Quote SmokeyTA="SmokeyTA"The Assange case hasn’t been seen by the highest court in the land, the highest court in the land had no evidence put before it and looked at no evidence because it wasn’t within its remit to do so. This is wrong. We are planning on extraditing a man with no thought as to whether this is the right and just thing to do. This is wrong.
We are extraditing him because some admin was done correctly; we have attempted to absolve ourselves of any responsibility for anything other than checking that admin was done correctly. This is wrong, We have as much of a duty to prevent people being extradited as an abuse of due process and as a use of the law to harass an individual as we do to prevent people in this country suffering an abuse of due process and from use of the law to harass an individual.'"
I'm sorry but that is absurd. This area is one of the simplest in the case; the investigation in Sweden includes a rape allegation, and here, as there, an allegation of rape is serious.
If he was accused of exactly the same thing in this country, would it be "not right" or "unjust" that he be arrested and taken for questioning to the police station in the area where the alleged offence had been committed? Of course not.
What material difference does it make if that area is in fact as here a different country? You seem to be arguing that leaving the country where the rape allegation is being investigated somehow of itself makes it unjust for you to have to go back.
I think you are also suggesting that in such a case, the UK should first investigate, and decide whether or not there is enough evidence of rape, before sending him back. Exactly how would we do that? Send a team of rozzers and CPS over to Sweden to do their police and prosecutors job for them?
With regard to that particular charge, the case appears to be that, indisputably, Assange inserted (thanks George) his unprotected penis into a woman, and the contentious areas seem to centre on claims (a) she was asleep and did not consent to this insertion and (b) he knew that in any event she only consented to protected sex.
Why you would pick on such a case as being somehow an example of injustice, I can't think. Would you say the same if it was your daughter who was the complainant? To me, this is plainly an allegation that the Swedish prosecutors and, if they think fit, the Swedish courts, should consider and rule upon, and there's nothing unjust about it.
The final word must be this: if Assange had stayed in Sweden, would you say it was not right, or unjust, that he should be brought in for questioning under the Swedish warrant for his arrest? I can't see how you could say that, since their system would plainly only be doing its job.
