SO trivial to so many, it will be easily shown in court and he'll be a free man very quickly.

[Drummond]

I honestly don't know UK law, but can you show us in the law where it allows someone to avoid trial with a decent lawyer, just because they think the charges are trumped up? And do these laws exist in Sweden too? Here in the US, no matter how crappy it all seems, the court of law will straighten it out and determine right from wrong - not the individual.

And if he does get extradited, it will only be under the rule of law. If he qualifies to be extradited to Sweden, he should be sent there. If Sweden has a treaty with the US, and he qualifies to be extradited, he should be sent. If it's SO trivial to so many, it will be easily shown in court and he'll be a free man very quickly.

Quite.

See ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange...dition_hearing

Extradition hearing The extradition hearing took place on 7–8 and 11 February 2011 before the City of Westminster Magistrates' Court sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates' Court in London.[42][43] Assange's lawyers at the extradition hearing were Geoffrey Robertson QC and Mark Stephens (solicitor), human rights specialists, and the prosecution was represented by a team led by Clare Montgomery QC.[44] Arguments were presented as to whether the Swedish prosecutor had the authority to issue a European Arrest Warrant, the extradition was requested for prosecution or interrogation, the alleged crimes qualified as extradition crimes, there was an abuse of process, his human rights would be respected, and he would receive a fair trial if extradited to Sweden.

Extradition decision The outcome of the hearing was announced on 24 February 2011, when the extradition warrant was upheld.[33][45][46] Senior District Judge Howard Riddle found against Assange on each of the main arguments against his extradition.[47] The judge said "as a matter of fact, and looking at all the circumstances in the round, this person (Mr Assange) passes the threshold of being an accused person and is wanted for prosecution."[47] Judge Riddle concluded: "I am satisfied that the specified offences are extradition offences."[47]

Assange commented after the decision to extradite him, saying "It comes as no surprise but is nevertheless wrong. It comes as the result of a European arrest warrant system run amok."[48]

Appeal to the High Court On 2 March 2011, Assange's lawyers lodged an appeal with the High Court challenging the decision to extradite him to Sweden.[49] Assange remained on conditional bail.[49][50] The appeal hearing took place on 12 and 13 July 2011 at the High Court in London. The judges' decision was reserved, and a written judgment was delivered on 2 November 2011, dismissing the appeal.[51][52][53][54]

Appeal to the Supreme Court The High Court refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, but this was granted by the Supreme Court itself, after the High Court certified that a point of law of general public importance was involved in its decision. The point of law certified was whether a prosecutor is a judicial authority. The Supreme Court heard the appeal on 1 and 2 February 2012.[3] The court reserved its judgment,[55] and dismissed the appeal by a 5-2 majority on 30 May 2012.[56][4]

Assange has exhausted every legal avenue to fight extradition to Sweden, as after all, 'he is an innocent man with nothing to fear ..' ... !!

[Noir]

Quite.

See ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange...dition_hearing

Assange has exhausted every legal avenue to fight extradition to Sweden, as after all, 'he is an innocent man with nothing to fear ..' ... !!

No he has not. He has taken the legal position of claiming (and being granted) asylum in a foreign embassy.
But the political pressure is so strong that Britain may storm an embassy office =/