So day two of Julian Assange's extradition hearing at the Belmarsh theatre closed but did not conclude as there was more to be said and the next instalment is up on Friday.
Among the several things to come out during day two of questions was the lack of answers coming out of Sweden about the prosecution process upon which the extradition request is supposedly pinned. For those who suspected a stitch-up then the news that Assange's supposed Swedish accusers had sent vindictive texts that seemed to contradict their statements adds to the dwindling credibility attaching to the prosecutions process and proceedings. So if one of the females that seemingly wanted to extort money from and get revenge was half asleep as opposed to completely asleep then she may not have been raped (even under the Swedish legal system) - we know Assange is an accomplished hacker of computers but to have sex with someone and not wake them up takes some stealth-like movement.
Perhaps the biggest void in the credibility of the Swedish case lies with its prosecutor Marianne Ny. She is the one leading the investigation against the supposed sexual assault claims and who issued the extradition request so surely to the extent Assange is up in court and called to account to defend his extradition, Ny should equally be called upon to explain her request. Thankfully under English law there is still very much the principle that someone is innocent until proven otherwise, something that seems to have escaped Marianne Ny.
This posting sums it up: Marianne Ny: making an arse of Swedish law
No comments:
Post a Comment