Any particular reason that you believe the alleged rape allegations more than the fact that they may _actually_ have been politically motivated? I mean, it's difficult to take sides without knowing what did transpire.
What I believe is what I see happening. Sweden has asked for him to be extradited to face charges for alleged crimes in their country. It doesn't seem unreasonable for them to ask for that, nor for Britain to comply.
My point was that I am surprised by the people who do take sides. Surely, the right thing is for him to be tried in Sweden as that's what the rule of law would require and to see what the outcome is.
At the same time, it's good that we have judicial oversite on this and he wasn't just extradited by default. I don't want to live in a country where I can be forcibly deported at any time, just because some foreign country wants to question me.
I didn't say that. I was referring to the 'rule of law' not the 'law' itself.
For example, was it right that Turing was tried for his homosexuality? Yes, it was right. I believe that the law itself was despicable but it was right that he was tried as that was the law at the time of his 'offences'.
I believe that same standard applies to Assange. He is alleged to have broken Swedish law, the British courts believe that under European law the right procedure has been undertaken for the extradition and so we see the process of law operating.
The voice comes from behind a nearby Rhododendron, as you are unlocking your front door. The stage whisper belongs to Alan Turing, the scene is: the past.
"The police are after me", he says, "and I think you know why. Please let me hide in your house".
You haven't adjusted to the spontaneous time travel or meeting the living dead very well, and you're staring without answering for too long; he continues: "It's only for a couple of days until I can make a run for the continent. I guarantee you with the power of suspended disbelief that none of your neighbours or the police will ever know".
"But it's just an enquiry", you say, "that's what the police do all the time, at this stage there's nothing to fear. Hire a lawyer and go with it".
"We both know that in this case (unlike your future Julian Assange, whoever he is) I'm certainly guilty under the law, and they have strong evidence to show it. What I'm saying is, it's a bad law, will you help me escape the consequences?".
"No, no I wont", you reply, "I want to live in a society with a rule of law. This is the law and you should be tried by it. It's the correct thing to do according to this system".
He pauses a moment, then "Think of the public humiliation, the jeering and mocking. They'll chemically castrate me, they'll make my life not worth living, the resulting depression leads to my /suicide/. They'll as good as kill me themselves!"
"Ha ha ha. Alan, m'boy, nevermind the jeering, and your resulting /death/. Think of the alternative! Your suffering is surely better than /anarchy/".
"I'm a real human, it's real personal suffering here, and on the other hand, your ideology!"
You reach for your cellphone to call the police. "If it's any consolation, Alan", you say, giving him a hearty slap on the back, "I think it's despicable too". Your cellphone has no signal - the past, again. You look around for a phonebox.
"'s easy for you to say, you're not the one being involuntarily sacrificed to someone elses political ideology under rules they don't even agree with themselves". He jogs across the road. "Why do you think it's useful to call it despicable if you go along with it regardless?"
"I don't know", you answer, "maybe I'll reply to this comment and explain it".
I think John's point is that people are dismissing the actual allegations outright and assuming the conspiracy is true without any evidence at all.
There's no evidence I'm aware of to back up the conspiracy. On the other hand the Swedes obviously believe there is enough evidence for a prosecution given the extradition request.
Why shouldn't the normal legal process occur? If he's got a good defence case then he should present it to the Swedish court. If he doesn't then he deserves the punishment for any crime he's found guilty of.
Edit: I see John has responded himself. See his response :)
I can tell you with absolute conviction that the vast majority of the 'swedes' (being as I'm one of them) do not believe there is enough evidence for a prosecution. This is unprecedented, the original dismissal of these allegations by the chief prosecutor would have been the end of it had there not been political pressure (gee, I wonder from where?) to bring this to trial.
My point was that I am surprised by the people who do take sides. Surely, the right thing is for him to be tried in Sweden as that's what the rule of law would require and to see what the outcome is.