Assange™ makes fresh bid for FREEDOM from Scotland Yard's 'physical encirclement'

Julian Assange™ is attempting to break out of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he has been encamped for two years. His lawyers plan to file a request with the Stockholm District Court in Sweden, where Assange is wanted for questioning over allegations of sexual coercion, sexual molestation and rape. The WikiLeaker-in- …

[Ragarath]

Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Meanwhile, in an effort to gain more UK fans, WikiLeaks claimed that the British government's "physical encirclement" of Assange has cost more than £6.3m in taxpayer money to date.

Rather than gain more fans it personally annoys me. Just go face your charges. I was initially on his side, but it is not the government wasting the money. It is Assange himself by continuing to evade the authorities.

Should we let off everyone that costs more than £100 to apprehend? £1000? £1,000,0000? Where do you stop?

If he had faced the charges initially then it would have cost the plane ticket to send him over there. By not facing up to his problems he has cost the taxpayer that money.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

> Should we let off everyone that costs more than £100 to apprehend? £1000? £1,000,0000? Where do you stop?

It is a valid point, although I have to say 6 million to pay someone to watch a front door does seem rather bad value for money.

[Ben Tasker]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

6m does seem a bit high, but I guess theres some paranoia about letting him slip through the net, so plod have overresourced.

Of course, even if Sweden suddenly say 'ah, new information, no case to answer', he's still going to be arrested as a bail jumper the second he strolls out into the rain. Pretty much bang to rights too

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Actually if he walks out... he gets nabbed by the UK and then they decide what to do with him.

He could personally be on the hook for the expense of the police circle and at the end... he won't go to Ecuador but to Australia since he entered the country on an Aussie passport.

From Australia... he'll be fair game...

[James Micallef]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

"so plod have overresourced"

You don't say?? 24-hour coverage with 8-hour shifts and 4 police officers per shift means you need 12 officers full-time, for 2 years (24 man-years). Considering backup for vacations, logistical support, additional call-outs etc, being generous lets round that up to 30 man-years.

That's £200k/year per officer, with another £350k for equipment and expenses (since the exact figure quoted was £6,350,099.96)

So seriously, where is all that money going???

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

"6m does seem a bit high, but I guess theres some paranoia about letting him slip through the net, so plod have overresourced."

1M for actual police staff time, 5M for the donuts and coffee. The good news is that the Knightsbridge Starbucks has never been more profitable!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

I cannot believe that a creep like Assange is getting any kind of help from anybody. I believe he'd sell his own mother if he could.

Any country that assists or in any way defends this man that has cost several people their lives through his infantile behaviour should be treated as an international pariah and shares his guilt.

[Robert E A Harvey]

Re: Watch a front door

All this economics baffles me. Do we /only/ pay him while he's looking at a front door? Would we not have been paying him if he'd been e.g. Stop-and-searching some poor black kid?

[Kane]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

"It is a valid point, although I have to say 6 million to pay someone to watch a front door does seem rather bad value for money."

Not if your name is G4S.

Mine's the one with the ankle bracelet in the pocket.

[Nifty]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Cost of watching front door: £50,000

Cost of monitoring all IP traffic + voice comms to & from the premises: £5,950,000

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

"It may sound callous (Or even sociopathic)"

I was kind of edging towards bureaucratic as a description. Congratulations on reducing a victim's lifetime of residual trauma down to an hourly rate. The Gordian Knot of emotions and PTSD has been sliced by the keen edged sword of your logic. Let us rejoice.

[Irongut]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Actually it is much worse than callous or sociopathic, you forgot the rule of law. Assange is not a perpetrator because he has not committed any crime. Until he is convicted he is merely an innocent man who has been accused. So by strict application of your views we should spend absolutely nothing.

[Chad H.]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Except he has potentially commited a crime in Sweeden (saying he hasn't commited a crime is not true) and in any case he has now committed a crime in the UK - contempt of court, bail jumping, call it what you will.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

He hasn't committed a crime until the courts say he has. Even in Sweden, the accused has the right to a trial by a jury of his peers. The only person who has signed off on the extradition paperwork is an official in the persecutor's office. Not even a judge.

[acacacac]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

"Even in Sweden". Wow, thanks for the vote of confidence. "Even" in Sweden. We're just above the threshold for being considered a developed country where people aren't just summarily executed for stealing carrots, right?

"...a jury of his peers.". No. Regular trials have no juries in Sweden. But why bother checking such things before posting your comment? Better to just assume stuff, and go with the view of Sweden as presented in US movies and TV series.

[nisse72]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Well, unless his crime is about freedom of the press, there will be no jury.

[Androgynous Cupboard]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Jumping bail is a crime in itself. Even if he's found entirely innocent in Sweden would now face charges in the UK. By his own actions he went from possibly innocent to definitely guilty of something.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Nope he did commit a crime.

He jumped bail.

He should have been under arrest during his appeals hearing. He should have been in jail however he was given bail.

The minute he walks out of the embassy, he's going to jail with no chance for bail.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

"If he had faced the charges initially " ... I don't think Assange has actually been charged with anything, has he? All the Swedish wanted was to ask him a few questions. I would have picked up the phone, but apparently they do things the old fashioned way in Sweden. Most people seem to think that it is just a political stunt to limit his damage to the US. Oh, and to introduce him to his new accommodation in Guantanamo bay via that old favourite, black rendition.

The official complaints are that he didn't use a condom. In what rational country is that a crime?

[TopOnePercent]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

The official complaints are that he didn't use a condom. In what rational country is that a crime?

Hang on.... if a lassy consents to a little horizontal boxing provided you wear gloves, and you charge in and turn it into bloodsport, how can you rationally consider that not to be an offence?

If the lady in question insists he wear his wellies, then that is her right, and violating that IS rape. She'd (apparently) not consented to unprotected sex, so there was no consent in place.

[David Glasgow]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

Thank you for adding such clarity to a hopelessly confusing story.

Suddenly his defence "but m'lud, I was wearing boxing gloves" makes sense.

[GrumpyMiddleAgedGuy]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

You are naive if you think the police attend every crime and investigate it fully. The don't. They make decisions based on cost all the time. Police in London for example wont come to a car accident, even where road rage is involved, unless someone is hurt. They choose to "concentrate" on more important crimes. [ I know this from personal experience ]

Recently we had a case reported where a convict escaped from prison for 10 years, no police investigation, in fact it emerged that at one point he even flagged down a police car and got a lift.

Bear in mind Assange is wanted on a questionable rape charge, Rape has a low conviction rate and the police are constantly criticised over there "inadequate response". Yet somehow, THIS rape case which didn't even happen in Britain, and has been prioritised to the value of over £6,000,000.

That a political decision made higher up.

Why I'm so annoyed about this is that a couple of years ago we had a gang appear in our street. The police didn't act on intimidation, car damage, ship lifting and drug dealing that resulted, until a young boy was stabbed to death. Then they claimed ignorance(!) and finally arrested those involved and everything went back to normal. That's the real result of diverting scarce resources away from real crime.

[Reading Your E-mail]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

"Ship Lifting" damn they do step it up a notch in London ;)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

> Police in London for example wont come to a car accident, even where road rage is involved, unless someone is hurt.

Thanks, that's good to know.

-- Hullo police? There's been a car accident, could you come to assist?

-- Our policy is not to attend the scene, Sir, unless someone has been hurt.

-- Uh, OK...

BIFFF!!! WAAAACK!!!! SPLAT!!!!!

-- Could you come now, please?

[tentimes]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

So, the CIA set a honey trap in Sweden, with the only intention to get him to the USA to put him behind bars for 100+ years, and that's his fault?

The man did the world a service, showing the USA for just what they are. Warmongering cowboys who think they can do as they like all over the world with impunity,

Just look at how they tortured Bradley Manning, before throwing him in the clink for a stupid amount of time,

History will look back at theses years and see an imploding America that liked to kill innocent civilians either for sport or as revenge for terrorism in it's own country. They are nearly as bad as Isreal. People like Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden will shine through as heroes, prepared to make a sick country face it's conscience.

I really hope we can forge a new world with those animals not in it. And no, I am not a Muslim, I hate religion. "Answer for his crimes" ffs - totally made up honey trap from the CIA.

[TopOnePercent]

Re: Who cost the taxpayer £6M?

So, the CIA set a honey trap in Sweden

....

totally made up honey trap from the CIA.

So in your mind there's no possibility that the ladies in question weighed up the risks of a painful AIDS related death or a lifetime of ARVs against 2 1/2 minutes fun with Julian, and came to the conclusion that he wasn't worth the risk?

[auburnman]

Oh good

Let's have this argument again.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd forgotten he even existed.

[BillG]

I'd forgotten he even existed.

Julian who?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd forgotten he even existed.

Hence his new activity. Assange lives by press exposure.

The worst thing that can happen to Assange is that he's finally dragged off to Sweden, spends 15 minutes in court and gets thrown out with a £50 fine, nothing more. That would mean he would go from his mostly imagined status of US Enemy No1 to some jerk who couldn't be arsed to do a blood test when he did over some girls without a condom.

After which he is shipped to the UK to serve time for skipping bail.

I know that's not the right sequence, but a more ego-deflating scenario would be hardly possible for Assange. He may even have to find a job then..

[Ian Michael Gumby]

oh but that's just the start...

First, had you read the papers lately? The US is in no position to do anything about Assange and could ill afford to interfere especially with ISIS and Iraq.

So he goes to Sweden.

Worst case... he's charged and faces 4 years in prison. (He's still on the hook for that. And under the law, I believe that's the max he would face for that offense.) But the odds are he would face much less than that if found guilty. He could even offer a plea deal where he serves no time.

So after Sweden he's returned to the UK.

He then faces the music.

He will most likely face a stiff penalty and may get jail time.

He is then put on a plane and tossed from the UK back to Australia.

Here's where it gets interesting.

He's probably going to lose his passport and his rights to leave the country.

The US if they decide to charge him, can then easily get an extradition from Australia. Remember he's a convict and he was charged and found guilty of hacking US Computers as a teen. IMHO its probably the best shot the US has of getting him, if they wanted him and of course it depends on who's in office at the time. (US and Aussie).

If he's lucky... he can slip through, get a Ecuador passport and leave Australia before this could happen.

That's the end game. Then he'll be in a country sized prison just like Snowden.

[DiViDeD]

Re: oh but that's just the start...

"Worst case... he's charged and faces 4 years in prison. (He's still on the hook for that. And under the law, I believe that's the max he would face for that offense)"

Sorry, but this has been covered more than adequately many times before. The maximum penalty he would face is a fine of 5,000 Kr, which is a little under 500 quid. There is no possibility of jail time being involved.

His reasons for refusing to return to Sweden had nothing to do with a fear of jail, but related to his concern (real or imagined) that he would board a plane at heathrow and wake up in an orange jumpsuit at Guantanamo.

However, the real oddity in all this has been the willingness of the UK to comply with a Swedish arrest warrant, when that warrent does not involve serious criminal or terrorist action on the part of Assange (the purported reason for introducing this cross border cooperation on internal warrants), nor is the warrent issued in respect of something which is a criminal offence in the UK.

Can you imagine the outcry if the UK government complied with the UAE if it demanded extradition of a UK citizen to Dubai because s/he'd criticised the Al Maktoums?

Still, if Julian DOES end up in Oz, I'm sure our government will treat him with the same compassion and respect for human dignity as they do to those from war zones who seek asylum here (although he does have the advantage of not being a 'little bit brown')

[Brangdon]

Re: "when that warrent does not involve serious criminal or terrorist action"

He's accused of rape. Rape is a serious crime.

[DiViDeD]

Re: "when that warrent does not involve serious criminal or terrorist action"

No, he's accused of 'Sex by Surprise', which has no counterpart in the legal system of the UK. It's not rape, and to suggest it is serves to belittle the victims of real rape.

[DragonLord]

Re: oh but that's just the start...

The problem with international treaties is that if you want their end to be upheld you have to uphold your end. As this is a European arrest warrant, the UK is obliged by treaty to arrest Assangne if he's on their land. There are penalties if they don't.

So it's not the crime that's at stake, it's the arrest warrant and treaty surrounding it.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: oh but that's just the start...

I suggest you go back and check out the charges. He would be charged where the one count carried a maximum of 4 years.

In the US that would be a felony and not a misdemeanor. You don't swear out an EAW for a charge that carries only a fine. (Seems you've been listening to Assange's spin.)

Again, the US hasn't filed any charges so he faces nothing in the US. Right now the threat of US is of a paranoid man child. But then again, only Julian knows what he did and maybe he has a guilty conscience?

And yes, he'll eventually end up in Australia. He's Australian and that probably should scare him the most.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: oh but that's just the start...

However, the real oddity in all this has been the willingness of the UK to comply with a Swedish arrest warrant, when that warrent does not involve serious criminal or terrorist action on the part of Assange (the purported reason for introducing this cross border cooperation on internal warrants), nor is the warrent issued in respect of something which is a criminal offence in the UK.

That too has been covered adequately - this case has travelled (again at great expense to the UK taxpayer) to the highest level in court where it was upheld that the arrest warrant covers something that has a sufficiently close equivalent in UK law, and it is thus valid and upheld. There are really no doubts about validity in law here, nor about the correct process. I suspect that's why Assange first bailed from Sweden, and then bailed from, well, his bail in the UK - the guy is a total ass, but even he could see he finally created a mess too big to sleep, canoodle or BS his way out of.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: oh but that's just the start...

"back to Australia....easily get an extradition from Australia."

Easily? Is there not an Ecuadorian embassy in Australia?

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: oh but that's just the start...

Yes, there is an Ecuadorian embassy in Australia.

But Assange has to fly and land in Australia. That takes time.

He has to be processed in.

That takes time.

He could be held for a short period of time by the Aussie government. (He's a bad boy now..)

The Ecuadorian Embassy may not want him after 2 years as a guest.

Lots of things can happen.

[Fluffy Bunny]

"The worst thing that can happen to Assange is that he's finally dragged off to Sweden"

Actually that isn't the worst thing that can happen to him. The worst is that he gets asked 2 questions, to which I expect he will answer no. Then he will be shipped off to that lovely caribean holiday site, Guantanomo Bay.

[Anonymous Coward]

> The worst thing that can happen to Assange is that he's finally dragged off to Sweden, spends 15 minutes in court and gets thrown out with a £50 fine

I've no axe to grind here but mate, you haven't dealt much with the plod, have you? Piss them off for whatever reason and be guaranteed that they *will* make your life hell, just because they can.

[Anonymous John]

It's the second anniversary of his arrival at the embassy. You can now forget about him for another twelve months.

[Cliff]

Ticket to Ecuador

What makes people think they'll want him after being such a pain in the arse? We've all had house guests who don't know when to fuck off, imagine being stuck in that small space with that twat 24h/day for 2 years!

Didn't their ambassador allegedly say to one of the government "we have a problem", to get the response " no, you have a problem "?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Ticket to Ecuador

Cliff, why the name calling? If you happen to know him personally then you're welcome to have any opinion you want of the guy, but it's still rather ungentlemanly to make that public so gratuitously.

If you do not know him, why should you throw an arbitrary insult? That's mob mentality and hardly makes you appear as a useful member of society yourself.

This is possibly the sort of reaction this article wants to elicit however, and this is the stuff of gossip magazines. I know readership is king, but come on...

[Anonymous Coward]

6M?

Worth every penny.

[David Webb]

Fees

Can't we charge the Ecuadorian embassy for the added requirement of police labour required to ensure the bloke doesn't leg it? After all, it's due to their decision to shelter an alleged rapist that we're having to stump up £6m and I'm sure they would throw him out pretty quick if UK.gov sent them a bill for added police coverage outside the normal required.

[smudge]

Re: Fees

What "added requirement"? Sure, there have been police assigned to this, who could have been doing other things. But has the police force spent £6M that they wouldn't have spent anyway? No.

Remember, the UK Government claimed that Thatcher's funeral cost nothing, because no additional resources were recruited.

Same argument must also apply to watching out for Assange.

Unless someone can show us the police officers recruited specifically to do that.

[David Webb]

Re: Fees

Well, yes. The police would still have spent the £6m on policing, but on actual police work, not the sort of work you outsource to G4S in the hope the criminals get away to keep prison populations low.

Going at it from an IT angle, the BOFH suddenly finds his budget for the year is cut by £50,000 because the Boss decided to spend it all and buy 5 iPads, it's still the IT budget but it's been taken away from the actual IT stuff, like upgrading the PFY's PC to have 4 Titan's rather than 3.

We're spending £6m on 1 thing, guarding the embassy, rather than £6m on general policing of London, and when my local police force is having it's budget cut by tens of millions but £6m is being wasted, I'm pretty pissed that we're not demanding reparations from the embassy.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Re: Fees

The Ecuadorean embassy didn't ask to have their front door watched. The people that deserve that bill are the Swedish, for acting like the lickspittle vassals to the US that they are.

[A.P.Richelieu]

Re: Fees

There are international agreements on extradition in place between Sweden and U.K.

If someone is suspected of a crime in Sweden, which was committed in Sweden,

and then flees to the U.K., then Sweden can according to that agreement,

request extradition. The U.K. has in several courts found the Swedish request valid.

There are similar agreements in place between Sweden and the US.

Mr Assange is requesting that Sweden guarantees that Sweden does not abide by

this international agreements. That is not how things work.

The US has not asked for extradition. Personally, I do not see that the US has a case.

Why would a non-US Citizen be breaking the law if he publishes US confidential material

outside of the US. They have no jurisdiction, outside the US.

It would have been different, if Assange was a US Citizen.

If Russian pay a US Citizen visiting Russia for confidential information, they are not breaking

the US law.

I think that the US is quite happy to see Mr Assange continuing his life in freedom at the Ecuadoran Embassy.

As for the charge against Assange in Sweden. He was told that he had to use a condom,

and later at night he did it without the condom, and the girl only noticed afterwards.

Not his choice and illegal in Sweden.

The shit however hit the fan, when TWO girls found out that he's been doing them both.

Bet he regrets beeing a womanizer.

[Velv]

Re: Fees

While I absolutely agree with everything you've said about jurisdiction, you forget that the Merkins believe they have jurisdiction everywhere on the planet irrespective of what has actually been signed by governments.

[Positive Luddite]

Re: Fees

"the Swedish, … lickspittle vassals to the US "

It's the Brits that have a special friendship with US, remember? The Swedes are not even part of NATO.

Actually, because UK is friendly with US, they (you, that is) will spare the Yanks the cost and the pain of having J.A. sent over – rather send him home by way of Sweden.

[Anonymous Coward]

Football party

Assange should get the Ecuadorians to throw a big, noisy football party for their next match; put a big screen TV in the front garden for the benefit of the plods on duty and slip out the back.

[Anonymous Coward]

When I saw the article, my first thought was "Didn't he go to Russia?"

Sorry, slow morning. Still half asleep.

[Anonymous Coward]

Does this Assange person have something to do with operation yewtree? or have I misunderstood something?

[Khaptain]

Ecuadorian embassy

I wonder if he will leak any of the Ecuadorian Embassy secrets when he eventually gets out.

2 years in an Ecuadorian embassy doesn't sound much like fun either. I wonder if he actually pays for his own keep.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Ecuadorian embassy

He may be p*ssing his life away inside the four walls of the Ecuadorian embassy, but it's better than p*ssing his life away in an orange suit in Guantanamo Bay.

[Khaptain]

Re: Ecuadorian embassy

Didn't a certain Mr Obama swear to remove that facility ? Julian could have released some very interesting leaks about Gitmo.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Ecuadorian embassy

He may be p*ssing his life away inside the four walls of the Ecuadorian embassy, but it's better than p*ssing his life away in an orange suit in Guantanamo Bay.

Not going to happen, although I'm getting to the point where I'd actually wish they dragged him off.

The US has (possibly by accident) done one thing right: they left him well alone. As demonstrated, Assange can create a mess all by himself, and now he's neatly wanted in 2 countries for, well, mostly being a dick.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Ecuadorian embassy

He wouldn't go to Gitmo.

Obama would have Holder try him in a NY Federal court.

Manning would come out in drag and testify.

(Say what you will, but Manning as weird as he is... still will tell the truth under oath.)

So no Gitmo.

Its the Federal prison system that probably scares Assange. There he will disappear in plain sight.

(He'll be a number in the prison system with no real connection to the outside. Depending on which prison, he'll probably become some guy Bubba's new 'girlfriend'.... ) To Assange, that's not a happy ending ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Assange should be held accountable

He should pay for all costs associated with his attempts to escape extradition and trial for his crimes. He's just a manipulative criminal able to dupe the gullible.

[CanuckDriver]

Re: Assange should be held accountable

Any assets that he owns should be siezed and forfeited to help cover this scumbags attempts at evading the prosecution he should for the crimes he has committed. If he is innocent of them, he should have no fear.

[Ilmarinen]

Re: Assange should be held accountable

Oh dear -

"nothing to hide, nothing to fear" eh?

Thought we'd dealt with this one. Do keep up!

[Fluffy Bunny]

Re: Assange should be held accountable

"nothing to hide, nothing to fear" - that was never true about anything or anyone. It's just something the nanny-staters say to stop you from voting against their latest infringement on your liberty.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Assange should be held accountable

Any assets that he owns should be siezed and forfeited

Hahaha - like the proceeds of his book?

The guy has zilch and is a slacker, desperately trying to avoid having to find a real job.

[Anonymous Coward]

>"where he will be persecuted for leaking thousands of American and British diplomatic cables"

I may be both shallow and pedantic, but it was Chelsea Manning who leaked those cables. Assange published them after they had been leaked.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Re: >"where he will be persecuted for leaking thousands of American and British diplomatic cables"

In America, publishing state secrets is still a crime, even if you didn't do the leaking yourself. Why do you think they have worked so hard to get their hands on him?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: >"where he will be persecuted for leaking thousands of American and British diplomatic cables"

In America, publishing state secrets is still a crime, even if you didn't do the leaking yourself.

That is a crime in every country. That's why they are called state secrets..

Why do you think they have worked so hard to get their hands on him?

I see little evidence of this "hard work". They haven't even gone as far as create the right conditions to issue paperwork for extradition. All that has happened so far is some politicians trying to use this in the media to profile themselves, but from a procedural point there is nada.

It's all in Assange's head (no, the upper one).

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: >"where he will be persecuted for leaking thousands of American and British diplomatic cables"

Funny thing.

What apparently scared Assange is that in the Article 32 hearing the allegation was that Assange helped with the theft.

Small detail that has serious implications.

[RISC OS]

Maybe he could get out by

being hoisted straight up in the air several KMs to a helicopter, then he wouldn't have left Ecuadorian land.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

ok, how about tunnelling straight down ? hehe. Ecuador must be somewhere down that way if you far enough

[CanuckDriver]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

Wouldn't that constitute illegal mining?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

Wouldn't that constitute illegal mining?

Sure, but it does fit form, though: he is indeed the type that digs when in a hole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

Dig you (alleged) fucker, dig.

Ah, but since The Matrix we know there is no spoon. What is he going to dig with? Ferrero Rocher packaging is far too weak for that.

[Goldmember]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

It may not be legal to exit that way, but he didn't exactly get to the embassy under the most legitimate circumstances, so I doubt it'd bother him.

Air evac is a pretty good way to go, if you can stump up the cash to pay for it (including a very high amount to the pilot willing to take the risk). The plods waiting outside would be able to do bugger all about it too.

It'd be funny, if nothing else.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

It'd be funny, if nothing else.

I think digging would be more fun, I imagine a scene like you see in some crime movies where the villain has just escaped (in this case into an Underground tunnel), only to be rammed by transport going at full speed. London Underground seems to have planned for that already as all train ends have screen wipers and are painted red. It will be but a brief smudge...

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

Then he could try this...

get a ducted fan 'tub' attached to a helium balloon. In the dead of night, he could float silently away to a high enough altitude where the noise of a 'quiet' fan wouldn't be heard by the ground plods. He scoots away far enough... lands, changes with someone else and then high tails it to a ship waiting to take him to another ship off the coast. Then he can take a slow freighter to Ecuador before he's found out.

Hey! It would make a great spy novel escape. To add to it... the Ecuadorian Embassy could help by making an outdoor broadcast of the world cup (noise and all) and then use lighting to hide his escape. (Remember how magicians used lighting to make the Statue of Liberty disappear? Its an optical illusion that creates the blind spot and then the noise and distraction will give him his gap.

Just saying...

[RISC OS]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

> 1) It's not Ecuadorian land.

So how come in US films yanks always claim once they are in their embassy that they are on US soil?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

> 1) It's not Ecuadorian land.

So how come in US films yanks always claim once they are in their embassy that they are on US soil?

1 - because it's only a film?

2 - because they're Yanks?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

That's fine. Except for two minor details.

1) It's not Ecuadorian land.

2) Airspace. Only the first 1000 feet or so 'belongs' to the landowner.

3) Pollution laws. From what I read of his Swedish adventures, the guy has a certain aversion to personal hygiene so you don't want that hanging out there, competing with London's pollution.

Plus there is the mess to clean up if they accidentally drop him..

[jonathanb]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

The Equadorian Embassy is within an apartment building. They don't actually own the land, just the internal non-structural walls and the area inside them.

[Androgynous Cupboard]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

> The Equadorian Embassy is within an apartment building.

> They don't actually own the land, just the internal non-structural

> walls and the area inside them.

+1 for making a joke about leaseholds. Never thought I'd see the day.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

I suspect any helicopter that hovered over central London - in the region of Westminster/Buckingham Palace - for more than a few minutes for whatever reason would soon find itself the object of intense scrutiny.

Said helicopter would then have to make the journey from London to a "safe" place. Now helicopters are very capable aircraft but fuel economy and high speed are not their strongest attributes. Now Assange's supporters may be generous, and I don't know how much you need to pay a pilot to press on with the job in hand and ignore Air Traffic Control telling them to land while a pair of Eurofighter Typhoons take up station near by , but I suspect not generous enough.

[Arachnoid]

ignore Air Traffic Control telling them to land while a pair of Eurofighter Typhoons take up station

Well if it were a book/film one was writing the pilot would have a flight plan logged to overfly the area,drop off radar with "engine problems" then fly himself and the accused straight to the airport with two ready made Ecuadorian passports in pocket.

Then again he could just wear a disguise [a Burka seemed to be a certain BBC reporters favorite garb] and come out the front door too..........

[Rampant Spaniel]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

A large catapult on the roof might work, would be worth watching them try!

[DropBear]

Re: Maybe he could get out by

Dang it, where is Lord Varys when you need him?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's really good news about the "new information"

And it should be discussed with the Swedish judiciary at the earliest opportunity, so that this whole mess can finally be cleared up. May I suggest tomorrow's 0730 flight from Heathrow?

(or if that's too risky because the evil Swedish puppets are going to bundle him into a big brown envelope, then there's not much point in trying to talk to them about this news anyway)

[amanfromMars 1]

Met Plod Plodding a Crooked Furrow with a Nice Cushy Earner ... Well, it aint dangerous, is it*?

Jeremy Paxman teases out of Conrad Black, a most unwholesome picture of US justice, which is not an altogether unexpected great match for its criminal protection and proaction services? Check it out ...... http://youtu.be/hBI35DMHjy4?t=5m52s

And what is one to think of governments which choose to be joined at the hip to such as would be an abomination and perversion of a prosecution service and colluding executive administration, knowing that they know it is corrupt and mightily self-serving of a just a chosen few with nothing of novel and noble note to offer?

* Unless boredom can be life-threatening.

[Gray]

Re: Met Plod Plodding a Crooked Furrow with a Nice Cushy Earner ... Well, it aint dangerous, is it*?

We Merikins invite Jules Assunge to Merika via our Sweedish satellite subserviants ... in the spirit of US prosecution 95% plea bargain efficiencies he is offered Door #1, lethal injection in the left arm, or in uproariously good spirit of accomodation, Door #2, lethal injection in the right arm. If this don't suit there is the option of the world-renowned Oklahoma "groin" injection replete with fumble-fingered needle probing and vein blowout. (Can youse Briti'cans spell 'deturrint'? We get hardly no repeat offenders!)

Oh, but wait ... ! It involves Merikin national security secrets! Sorry, but that's a secret court, secret evidence, secret verdict, secret imprisonment and permanently sealed records. Bye-bye boy-o! T'was nice knowin' ye!

Justice? Bwa-haaa-ha-ha do we got justice. Send 'im on over!

[amanfromMars 1]

Re: Met Plod Plodding a Crooked Furrow with a Nice Cushy Earner ... Well, it aint dangerous, is it*?

Oh, but wait ... ! It involves Merikin national security secrets! Sorry, but that's a secret court, secret evidence, secret verdict, secret imprisonment and permanently sealed records. Bye-bye boy-o! T'was nice knowin' ye! .... Gray

Regarding national security secrets of any group of co-conspirators/executive administrators, Gray, here be a real world view which it is virtually impossible to maintain and safeguard against self-incrimination and dirty secrets discovery nowadays, for of course are things fundamentally different today and the ways of the past are a crooked history best swept under the carpet of bad memory ......

The defining characteristic of the Bush II/Obama administrations is the reliance on secrecy--not to protect "national security" but to avoid accountability. If the operation is secret, its failure can be safely buried. This is the reason why everything is classified in the Bush II/Obama administrations: transparency and public knowledge are anathema because they enable scrutiny and analysis and eventually, accountability.

Secrecy is all about avoiding accountability. "National security" is the facade.

Secrecy is the refuge of every dictatorship, totalitarian regime and fascist junta on the planet. We need only look at the savage response of the Obama administration to whistleblowers who have risked their careers and livelihoods, not to mention their freedom, to expose the most egregious violations of the Constitution and American values to see just how dependent the Obama administration is on secrecy to avoid accountability.

Bush II was no better: using proxies (private contractors, local militia, etc.) has a long history in the U.S. Imperial Project as a way of avoiding accountability and scrutiny, but the Bush II/Obama foreign policy is totally dependent on proxies of one kind or another (consider the explosive rise in the use of killer drones, Obama's favored proxy).

The real world is not as forgiving as a bought-and-paid-for media; blowback takes many forms. The incoherence of the Bush II/Obama administrations is not only reaping horrendous harvests in the playgrounds of their Imperial ambitions, it is eroding the American public's trust in their government and the institutions that claim to protect them in a dangerous world. .... ZeroHedge

PS ... nice post by the way. I just love that sort of humour.:-)

[Chad H.]

>>>>>The WikiLeaker-in-chief has always denied any accusations of wrongdoing, and has said that he fears being extradited to the US via Sweden.

Which is utter bullshit as whilst in Sweeden both the Sweedish and UK governments would be required to ascent to his extraditions, as opposed to just the UK government whilst he sits here.

Now ask yourself, what kind of man turns down an opportunity to make extradition to the US harder and instead decides to become a fugitive.

[ShadowDragon8685]

The funny thing about international laws and international agreements and suchlike is that the only thing there is to enforce them is the threat of reciprocal violence.

It's not like there's a magical geas upon the Swedish authorities, or security agencies, which make it literally impossible for them to make the choice to ignore their lawful requirements re: not handing Assange over and hand him over.

It's really just treaty obligations. Who, exactly, is planning to make punitive war against Sweden if they do, in fact, do just that? Is the UK going to invade them to exact some measure of punishment for their flagrant ignoring? Is the EU going to slap trade sanctions upon them?

The U.S. wants Assange. Bad. There may not have been any official extradition requests. That's because there isn't going to be anything above board for him if we get our mitts on him. He's been demonized in the press over here, and there are people calling for him to be executed as a traitor.

No, not even patiently explaining to those people that the crime of treason first implies that the person in question have an obligation to the body they've ostensibly treased against, which an Austrailian citizen would not have re: the United States, did anything.

And I don't mean just your standard rednecks, either, I mean people in Congress.

He has every reason to fear the United States, because if he gets caught, he's not going to face a trial by jury. MAYBE he'll face a secret trial by a military tribunal whose jurors have all been ordered to find him guilty. More likely he'd wind up in the deepest part of the black bag intelligence apparatus, being interrogated until the end of his days.

The U.S. can be a vengeful bastard when it wants to be. And re: Julian Assange, the U.S. is ready to pull out all the stops. Because he made powerful people look bad by exposing their dirty laundry.

[Chad H.]

Which would make sense if there was some barrier stoping extradition from the UK to the US.

There isn't - it's actually quite easy.

If the US had wanted him , they would have made it direct, or kidnapped him direct here, where they have US airbases to run off to.

It's a fairy story he is spinning to avoid charges, nothing more.

[PeterGriffin]

Why would Sweden send him when we haven't...?

It's not as though our government is adverse to capitulating to the American Governments every war mongering whim.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Why would Sweden send him when we haven't...?

They wouldn't send him.

He goes back to the UK and even the UK wouldnt send him.

They'd boot him back to Australia.

That's where the fun begins.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Re: Why would Sweden send him when we haven't...?

"They'd boot him back to Australia" - why? We don't want him. We'd just onforward him to America. They're the ones that want him.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

@Fluffy Re: Why would Sweden send him when we haven't...?

The US hasn't indited him so no charges. No charges, no extradition request.

But, by an accident of birth, he's Australian so you're stuck with him.

[Adam Inistrator]

state shills

as we know from snowdon, the state engages in social disinformation big time. hence all the helpful shills presenting their "opinion" here

[TopOnePercent]

Re: state shills

as we know from snowdon, the state engages in social disinformation big time. hence all the helpful shills presenting their "opinion" here

So anyone that disagrees with you must be a paid "state shill"? It can't simply be that they disagree with you because you're wrong?

[Fruit and Nutcase]

Ferrero Rocher

He could start consuming the Ecuadorian Ambassador's supply of Ferrero Rocher as a means of putting on weight to such an extent that they won't be able to take him out of the building in a hurry.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Ferrero Rocher

He could start consuming the Ecuadorian Ambassador's supply of Ferrero Rocher as a means of putting on weight to such an extent that they won't be able to take him out of the building in a hurry.

Doesn't need to. His ego alone will no longer get through the door.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Slip of the pen/tongue?

"The Australia-born computer hacker claims that the Scandinavian country will despatch him to the United States, where he will be persecuted for leaking thousands of American and British diplomatic cables."

The word persecuted should be prosecuted.

Using the term persecuted is intentionally misleading in an effort to say he would unfairly be extradited even though the US hasn't filed any formal charges against Assange.

[ShadowDragon8685]

Re: Slip of the pen/tongue?

No, not really.

Even if you don't believe his claims, Mr. Assange is asserting that he will face *persecution* in the United States, not prosecution.

And in fairness, he almost certainly *will* be persecuted to the fullest extent of secret laws handed down by secret judiciaries tried in secret military tribunals. There's not going to be any such thing as a fair trial for him if he sets foot on American soil. The words "Freedom of the Press" and "Public Right to Know" get lost in a droning sea of "National Security, Terrorist, 9/11 9/11, Operational Secrecy, Traitor traitor traitor" over here.

[Ian Michael Gumby]

Re: Slip of the pen/tongue?

No, he'll be prosecuted under the law

He'll probably piss someone off in prison and get himself shiv'd

He's a total prat.

[Fluffy Bunny]

Re: Slip of the pen/tongue?

Persecute is the plain language form of prosecute.

[jorge666]

British peasents

Hundreds criminals walk free and someone spends 6 million pounds on personal vendetta.

Of course it is always easy to spend government money. Who cares, peasants who live in stinky, high level humid houses will pay without saying anything.

Last polls asked who pay the most taxes? Richest, they said. Not true again.

The poorest pay the most taxes in UK, basically keeping government alive. So, keep stretching your asses for USA to fuck you as they wish.

It is really hard to find any police in UK beside London. When there is a burglary, average time for police to arrive is 2-3 hours and costs are cut even further. And still in London somebody happily spending money like there is no tomorrow.

[Cliff]

Re: British peasents

Hmmm so a burglary should have the same response time as a stabbing? Urgent tea, sympathy and fingerprints? Or is it reasonable for it not to be handled by the same front line team who are trying to respond to other problems? You may not see as many bobbies on the beat, but that's because the tools of policing have changed and so have the problems they're meeting. Given a choice between lower council tax and police patrolling, people choose the former. Make of that what you will.

As for that bill for assange, it's a big number. Worth it though. Not as'punishment' four wiki leaks which certainly has/had worthy intentions, but to catch a criminal (contempt of court -actually one of the more open ended crimes) who is also wanted in another country. And it has kept his massive ego quiet for a couple of years. Worth it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: British peasents

There are several police forces in the UK and they are funded locally. Spending a lot of money on police in the capital does not have a direct affect on provision in the provinces.

[Robert E A Harvey]

Escape

Surely the time honoured method is to dress up as a washer woman and walk out carrying a basket? As long as he remembers to wear big black boots and say "Lawks" a couple of times he'll be fine.

[skeptical i]

Re: Escape

Until he runs into a real washer woman who exposes the ruse, that is (viz, Mr. Toad, _Wind in the Willows_).

--> Suds, yum.

[Rabster]

It's amazing (or should be) how many people shoot their gobs off about this case without reading up on it. Start here : http://www.newstatesman.com/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-myths-about-assange-extradition

In particular ; he is required by Sweden for an interview as an immediate precursor to being charged - guess what Sweden is, like, a whole other country and has its own laws.

The charges were already debated in an appeals court and have been shown to be worth going to trial.

The UK supreme court established that what he is charged with would be a crime under UK law. Read the link, follow the links therein, then post.

He may not be guilty but it is damned clear there is a case to answer.

[TheMole]

How does he know ?

How does Assange know to the nearest penny how much it has cost ?

hmmm

[eaamj01]

Escape

Surely he could just dress up as a cat and fly out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJfM23iChzs

[Scuby]

and in other News...

... Media Whores Julian Assange and Katie Price are to Wed.

[Ryan Kendall]

He's broken UK law he skipped bail.

Assange has cost, the UK police money NOT the government. He should pay it back, He should be punnished

[Anonymous Coward]

Cost effective

Why bother spending more money on this guy than you would some other bail jumper in the UK, cut the police presence to that normally found out and around an embassy. Its not as if he will abscond from his comfy prison - after all should he get out he is likely to be picked by the black-helicopter crowd.

If he succeded in leaving the UK then good not our problem anymore

[amanfromMars 1]

Cost effective .... in the way of a hooker or cuckold

Why bother spending more money on this guy than you would some other bail jumper in the UK, cut the police presence to that normally found out and around an embassy. Its not as if he will abscond from his comfy prison - after all should he get out he is likely to be picked by the black-helicopter crowd.

If he succeded in leaving the UK then good not our problem anymore ... Lostyearsago

Quite so, Lostyearsago. One does wonder why Blighty does as she's told by foreign parties rather than doing her own constructively unique thing. No longer the home of the brave of heart and the true of spirit is that which she represents nowadays and that is a shame which the City and Westminster is to shoulder the blame for, for the ignorant population are too stupid to know anything at all about any of those sort of dodgy games and therefore are as innocents and dumb paying spectators to the media hosted pantomimes that pass themselves off as competing realities.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Cost effective

Why bother spending more money on this guy than you would some other bail jumper in the UK, cut the police presence to that normally found out and around an embassy. Its not as if he will abscond from his comfy prison - after all should he get out he is likely to be picked by the black-helicopter crowd.

Because Assange's love of publicity has turned this into a case that cannot be swept under the rug. Even if anyone was willing to deal, they can no longer do this because it would cause political problems - why give Assange a free pass when it has been very publicly proven there is a case to answer in Sweden and he skipped bail in the UK? This is why this guy is a total moron - when left to his own devices he really has taken every opportunity to dig deeper. By absconding he also pissed over his celebrity contacts who funded his bail - no chance he'll ever get back on those Xmas lists, especially not since the charges he is facing in Sweden are sexual.

The US didn't turn him into a pariah, he did all of that himself.

Personally, I think they can't ship him to Sweden soon enough.

[Andy The Hat]

"A large catapult on the roof might work, would be worth watching them try!"

Oh why, oh why did you have to put images of trebuchets and wooden horses smelling mildly of elderberries in my head!!! :-)

[Anonymous Coward]

Simple solution

"Aaand in other news, history was made today when the fugitive Turing level AI platform known only as Julian Assange was shut down under Executive Order 0101, approved by Obama.

It turns out that the conspiracy theorists were right, Assange was actually a robot all along.

"

[HardCoded]

Why is he so scared?

I doubt he'd flourish in a prison environment, people seldom do.

His fears of being killed, raped or tortured in prison for exposing the confidential information of the US government are valid. Even being shived in his cell by some twisted lifer in the UK just for the sake of doing it are too. Because he's a nancy boy who is scared of doing time? Perhaps. Because he is high profile? Yes.

David Hicks was an Aussie who got caught fighting with the Taliban. He was abused by the by the US guards in Gitmo and kept locked up for 5 years. I saw a TV interview with his defence lawyer who confirmed he had been raped by the US guards. I can't find that particular link. But does it surprise you? Anyone who says that rape should be used as a corrective tool even as a joke should regularly visit a psychiatrist. I think jokes about rape in prison are about as funny as the act itself.

Hicks is home now, being no-one in South Australia somewhere. Here's the wiki link about his defence lawyer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Mori

The thing is: Assange now looks like a tool instead of a champion of exposing the truth.

Yes, he is a smug egotist, careless, possibly even technically guilty of sexual assault in Sweden for the brazenly dumb action of not wearing a condom when he was asked to.If he hurt those women, then he deserves to be punished for that. He has probably even contributed to the death of someone(?) and the demise of another who is doing hard time, the man responsible for Wiki Leaks in the first place.

He exposed confidential information. Sometimes you have to suffer for what you believe in.

Perhaps the US has won the current fight. It is scaring the shit out of whistle blowers and taking focus away from the issue of freedom of information, abuse of power, and corruption at high levels. Possibly Assange did this himself without their "help", because he's thick and smug. The fact is: we don't know yet.

My question is if he's old hat why spend all that money on surveillance?

Well done, everyone. Especially you, Julian. Trapped in prison or in your own head. Golf clap.