Julian Assange’s lawyer tells extradition appeal arrest warrant is invalid

The Guardian

Royal Courts of Justice, 12 July 2011 by Robert Booth (Excerpts)

The European arrest warrant issued for the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, is invalid, the high court was told on Tuesday, because of significant discrepancies between its allegations of sexual assault and rape and the testimonies of two women he allegedly had sex with.

The warrant details four allegations of unlawful coercion, sexual molestation and rape, relating to encounters between Assange and two Swedish women while on a trip to Stockholm last August.

But Ben Emmerson QC, for Assange, said the warrant was a misinterpretation of the evidence and it was "surprising and disturbing" that Swedish district judges who requested Assange’s extradition had been misled.

Emmerson told Lord Justice Thomas and Mr Justice Ousely that there was no evidence about there being a lack of consent in the encounters as appeared to be suggested in the wording of the arrest warrant. He said three of the allegations would not amount to criminal offences under English law.

Emmerson said: "The senior district judge found that those factual allegations would establish dual criminality on the basis that lack of consent, and lack of reasonable belief in consent, may properly be inferred from the conduct described, particularly the references to ’violence’ and a ’design’ to ’violate sexual integrity’. However, that description of conduct is not accurate. The arrest warrant misstates the conduct and is, by that reason alone, an invalid warrant."

Emmerson examined the witness testimonies of the encounters in graphic detail.

Emmerson told the court the case did not hinge on whether Assange accepted this version of events and others relating to other incidents because there were no charges against him, but whether the arrest warrant in connection with them was valid on "strict and narrow" legal grounds.

Read the original article in full in The Guardian.

357 days under house arrest.

Judgement for the appeal Hearing:
2 November 2011

Our Twitter Feed

On 29/11/2011
02:49 – RT @suigenerisjen: Surely #contempt of court?! SvT 'people's tribunal' decides 'is #Assange innocent?' on TV before he is charged or tri ...

On 28/11/2011
20:12 – @isobelsverkstad U complained 2 SVT 4 using #prataomdet as pretext 4 #Assange showtrial on prime time TV z @martenschultz
19:57 – @isobelsverkstad I'm sure u have heard of it before: The #Assange case has been politicised from the get-go: S

On 26/11/2011
18:32 – RT @braingarbage: Fair Trials International unwisely told me they have a hands-off approach to wikileaks, b/c it is too dangerous politi ...
14:40 – Sweden's brand of Feminism: Watch 'Sex War' documentary w English subtitles aired on public TV2 channel. D @wikileaks

On 25/11/2011
02:49 – Swedish Public TV SVT 'put #Assange on trial' on prime time television show 'debatt' thru #prataomdet. @wikileaks S
02:38 – Bonnier, "the Murdochs of Sweden", award #prataomdet campaign that shaped Swedish public perception against Assange: S

On 24/11/2011
23:09 – Swedish editorial: #prataomdet lobby campaign shd have won PR-prize instead of National Journalism prize- Y @wikileaks
22:19 – Bernard Keane: #Assange and #Rudd: the government’s strange lack of curiosity a & W @wikileaks
22:17 – Jennifer Robinson: #Assange case: it’s time for Gillard to ask Obama some important questions 3 W

Read more on twitter...

Click to share this post on Twitter Share this on Facebook