undefined | Better HN

0 pointsvacri10y ago0 comments

> Extradition from the UK to the US through Sweden requires goig through Swedish AND UK courts. Its strictly harder

Once he's in Sweden, how does a UK court have any jurisdiction? Anyway, the UK already wants to arrest him and hand him over to Sweden, given that they've been staking out the embassy for several years now.

Imagine if the London police had've spent all those staff-hours chasing domestic rapists. I reckon they would have nabbed at least one that they wouldn't have otherwise, which would bring them up to the same level of arrestees detained as all this effort spent on one guy (who hasn't even been found guilty in any court yet).

The idea that "they wouldn't do it; it's all too politically hard" discounts all the resources they've already spent because of politics.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

ascorbic10y ago· 2 in thread

> Once he's in Sweden, how does a UK court have any jurisdiction?

It's in the extradition treaties. If the person has already been extradited from another country, that country also needs to give permission for any onward extradition.

alextgordon10y ago

But do they need permission from the courts, or from the home secretary? Theresa May will do whatever the US tells her to, it's not like Assange is the cause célèbre that McKinnon was.

Tomte10y ago

That doesn't matter, that's the point.

Having the Swedish government and Theresa May assent to an extradition can never be easier than having only the Swedish government assenting to it.

Even if she really did "whatever the US tells her to" Assange wouldn't lose the smallest thing.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse