Assange\’s Lawyer speaks out

And dear God it\’s a mess. One would hope that his courtroom arguments are better than this otherwise Julian is going inside for a long time.

Sweden routinely imposes severe restrictions on suspects held on remand. Pre-trial, suspects are often held in detention, or even in isolation. This treatment is unnecessary and humiliating and thwarts the defendant\’s ability to prepare their case.

Lessee: your client has fled the jurisdiction and is fighting extradition. Yup, I think the idea of him being held on remand until trial stands up to scrutiny.

16 thoughts on “Assange\’s Lawyer speaks out”

  1. Lawyers routinely deploy large numbers of arguments with minimal, shall we say, credibility. The idea is that one of the arguments deployed might work, or that there might be some functional argument in the collection of fatuosity.

    Since deploying an entirely nonsensical argument doesn’t harm your case if there is a sensical(?) one in there lawyers rarely get bothered by standing in front of judges spouting the most incredible bullshit. Everyone knows it’s bullshit but everyone knows why it’s done.

  2. I think when Assange started leaking cables that put our combat forces/informants at risk, that my sympathies for him vanished. And he made it worse by disclosing private individuals’ bank account details over the Icelandic bank failures, etc, etc. He is not, I repeat not, a libertarian hero for free speech, even though some powerful people have been nicely embarrassed by his website.

  3. It’s worth noting that Assange has already admitted that all the facts of the matter are true, as his victims claim. His defence appears to be based on a claim that the Swedish law is wrong to consider non-consensual sex to be rape if consent was previously granted for other acts.

    It’s hardly a surprise he’s fleeing justice, considering the jail sentence he will undoubtedly have to serve if he faces the courts. It’s also not a surprise that he continues to present nonsensical justifications for his few remaining supporters to cling onto. It’s not a surprise, but it is rather sad, that there are still some who cling to every word he says and insist he’s being persecuted rather than prosecuted.

  4. Julia> It doesn’t mean he’ll be denied access to his defence team. It’s common that prisoners at high risk of violence from other prisoners – like, for example, rapists – are held in isolation from other prisoners for their own protection. That’s somewhat different to solitary confinement.

  5. tory boys never grow up

    Not just fled one legal jurisdiction either. Perhaps the best idea is to put him on a scheduled flight to Quito – one of those that go via Miami!

  6. JamesV:”The idea is that one of the arguments deployed might work, or that there might be some functional argument in the collection of fatuosity.”

    I once was discussing the famous Contra-related court case held at the ICJ, Nicaragua v. United States, with one of the legal team who drafted the arguments of the Nicaraguan side. They included several weak arguments that they didn’t expect the court to buy, and didn’t really believe themselves. Rather more in hope than expectation may not sound a good strategy, but they felt these additional arguments did not undermine any of their stronger ones so it was worth a try. To their surprise some of these lines of arguments were accepted!

  7. One of the most deadly questions a judge can ask counsel is, “Mr Lud, what is your best argument?”

  8. Good post, Tim.

    Tory boys etc (never was a truer word spoken, etc) – Are there any flights from this part of the world to that part of the world which do not go via Miami?

  9. I think when Assange started leaking cables that put our combat forces/informants at risk

    ie never. Sigh. At least read a little bit about the case before shouting your mouth off about TREACHERY!!!!

    It’s worth noting that Assange has already admitted that all the facts of the matter are true, as his victims claim

    See above. Sigh.

    Assange is a piece of work, but Wikileaks was a force for good, and the lies being assiduously spread by his opponents about what has and what has not been established to have taken place in Sweden are concerning.

  10. Assange is a piece of work, but Wikileaks

    Was not and should not be just Assange. But he seems determined to take it down with him in a final pyre of narcissistic hubris.

  11. Lawyers routinely deploy large numbers of arguments with minimal, shall we say, credibility.

    I had an ex-GF like this. When she’d done something wrong and I wanted an explanation, she’s reel out one excuse after another, usually contradicting each other, in the hope that I found one I liked.

  12. Assange is a piece of work, but Wikileaks was a force for good…

    Aye, ‘cos without them we’d never have learned that the new Ukrainian president had…wait for it!!…funding sources which were linked to organised crime in that country!!

  13. Are there any flights from this part of the world to that part of the world which do not go via Miami?

    Most of them don’t. KLM, for example.

  14. sackcloth and ashes

    ”I think when Assange started leaking cables that put our combat forces/informants at risk’

    ie never. Sigh’.

    Really?

    http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/taliban-study-wikileaks-to-hunt-informants/

    Assange is also quoted as stating that if Wikileaks outed Afghans and the latter ‘get killed [by the Taliban], they’ve got it coming to them. They deserve it’ (See David Leigh & Luke Harding, Wikileaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy (London: Guardian Books 2011), p.111).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *