To those who scoff at Julian Asange's fears

[Swagman]

can they point to similar matters in the USA, or the UK or Australia or indeed, any European country or maybe an African nation or Iceland and even Sweden where :

police and investigators contact a suspect in a crime and request that suspect travel to them for questioning ?

(and this after a Chief Prosecutor has examined the case and concluded there is none to answer)

Do Los Angeles detectives, having discovered a suspect is in New York, telephone that suspect and request he hop on a plane to LA or rather do they do as every other detective in the USA does, travel the country interviewing people quite often fruitlessly?

Is it not normal for British police to hop on a plane and endure the 24 hour flight to Australia (as they did a few months ago) to interview a suspect about a bank robbery ?

Perhaps they could explain why they believe the Swedish approach is normal when it is entirely unique in their own system (as demonstrated when Swedish investigators traveled to Croatia earlier this year to question a suspected murderer).

[Swagman]

1. Britain Refuses to Extradite U.S. Sex Crimes Suspec

..... on Human Rights Grounds
[link: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/06/29/britain-refuses-to-extradite-u-s-sex-crimes-suspect-on-human-rights-grounds/|
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/06/29/britain-refuses-to-extradite-u-s-sex-crimes-suspect-on-human-rights-grounds/]

[Spider Jerusalem]

2. Totally unrelated situation?

This person as I recall is facing open-ended detention; the relevant UK law here is Article 5 of the European convention on human rights. Indefinite dentention without due process, as represented by Minnesota's sex offender programme, is in clear violation and no EU state would extradite someone facing this punishment (nor would any EU state extradite someone who'd be facing the death penalty, for that matter).

Article 5 – Right to liberty and security'

1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:

a. the lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competent court;
b. the lawful arrest or detention of a person for non-compliance with the lawful order of a court or in order to secure the fulfilment of any obligation prescribed by law;
c. the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offence or when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offence or fleeing after having done so;
d. the detention of a minor by lawful order for the purpose of educational supervision or his lawful detention for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority;
e. the lawful detention of persons for the prevention of the spreading of infectious diseases, of persons of unsound mind, alcoholics or drug addicts or vagrants;
f. the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorised entry into the country or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition.

Assange is not facing indefinite detention or a breach of his rights under the ECHR under the legal action in Sweden.

[tama]

4. Not "would" but "should"

History of CIA renditions shows that many if not most EU govs would, though they should not.

As for Assange, as long as Sweden does not give guarantees that will not hand him over to US custody...

[malokvale77]

3. He has plenty to fear

And it has nothing to do with rape

[The Doctor.]

5. Anyone who still thinks this is only about rape allegations,

after reviewing all of the very strange behavior by both the Brits and the Swedes, knowing all of the events leading up to the extradition request, and seeing and hearing what US officials and the M$M have said about Assange is either terminally stupid or a troll.

I'm just so fed up with deliberate ignorance.