Assange’s Hopes of Freedom Trampled
by justin Tuesday, Feb 13 2018, 10:16pm
A UK judge trampled all over Assange’s legal team’s arguments that it was not in the “public interest” to enforce an arrest warrant for Assange for skipping bail. Assange’s completely inept, divorced from REALITY, legal team, argued that his self-incarceration at the Ecuadorian Embassy was punishment enough for skipping bail and that further enforcement of the warrant was a “disproportionate punishment,” which ‘defence’ Judge Emma Arbuthnot stomped all over by stating that Assange was FREE to leave the embassy at any time and face charges in UK courts, which outcomes he could appeal if he chose.
Furthermore, Judge Arbuthnot shredded every argument Assange’s hapless legal team presented -- good work, dummies! It seems that Judge Arbuthnot took Assange’s refusal to comply with due process personally, stating that ‘Assange seems to think he is above the law,' to paraphrase, Judge Arbuthnot, however, appeared to extend her criticisms a little too personally, which could be grounds for appeal, implying he was a coward, though she was reasonably careful to remain within boundaries set by UK law in the matter. It would be a difficult challenge for appeal, particularly with no real evidence provided by Assange’s legal team -- what did he expect, the tooth fairy to save him?
Our advice to Assange based on the travesty his legal team presented for his case, is to secure some REAL evidence to present to the courts in support of real arguments, this is first year legal student stuff. However, Assange is a multi-millionaire (large Bitcoin stash) and easy prey, as long as the money flows, he will be fed fantasies and false hopes in order for his clearly inept legal team, which includes a QC and seemingly delusional Australian solicitor, Jenny Robinson, who seems burnt out on this case, to continue to live a luxurious life.
Poor Julian is a very easy target manipulated by legal parasites and other more powerful state forces; any Australian half-baked lawyer would have informed Assange he had no real case without supporting evidence that courts are obliged to accept and consider according to existing legal principles and case records in vast case libraries.
This clearly tenuous, tissue-thin case was begging to be shredded, and Judge Arbuthnot obliged.
See for details:
for some intriguing recently revealed (FOI) email exchanges between UK and Swedish legal officials, which hint at a conspiracy between the UK and US to stifle any attempt by Assange to gain his freedom.
<< back to stories