"Paul Herber" wrote in message
al-september.org...
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 15:35:04 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ insert my surname
here.me.uk
wrote:

On 08/03/2015 14:06, Paul Herber wrote:
On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 12:32:38 +0000, Nightjar "cpb"@ insert my surname
here.me.uk
wrote:

On 08/03/2015 12:20, Capitol wrote:
Nightjar cpb@ wrote:
On 08/03/2015 01:28, harryagain wrote:
"Nightjar .me.uk" "cpb"@ insert my surname here wrote in message
...
On 07/03/2015 16:09, harryagain wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxo76KVVxQk


You don't really expect me to spend a quarter of an hour watching a
bit of
propaganda do you Harry? In any case, I thought you didn't want
criminals
from the EU here; the EAW allows them to be extradited back to
their
own
country for trial.

I don't expect thet as one of the brain dead you would be able to
comprehend
this tyranical crap from the EUSSR.

The problem is ****-fer-brains, Brits being extradited to nasty
foreign
jails and held without charge for months.



So, you don't want their criminals coming here, but are fine with our
criminals going there?

A European Arrest Warrant can only be issued in connection with a
serious crime that is an offence in both the requesting and the
surrendering states. The request then has to be certified by a
British
Court, after which extradition proceedings can begin. A judge will
then
assess whether the offence qualifies as an extraditable offence, that
there are no statutory bars to the extradition and that it does not
infringe the person's human rights. If all those conditions are met,
then a British judge will order the person's surrender, but that
decision can be appealed in the High Court.

IOW, the people you are concerned about are criminals who have
committed
a serious offence and whose cases have been considered and agreed by
British Courts. The only real difference between a EAW and what went
before is that extradition can happen within 48 days (or 16 if the
person agrees to be extradited) instead of taking up to a year, quite
possibly with the person sitting in a nasty British jail.


# Assange?

Charged with a serious offence and found by a British Court to have a
case to answer. My personal view is that he is probably guilty and
everything else is just a smoke screen to try to hide that, but we
won't
know unless or until he goes to trial.

I don't think he's been charged with anything.

True. He has been accused and two Courts have found that there is a case
to answer, leading to the issuing of a warrant for his arrest. The only
thing that stopped him being charged was fleeing to the embassy.

The Swedish police want to talk to him and
they've been invited to do so at the embassy, but declined to do so.
That smells fishy to
me.

Not the Police, but the chief prosecutor. No reasons have been given,
but it has been suggested that it is connected to the nature of the
evidence available to the prosecution.

Either way, I think his actions are motivated far more by the fear of
being found guilty of rape than anything else. Not that I would lose any
sleep over somebody who recklessly published information of potential
value to terrorists being held to account for his actions, were he to be
extradited to the USA, even though that is quite unlikely.

Well, just 4 days later the Swedish prosecutors change their mind.

Yes.

Maybe we made a difference!

No, the statue of limitations is about to expire on some of the
alleged crimes so those fools have realised that they had better
interview him in the embassy or they won't be able to get him
extradited to Sweden.