back to article London flatmate (Julian Assange) sues landlord (government of Ecuador) in human rights spat

Housemate from hell Julian Assange is taking his landlord, the government of Ecuador, to court to stop its officials from, allegedly, running roughshod over his human rights. The WikiLeaks supremo is fed up with being essentially held in near-solitary confinement in an Ecuadorian embassy broom cupboard in London, England. In …

  1. Mark 85 Silver badge

    Now, Assange fears the new president of Ecuador, Lenín Moreno, has ordered staff to psychologically break him....

    Too late for that I'm afraid. A guest suiing the hosts. Just when you think you've heard/read/seen it all, there's Assange who's truly the guest from hell.

    1. The Man Who Fell To Earth Silver badge
      FAIL

      Tic-tac-toe < Checkers < Chess

      Holed up in an embassy as an asylum seeker, and you sue the embassy's government. Clearly Assange isn't a Tic-tac-toe player, much less a Chess player.

      Not much of a future as a floor painter either.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Tic-tac-toe < Checkers < Chess

        "Not much of a future as a floor painter either."

        He proved that when he went into the embassy in the first place. Mind you, the results have been somewhat more entertaining for the rest of us than watching paint dry.

    2. DougS Silver badge

      I really hope he gets the boot

      And the UK arrests him and does whatever they plan to do, and then...nothing. That the US just doesn't give a damn about the self-important little twat, he doesn't get extradited to either Sweden or the US, and he has to find some other reason to play the victim.

      That's probably what he really fears, is that the world has moved on and no one gives a shit about him.

      1. Waseem Alkurdi

        Re: I really hope he gets the boot

        He's a human being after all. Would any human being "want" to get arrested by a TLA notorious for prisoners going poof?

        1. HereIAmJH

          Re: I really hope he gets the boot

          Would any human being "want" to get arrested by a TLA notorious for prisoners going poof?

          Because Manning went poof... well, I guess Bradley did, but it wasn't a TLA that did that. He took it like a man, served the time, and has been released, early. But you go ahead and jump at shadows and fear the monsters under the bed.

        2. Clunking Fist Bronze badge

          Re: I really hope he gets the boot

          "TLA notorious for prisoners going poof"

          He's wanted by the Saudis now? Well I never...

        3. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: I really hope he gets the boot

          He's a human being after all. Would any human being "want" to get arrested by a TLA notorious for prisoners going poof?

          Those two women he allegedly raped in Sweden are human beings as well. It's worth remembering that he was in Sweden for some time after the leaks he is allegedly worried about, without any apparent concern about rendition to the US. He only seems to have become worried about this after he ran away from Sweden to the UK after these allegations came to light, and he only 'sought asylum' in the Ecuadorian embassy after being picked up by the UK police so that the Swedish prosecutors could catch up with him, and bailed - which he promptly skipped out on. it's also worth remembering that the UK has a far less stringent extradition treaty with the US than Sweden does, so if he was, as he claims, seeking to avoid extradition there from Sweden, the UK is about the last place he would have wanted to come.

          Occam's Razor would suggest that, rather than a vast conspiracy against him by US TLAs, the Swedish Government, the British Government, and the Ecuadorian Government, to lock him up (and lets not forget that the person who actually leaked those documents has already been freed), it seems much more likely that here is a guy with an inflated sense of self-importance running from justice from a country where the idea of sexual consent is a bit more rigorous than his home nation.

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: I really hope he gets the boot

        "That the US just doesn't give a damn about the self-important little twat,"

        The difficulty with this happening at present is that it could turn into a pissing match between self-important little twats.

      3. Andrew Norton

        Re: I really hope he gets the boot

        Oh, sweden will extradite him.

        The charges have been dropped only because they can't take the next step, which is 'arrest then charge'.

        And just like how 'charged' means something different in the Swedish system. They can reactive the charges any time until the statute of limitations, and request he be sent over to face the rape charges. That's why he hasn't left.

        He'll stay there until they expire, then leave. Remember, he said 18 months ago that he would be fine with going to the US if Manning got Clemency (https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/819630102787059713). Manning's been out 18 months after Obama granted clemency, he's still hiding... from Sweden.

        1. Persona

          Re: I really hope he gets the boot

          "They can reactive the charges any time until the statute of limitations"

          The statute of limitations expires in August 2020 so he's still got a long time to hide, and after that he has the bail skipping bail to contend with.

        2. imanidiot Silver badge

          Re: I really hope he gets the boot

          That means he could leave. The swedish charges HAVE expired. However, unluckily for him, he'll die in there if he's going to wait for the UK charges of escaping on bail because those don't expire. And the UK would happily extradite him if asked. However the US would be much smarter in NOT asking for his extradition. I suspect that would bruise his ego and reputation more than this whole "stuck in an embassy" schtick which is still allowing him to play the victim.

          1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

            Re: I really hope he gets the boot

            imanidiot,

            Nope. The Swedish charges haven't expired. Most of them were on a 5 year statute of limitations, they were the more minor sexual offenses ones, and expired 3 years ago. The 2 rape ones are on a 10 year timer. So he's got a couple of years yet to hide.

        3. Ken 16 Silver badge
          Holmes

          Re: I really hope he gets the boot

          He may just want to wait til after Brexit to avoid the EU arrest warrant

      4. Ian Michael Gumby Silver badge

        @DougS ... Re: I really hope he gets the boot

        I've been saying the same thing for years now...

        If the US wants him... they will tag him in Australia. That's his last stop and they will pull his Passport.

    3. Nick Kew Silver badge

      psychologically break him

      Hmmm. I should've thought indefinite confinement would tend to do that. The embassy may not technically be prison, but his situation must rank with being confined to a cruise ship or spaceship for immediate hell, and without the prospect of release to keep a chap sane.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        "his situation must rank with being confined to a cruise ship"

        Not even that. He can leave at any time without needing to be able to swim.

      2. streaky Silver badge
        Black Helicopters

        For like the 400th time he's perfectly entitled to leave whenever he likes. Stop pretending he's in some secret CIA prison in Antarctica. His confinement is *completely* self-imposed. Pretending the US is out to get you doesn't mean they actually are - if the US ever tries to extradite this man from anywhere it'll be in full view of the world and he'll be entitled to all rights availed any other US prisoner. Now personally up until Mueller went after his mates I didn't think the US could even figure out what to charge him with - now it's reasonable to assume the US thinks they might be able to prove he knowingly engaged in espionage against the US on behalf of a foreign power. Some of the Mueller docs you can totally see where names have been redacted it should say "wikileaks" or "Assange" - I wonder if he has anything to trade because Putin won't lift a finger to help him.

        1. DougS Silver badge

          @streaky

          it's reasonable to assume the US thinks they might be able to prove he knowingly engaged in espionage against the US on behalf of a foreign power

          That depends on whether Assange 1) was making the high level decisions for Wikileaks during that time and 2) Wikileaks had all the leaked emails in their possession at once, and dribbled them out based on when someone else told them to.

          If the emails were held by the Russians and dribbled out to Wikipedia according to a timetable advantageous for the Trump campaign (and they were, again and again new leaks occurred when there was bad news about Trump they wanted to distract from) then Wikileaks can say "we were just following our policy of releasing whatever we get as soon as we get it". At worst they could be accused of being a knowing and willing dupe, but not part of the conspiracy.

          However, the allegations that Roger Stone was in communication with Wikileaks will mean that's a hard claim to make. Probably impossible to make, once he's indicted and he inevitably cooperates to reduce his sentence. So if Assange had any involvement with the timing of the Hillary email leaks, he should want to leave the embassy sooner rather than later. Though either way, the charges he'd face would have him serve MUCH less time than what he's already decided to serve on his own.

          1. streaky Silver badge

            Re: @streaky

            @DougS the problem he has is how adamant he was that these people weren't Russians and how he knows who they are and absolutely did I mention guarantees they weren't Russian? I said at the time long before Mueller and Trump being elected in fact that he couldn't possibly know - the only way you can know if they're Russian or not is if you know for a fact they are. Nope, they're not Russians. His claims on this have been far too matter of fact for his own good - if he'd said "I don't believe they're Russians, but how could I know?" he'd be far less at risk of this.

            1. DougS Silver badge

              Re: @streaky

              I always thought the biggest problem with this claim "they weren't Russian" is that the whole point of Wikileaks is submissions are supposed to be guaranteed anonymous. How the heck can they guarantee anonymity AND know whether the emails came from Russians unless 1) submissions are actually not anonymous or 2) this particular "submission" did not come through their normal channels, which raises all the questions about collusion/conspiracy on the all too obvious timing of each release.

              Neither possibility leaves Wikileaks looking good. The mere fact that they'd be insistent "they weren't Russian" shows they're taking a side in this. A properly neutral 'leaker' would simply say "our submission process guarantees anonymity of the submitter, thus we have no possible way of knowing where these emails originated or who provided them to us".

          2. Orv Silver badge

            Re: @streaky

            I think it's unlikely the US is what he's really worried about right now, because he helped the current US President get elected. The odds of any executive branch entity going after him are basically nil. No, he's worried either that the UK will throw the book at him, or that those rape charges will actually stick. "Boys will be boys" isn't a great defense anymore.

  2. TheUnregister

    Disgusting, absolutely disgusting article. I am banning the "news" site theregister.co.uk from my company's allowed sites policy.

    1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

      Re: TheUnregister

      I see you've got your internet access back, Julian.

      C.

    2. Snorlax Silver badge
      WTF?

      Re: TheUnregister

      What's the problem?

      Julian himself would be the first to defend a person's right to freedom of expression.

      If you don't like the article, read something else.

      1. Mike Moyle Silver badge

        Re: TheUnregister

        "Julian himself would be the first to defend a person's right to freedom of expression."

        ...unless it inconvenienced or prejudiced HIS interests; then it's right out!

        https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/wikileaks-assange-complains-hes-victim-of-leaks/articleshow/7139648.cms

        1. Snorlax Silver badge

          Re: TheUnregister

          @MIke Moyle:"...unless it inconvenienced or prejudiced HIS interests; then it's right out!"

          My comment was partly tongue-in-cheek.

          Assange is an arsehole (and I think I'm on record saying so on numerous occasions), and his supporters can't claim the right to freedom of expression while at the same time denying the same right to those they disagree with...

    3. Rol Silver badge

      I notice Unregistered has registered just this one comment in the whopping 24 hours they've been a member.

      It'll be difficult to miss something that wasn't really there.

      1. Nick Kew Silver badge
        Pint

        I notice Unregistered has registered just this one comment in the whopping 24 hours they've been a member.

        At a guess, it's a joke from someone familiar with Reg comments. Maybe a regular or a lurker. Or even someone deliberately feeding a line to that first reply :)

        1. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: TheUnregister

          It is very reminiscent of something that everyone's favourite POTUS might write :)

    4. IceC0ld Bronze badge

      Disgusting, absolutely disgusting article. I am banning the "news" site theregister.co.uk from my company's allowed sites policy.

      ===

      bit of a god like admin gone nutz there, unless it IS irony ? but just comes across as crap

      and a whole single post too, we are HONOURED Julian :oP

    5. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: TheUnregister

      Thus speaks the Snowflakes at the Guardian.

      1. Danny 14 Silver badge

        Re: TheUnregister

        im surprised they didnt mention the B word. Seems a great way to derail threads these days.

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: TheUnregister

        Aaah, diddums; The Guardian Snowflakes just about manage to click the down-vote, but stringing together a few words that have any meaning in the real world is beyond them.

    6. Frumious Bandersnatch Silver badge

      and still, ...

      ... they come

      1. Kane Silver badge
        Alien

        Re: and still, ...

        "... they come"

        ULLA

    7. My-Handle

      "I am banning the 'news' site theregister.co.uk from my company's allowed sites policy."

      Really? I added it as the default home page for my company :)

    8. Kane Silver badge
      Trollface

      "Disgusting, absolutely disgusting article. I am banning the "news" site theregister.co.uk from my company's allowed sites policy."

      Hmmm...

  3. cosymart
    Meh

    Lets Get Real

    Who pays for his food? Does he get to choose the menu?

    To be honest if he had not skipped bail he would at most done 6 months at Her Majesty's Pleasure and as long as he avoided bending down for the soap he would have come out unscathed. As it is he has been banged up in the Ecuadorian embassy for far longer than most criminals get for GBH. What a muppet.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Lets Get Real

        Perhaps the allegations were fabricated, but then is that not the case in many rape claims?

        It is even becoming the norm within higher circles to use such claims to try and damage public figures - the most recent instance being the latest appointment to the USA Supreme Court.

        1. anothercynic Silver badge

          Re: Lets Get Real

          This is not about rape allegations anymore. It is about breaching bail conditions.

        2. Loyal Commenter Silver badge

          Re: Lets Get Real

          Perhaps the allegations were fabricated, but then is that not the case in many rape claims?

          No.

          Next time, actually bother to find out whether the thing you are typing is true or not before hitting that 'post' button.

          The evidence suggests that the vast majority of rape/serious sexual assault claims by women against men are true. To claim otherwise is basically blaming the victims. The thing is, human beings (en masse) are a nasty lot, and do all sorts of nasty things to each other. Men are far more likely to do more and nastier things than women (that is not to say that women can't be violent criminals, but on balance, most of those are male). Many rapists commit their crimes knowing full well that there will be little evidence to prove that what they did was not consensual, and that it will be hard to prove a case against them. Bear in mind that most rapes are not the violent dragged-off-into-the-bushes kind, but happen when men take advantage of someone they know, often when under the influence of drink or drugs, in a private situation. You (probably) are not a rapist yourself, so wouldn't believe the sheer number of women this happens to. The odds are that several women you know have been raped, and you know nothing about it.

          Anyway, rant over. Short answer:

          No. You are wrong.

          1. Jove Bronze badge

            Re: Lets Get Real

            Sorry, but you are misinformed; many rape allegations are demonstrated to be false. Furthermore, such allegations are being used to destroy reputations. Engage with reality.

            1. DavCrav Silver badge

              Re: Lets Get Real

              "Sorry, but you are misinformed; many rape allegations are demonstrated to be false. Furthermore, such allegations are being used to destroy reputations. Engage with reality."

              OK, there are a number of categories you can put rape allegations into:

              1) Proved true. The definition here is a secured conviction of rape (we'll worry about miscarriages of justice some other time). Very few rape allegations fall into this category due to the burden of proof.

              2) Proved false. The definition here is a secured conviction perverting the course of justice or making a false complaint (we'll worry about miscarriages of justice some other time). Very few rape allegations fall into this category due to the burden of proof.

              3) Not proved true but it sounds likely. This category is subjective and fairly big, actually. For example, most people listening to the Kavanaugh hearing should come away thinking he's lying and she's at least mostly telling the truth. I'd stick the allegations against him in the 'credible but not proved' category.

              4) Not proved false but it sounds likely. All of the accusations by 'Nick' in the UK are in this category until he gets done in court at the end of his trial. The accusations against Cliff Richard fall into this category, I think.

              5) Evidence is vague/not in public domain, and inconclusive. Lots of these, many dropped at investigative stage.

              6) Differing definitions. Rape is a subjective crime. With most crimes there is a much more objective definition of whether a crime has taken place. Quite a few potential cases of rape depend on people's memories and beliefs as to consent, and so it might be that from one person's perspective there is mens rea, from another's there is not. This is different from 5) because here it's not whether there's evidence of a crime, and more that's there's a question as to the incidence of a crime.

              Apart from 1) and 2), hard data is going to be hard to come by for the other categories.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Lets Get Real

                This current meme about "all the false rape accusations" is just cover for Kavanaugh, who may or may not have sexually assaulted women but is a proven liar and shouldn't be on the court for that reason alone.

                Republicans have now decided to counter the "#metoo" movement with "#himtoo", claiming that false rape allegations to destroy reputations are rampant. While they do happen, they are a rounding error in the number of overall rape allegations. Most will never be proven true or false, because unless physical evidence is left behind and is tested, or there are somehow neutral witnesses who don't have reason to go along with the story of one side or the other, there's no way to determine the truth.

                1. Orv Silver badge

                  Re: Lets Get Real

                  Women have little incentive to fabricate allegations, considering that even a legitimate accusation is a good way to have your life ruined while the man walks away without any consequences. I know more than one person who has been raped but decided not to report for that reason. In at least one case the man actually told them he'd ruin their life if they tried, and he was in a position to do so. Men hold all the high cards in most of these situations.

                  1. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

                    Re: Lets Get Real

                    Well, the Red Dwarf actor Craig Charles may disagree about the "any consequences", having been locked up in Wandsworth Prison for three months before trial.

                    I agree that the default position should be to accept the less-socially-powerful individual's story (if the story is plausible, and note that gender isn't relevant, but power is).

                    But there are many reasons to allege an assault, ranging from "buyers remorse" through the complex situation where consent was given by someone too drunk/drugged to be properly able to give consent and in the cold light of day sincerely believe that they hadn't.

                    And also, of course, the concept of a malicious allegation is not unheard of. Of the two allegations against Kavanaugh, one was a lot more persuasive than the other. It would not be inconceivable that someone might inflate a real incident into a false allegation for purely political motives. For example, someone might allege that a candidate for office grabbed women's genitalia in order to discredit the candidate... Hmm...!

                2. Jove Bronze badge

                  Re: Lets Get Real

                  Sorry, but no it is not.

                  Rape allegations are being used to destroy reputations and career advancement under the guise of protected identity.

                  It is months, possibly years before cases are brought to Court or thrown out. In the meantime the alleged offenders are subject to media and public recrimination, will likely loose their jobs and substantial impalement of income. Then when the allegations are brought to Court, if they get that far, a fair number of them are thrown out - all without prosecution of those making the allegations with their identities still protected and free to attack others again.

                  Recent numbers have show that only 1 in 56 cases of rape allegations in England and Wales lead to a conviction of the alleged criminal, yet those making the false allegations get off free.

                  In the case of Kavanaugh it clear from the start that it was a partisan subversion of the State to smear a SCOTUS candidate. You conveniently fail to mention that those involved in making these smear allegations are under investigation by the DoJ.

                  1. This post has been deleted by its author

                  2. Orv Silver badge

                    Re: Lets Get Real

                    The DoJ is itself a political organ, so being under investigation by it doesn't mean much except that you displeased the orange guy at the top.

                3. Jove Bronze badge

                  Re: Lets Get Real

                  With a success rate of only 1 in 56 successful convictions it is clearly not a rounding error.

    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Devil

      Re: Lets Get Real

      I think his concern (read: paranoia) about the CIA/NSA extradition may have been relevant at one time, but I think he's been locked up in the embassy too long. 'Statute of Limitations' most likely applies here. Also he should consider that self-imposed incarceration "time served".

      1. DougS Silver badge

        Re: Lets Get Real

        I'm sure the US could come up with charges for which there is no statute of limitations, but I think he likes playing the victim for attention and the worst thing that could happen to him is that he gets released and no one cares enough to extradite him anywhere. Then all his claims that he had to hide out to avoid unfair prosecution simply evaporate and he looks like the pathetic fool he is.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Lets Get Real

        Statute of limitations stop when you leave the country and technically he`s on foreign soil

        1. SkippyBing Silver badge

          Re: Lets Get Real

          'Statute of limitations stop when you leave the country and technically he`s on foreign soil'

          Repeat after me, Embassies aren't foreign soil, they're just buildings that have been accorded diplomatic status.

          1. Stoneshop Silver badge

            Re: Lets Get Real

            Repeat after me, Embassies aren't foreign soil, they're just buildings that have been accorded diplomatic status.

            Although if you've committed a crime in country X, any soil outside country X including its embassies and such, is foreign. Not sure about international waters; a different set of rules apply there, but I doubt anybody's going to lift a finger if Assange is nabbed from a dinghy floating halfway between the UK and South America.

            Hm, I take that back. A lot of fingers will be lifted, to then descend on keyboards. But nothing more than that.

            1. Clunking Fist Bronze badge

              Re: Lets Get Real

              "A lot of fingers will be lifted, to be dampened by the condensation on the glass, then the now half empty pint glass is returned to the table. But nothing more than that. Although maybe a burp."

              A fixing of sorts

          2. BongoJoe

            Re: Lets Get Real

            Repeat after me, Embassies aren't foreign soil, they're just buildings that have been accorded diplomatic status.

            Wasn't there a thing years ago in the America's Cup where in (I think) Australia a team (again, I think the USA) needed a keel rebuilt and were told that they had to do this on American soil so they beetled off to the Embassy to get it done within the grounds?

            This was approved and given the litigitious nature of the America's Cup, where most of the action takes place in a courtroom, I am now surprised that this keep rebuilding wasn't allowed.

            Mind you, not that I have an opinion on this matter: I am just milldly interested.

            1. JimC Silver badge

              Re: Lets Get Real/Americas Cup

              I doubt it: the noise, space, dust, mess and everything else associated with such work would make St Julian seem like a pleasant house guest. But yes, there have been all sorts of shenanigans in the past about nationality restrictions.

          3. Irongut

            Re: Lets Get Real @SkippyBing Silver badge

            Repeat after me, London is not part of Sweden or the USA.

            So the Embassies being foreign soil or not makes no difference.

            1. SkippyBing Silver badge

              Re: Lets Get Real @SkippyBing Silver badge

              'Repeat after me, London is not part of Sweden or the USA.

              So the Embassies being foreign soil or not makes no difference.'

              The fact he's wanted in the UK for skipping bail definitely comes into it though, and London is definitely part of that.

        2. Jove Bronze badge

          Re: Lets Get Real

          Possibly, but he will come under UK Law if he leaves the Embassy without Ecuadorian Diplomatic protection.

          1. DavCrav Silver badge

            Re: Lets Get Real

            "Possibly, but he will come under UK Law if he leaves the Embassy without Ecuadorian Diplomatic protection."

            He is still under UK law. The Vienna Convention treats embassies as inviolable, but they are not foreign territory. And he won't get diplomatic protection, as the host country needs to approve the application. Amazingly, the UK Government believes that a fugitive on the run from the UK court system is not of sufficiently good standing to become a diplomat.

            1. Jove Bronze badge

              Re: Lets Get Real

              Under the convention, Embassy officials are granted immunity, and are obliged to observe local laws but there are practical means of enforcing the law on those officials without the consent of the guest nation, other than to make an official unwelcome and to require then to leave.

      3. Ben Tasker Silver badge

        Re: Lets Get Real

        > Also he should consider that self-imposed incarceration "time served".

        From his filings, he does consider this time to be "time-served".

        But no judge will, or should, agree with that. It's self-imposed incarceration at a location of his choice, and the accused doesn't, and shouldn't get to call the shots. At the far more extreme end of that, you could murder someone and then go live in an embassy (hopefully a more luxurious one) for 30 years then walk out and claim time served. Would anyone agree that was right?

        I wonder if there's a risk that a judicial review of his current circumstances in Ecuador could in fact result in a conclusion that there's no grounds for offering him asylum, and that that offer should be withdrawn? Seems a bit dangerous to play whos-cock-is-bigger with the government that's providing the walls between you and arrest.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Lets Get Real

          The Saudi embassy in Istanbul might take him in?

      4. Snorlax Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: Lets Get Real

        @bombastic bob: " 'Statute of Limitations' most likely applies here. "

        No it doesn't.

        You can't dodge criminal charges by playing hide and seek for a few years.

        The clock doesn't run out, and you don't get off with "time served". Duh.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Lets Get Real

          @bombastic bob: " 'Statute of Limitations' most likely applies here. "

          No it doesn't.

          You can't dodge criminal charges by playing hide and seek for a few years.

          The clock doesn't run out, and you don't get off with "time served". Duh.

          Not sure why you got downvoted here. The UK doesn't have a statute of limitations as such. If a case is started and the defendant pisses off, all proceedings and clocks are stopped until the defendant is apprehended or presents him/herself back at court. No time limits.

          Remember Ronnie Biggs of the great train robbery. He was in Brazil for something like 40 years "on the run".

          1. DavCrav Silver badge

            Re: Lets Get Real

            "The UK doesn't have a statute of limitations as such. If a case is started and the defendant pisses off, all proceedings and clocks are stopped until the defendant is apprehended or presents him/herself back at court. No time limits."

            The UK does not have a statute of limitations for most criminal offences, although it does for minor offences like speeding. (This was in the news because I think it was Beckham got off because the letter wasn't delivered within the 14 day period. It was delivered to Aston Martin, where his car was registered, and the company that makes its money from keeping the rich sweet absolutely did not lie through their teeth and say it arrived fifteen days later. It definitely took a week from posting for the letter to arrive, and miraculously just for a rich guy.

            1. wallaby

              Re: Lets Get Real

              "The UK does not have a statute of limitations for most criminal offences, although it does for minor offences like speeding."

              Speeding does not constitute a criminal offence in UK law. The non payment of fines resulting from the offence can

              1. DavCrav Silver badge

                Re: Lets Get Real

                "Speeding does not constitute a criminal offence in UK law. The non payment of fines resulting from the offence can"

                Speeding is a criminal offence in UK law, unless you take the Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) conditional offer. If you claim not to have received the conditional offer, it all gets a bit murky.

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Lets Get Real

        How do his circumstances differ from any other person in hiding from the law? Do supporters of his claims believe that all escaped convicts / bail dodgers who are holed up somewhere should be able to count this against their sentences? Or is his extradition paranoia somehow related to this privilege?

      6. anothercynic Silver badge

        Re: Lets Get Real

        Skipping bail and a warrant out for the arrest of the perpetrator does not fall under a statute of limitations...

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Lets Get Real

      "To be honest if he had not skipped bail he would at most done 6 months at Her Majesty's Pleasure"

      If he hadn't skipped bail he wouldn't have committed any offence here, he'd probably have been shipped back to Sweden. It's his skipping bail that makes him liable for imprisonment here.

    4. Mike 137

      Re: Lets Get Real

      "... 6 months at Her Majesty's Pleasure ..."

      There's actually no such thing. Six months is six months. "At Her Majesty's pleasure" would mean "for an indefinite time, until the Monarch decides to release you" - and it's fortunately not been available as a sentence for ages - the last time it was used it would have been "At His Majesty's pleasure".

  4. pɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
    Black Helicopters

    its a strange one with Assange.

    I do agree to a point with his leaking of documents that expose wrongdoing on a government level, but on a personal level I cant help but think hes a first class prick and is not helping himself.

    its total bullshit that a woman goes to the police to ask advice if she can force someone to have a HIV test and then a few days later the whole thing ends up as a rape charge.

    I have no doubt that the men in suits, dark glasses with an earpiece with matching microphone up the sleeve are out to get him. What does he expect? you poke at a sleeping dog its going to bite you. eventually.

    Now hes having a go at the people who have kindly kept him out of an American spooks prison cell. I would not be surprised if they kicked him out the embassy. If someone was staying in my house for years paying no rent or anything towards the food bill, then started to complain at the internet access then I think he would be out the door, or at least direct him out the back door and off to an airport on a dark and misty night, slipping past the spooks watching the door for him.....

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      "Now hes having a go at the people who have kindly kept him out of an American spooks prison cell. I would not be surprised if they kicked him out the embassy."

      Yes, whatever the feelings about him and his "case", shitting on the people who granted him asylum probably isn't a good move. They can un-grant it just as easily.

      1. Halfmad

        He wants his asylum to be removed, then it's another victim card for him when he goes to trial by media etc.

        I hope he walks out of there and no government even bothers acknowledging it. That would be the ultimate slap in the face. Let Sweden say they'll pursue him if he ever enters their country, but beyond that.. 8 years of self imposed stupidity by an egomaniac.

    2. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      its total bullshit that a woman goes to the police to ask advice if she can force someone to have a HIV test and then a few days later the whole thing ends up as a rape charge.

      ISTR there were 2 women involved (not in a threesome sense) and so multiple charges. The rest is I think the justice process. If you go to the police for advice, and as part of that discussion, chargeable offences come to light.. the police can't ignore those. Or at least aren't meant to.

      But then the descent into farce. Rather than dealing with the accusations, he fled Sweden. The Swedes were naturally unhappy, so issued the arrest warrant. That lead to skipping bail and popping into Ecuador. The rest has the makings of a comedy show.

      What I don't understand is given Assange has had access to some heavyweight legal support, he didn't just deal with the Swedish charges. Ok, there's the possibility that he might have to deal with the US, but they're probably watching the situation with amusement. Instead there's still the suspicion that he may have been guilty of the sex offences, and is sorely testing the patience of Ecuador. As I understand it, they could decide they've had enough and reject his asylum request, then ask him to leave. Then there's the UK charges for skipping bail, but we could just ignore those and ask him to leave the UK.

      Not sure where he'd then end up. As I understand it, he was granted Ecuadorian citizenship, but don't know if that meant he's renounced his Australian. He's almost certainly outstayed any UK visa though. If it doesn't turn into a comedy show, I guess lawyers get to use the situation as an example of what not to do if you're looking for a simple life.

      1. Rich 11 Silver badge

        If it doesn't turn into a comedy show, I guess lawyers get to use the situation as an example of what not to do if you're looking for a simple life.

        It's already being used as a teaching point on university law courses. To considerable amusement, I'm told.

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        "Then there's the UK charges for skipping bail, but we could just ignore those and ask him to leave the UK."

        I think that last is unlikely. The judiciary take a very, very dim view of contempt of court. Only an enormous amount of political pressure could even begin to change their minds and I very much doubt any politician(s) care enough to put that pressure on. Especially since a recalcitrant judge might just bump it up to the supreme court who, in law, would almost certainly back the judge.

        1. Alan Brown Silver badge

          "The judiciary take a very, very dim view of contempt of court."

          My experience begs to differ (sitting in a courtroom, observing). They may well take a dim view of it but punishment for bail-related offences (including skipping out) tend to amount to a slap on the wrist and "Don't do it again" unless they're _serious_ (as in, people got hurt/major property damage is done) and the offender is a recidivist.

          "Causing police overtime" and having said coppers standing outside 24*7 was a political stunt, not a practical one.

          In all liklihood Jules would get about a week in the cells (maybe a month) and then told not to darken the court's doorstep ever again on any other charges. As for the extradition matter, it's ongoing, he's now proven he's a flight risk and he won't get bail again.

      3. Jove Bronze badge

        Where next

        I'm sure Moscow would "welcome" him if no one else would have him.

        1. JetSetJim Silver badge
          Black Helicopters

          Re: Where next - Moscow?

          I wonder how fit he is after living in a cupboard for 6 years. It's 2 miles to the Russian embassy, so if he can get past the bobby on the door, then perhaps a 20 minute run...

          1. Jove Bronze badge

            Re: Where next - Moscow?

            The Saudis have a neat trick for get individuals out of Embassy premisses - he could go via DHL.

            1. Snorlax Silver badge

              Re: Where next - Moscow?

              @Jove:"The Saudis have a neat trick for get individuals out of Embassy premisses"

              Their method requires the person to be chopped into manageable pieces.

              This may or may not be a problem, depending on your view of Assange...

      4. Mage Silver badge
        Black Helicopters

        Extradition

        1) The Swedish are LESS likely to send someone to USA than UK are.

        2) The UK could have refused bail. They put him on bail / house arrest.

        3) The USA had ample time to extradite him or rendition before he went to embassy.

        4) No doubt the USA has questions it would like to ask him, however his actions more suggest an unwillingness to face due process in Sweden than fear of USA, or else why was he not in hiding BEFORE the Swedish allegations?

      5. Andrew Norton

        "What I don't understand is given Assange has had access to some heavyweight legal support, he didn't just deal with the Swedish charges."

        He did.

        In late 2010 he had 3 court hearings, at the STockholm district court, the Svea court of appeals and then the Swedish Supreme Court. this was after the arrest warrant was issued, but before he turned himself in to UK police (so october-december 2010).

        He got some of the charges dismissed, and some downgraded at the appeals court, but that was it. There's a lot to this case most people don't get, because they don't read swedish, and too many accept Assange's claims (and the claims on his website) as somewhat truthful. I mean people still talk about 'hillary wanting to dronestrike him', despite it being a complete invention by him, without anything to back it, then her being asked about it and saying I don't remember it, and making a joke of it, which his supporters took as confirmation. I mean you gotta be some kind of incompetent moron to even think of an idea like that, and then completely ignorant of air security in capital cities (which Clinton is not) to even think it's possible.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          Conspiracy theories

          He did.

          In late 2010 he had 3 court hearings, at the STockholm district court, the Svea court of appeals and then the Swedish Supreme Court. this was after the arrest warrant was issued, but before he turned himself in to UK police (so october-december 2010).

          That's roughly my recollection, although not the details of what happened at those hearings. But after those (or during) was when he decided to leave Sweden and come to the UK. If innocent, he should have remained in Sweden to clear his name. But it's also where knowledge of Swedish criminal procedures might confuse things. So why the need for further police interviews, if charges have already been presented to the Swedish courts and appealed. I'm assuming that's around the difference between having evidence to charge vs evidence to prosecute.

          Like you say, the rest has been a lot of mudslinging and conspiracy theories. There's the US stuff, but also supporters stating that accusations of sex offences are SOP in character assassinations. Which can be true, but also why people in sensitive positions are advised to keep it in their trousers and behave like gentlemen... Which by most standards, Assange didn't. So will remain a suspected sex offender until he faces the music and is found innocent.

          1. Andrew Norton

            Re: Conspiracy theories

            no, he left first, the day before he was to be interviewed (and where his lawyer had been told he'd probably be arrested, hence his flight to the UK, the only country he could enter without a visa and stay in for more than the 24 days left on his schengen visa) which was September 27.

            The first hearing at the stockholm court was 18 november 2010.

            The Svea court of appeal hearing was 24 november 2010

            They appealed to the Swedish Supreme Court, their application was denied (nothing new, novel, unusual, etc)

            the EAW was issued 26 november 2010.

            SOCA certified the EAW on december 6, and on the 7th Assange handed himself in.

            " But it's also where knowledge of Swedish criminal procedures might confuse things. So why the need for further police interviews, if charges have already been presented to the Swedish courts and appealed. I'm assuming that's around the difference between having evidence to charge vs evidence to prosecute."

            The Swedish legal system isn't like the UK/Us one, not exactly.

            What was presented was in some ways similar to what the US would call an indictment, although my understanding is that there is the ability for the defense to have some exculpatory input. However, fleeing the country the night before a scheduled interview, then refusing to return (that's what happened through october 2010) does put the preponderance of evidence squarely in the area of 'feeling guilty and avoiding arrest'. Especially when, in August, he applied for a work/residence permit, and issued a press release saying he was moving there because they have a great and fair justice system, a free and open press, and they don't extradite to the US for political crimes (famously, Sweden refused to extradite the only CIA officer to defect to the USSR, and just to amp the US pressure up a bit, the President at the time was VP when the defection happened, and was a former head of the CIA - it was personal for Bush Snr)

            Anyway, the format of Swedish law and policing is that there has to be a final interview first, and then following that interview is the arrest and charging, with appearing at court soon after. They needed the interview to then do the arrest and charging. By comparison, under the UK system, he'd have been arrested on suspicion of the charge for the first interview, and charged and bailed to appear pending further investigations. This was pointed out to him and his team by the High court Judge who kept trying to conflate the UK and Swedish terms for 'charged', by saying 'but he hasn't been charged' using the Swedish literal to imply failure to reach the UK standard.

            As for it being a false claim, it's unlikely. It fits with what I've heard of him from those who've worked with him. His responses are also not the kind typical of an innocent man, especially with the resources and knowledge he had to hand. his arguments against the charges are also bizarre in their terrible fabrication. Such as claiming the women dropped the charges, when in fact when the original prosecutor dropped it, they hired a lawyer to appeal that. And so on.

            They've even started pointing to the high court stipulations to try and prove their narrative and re-write facts, seems they're oblivious to the fact that barristers will agree to stipulations that have little relevance to the elements of the case even if they're not wholely true, because 'its not worth arguing over that'.

        2. Jove Bronze badge

          Hillary wanting to dronestrike him

          How can you use her as a reference? Even Democrats don't take Hillary at her word

          1. Orv Silver badge

            Re: Hillary wanting to dronestrike him

            You don't have to believe Hillary to think that a drone strike on an embassy in a major city is a ridiculous idea. Besides, if it were true someone else would have leaked it by now, given how badly the current administration wants her to look bad.

    3. DougS Silver badge

      I agree that having someone releasing documents to shed some light on dirty dealings is a good thing, but only if it is done when free from an agenda. Maybe Wikileaks was free from agenda at first, but that ship sailed years ago.

    4. Jove Bronze badge

      Impact on Diplomatic Role

      I am wondering how is latest actions will affect his current status; I am sure that Ecuador has a Code of Conduct for those it assigns a Diplomatic role - including bringing the nation's reputation into disrepute or similar. This may be all Ecuador need to make him "Persona non grata". The UK rejected his Diplomatic Status so he is more than likely to be arrested once outside the confines of the flat.

  5. Flashfox

    Suing Ecuador ???? What a joke!

    He is suing Ecuador????? He doesn't like the T&Cs? Then he should just leave the embassy or the Ecuadorans should just kick him out.

    This is simply cowardice as he doesn't want to face justice. Is he afraid that the Americans will make him disappear like the Saudis did with the reporter in Turkey? . Assange knew very well what he was getting into and to expect "eternal freedom" was just plain dumb! As the saying goes "Live by fire and die by fire".

    1. Saruman the White

      Re: Suing Ecuador ???? What a joke!

      I think that what is more to the point is that the UK Human Rights Act does not apply inside the Ecuadorian Embassy (the Embassy is diplomatically considered a part of Ecuador), so Julian's court action will probably be tossed out PDQ. However it is likely to annoy the Ecuadorian government enough that, shortly after the case is tossed out of court, Julian will be tossed out the front door. Probably after giving the plods a heads-up so they can organise a "taxi" for Julian to nearest nick.

      1. katrinab Silver badge

        Re: Suing Ecuador ???? What a joke!

        I thought he was suing in an Equadorian court for breach of Equadorian human rights?

    2. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: Suing Ecuador ???? What a joke!

      He doesn't like the T&Cs?

      Cue up someone suing Wikileaks because they don't like the T&C's.

  6. Michael Hoffmann
    Facepalm

    Is the apt saying here...

    ... "don't shit in your bed"?

    1. DougS Silver badge

      Re: Is the apt saying here...

      Judging from Eucador's complaints about his lack of personal hygiene and lack of proper care for his cat, maybe he already was.

  7. Big Al 23

    Time to wake up and smell the koffee

    Assange doesn't seem to understand that the embassy has protected him from prosecution for his crimes and that he's been a very unsavory "guest". Hopefully Assange a fugitive from justice will soon have a lot more to complain about when he is evicted.

  8. Woza
    Headmaster

    "steps foot"

    No. Just no.

    The phrase is "sets foot", shortened from "sets [his/her] foot". Alternatively, "takes a step".

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    See you in court?

    Presumably his case is unlikely to be taken very seriously when the “victim” inevitably refuses to attend the hearing.

    What next? Take himself to court for instigating this arbitrary detention?

    I worry for him (maybe worry is the wrong word) that eventually Ecuador may decide to punish him for wasting the court’s (and everyone else’s) time. Unlike the Swedish and British legal systems he is currently dodging, I suspect the Ecuadorean one may be rather less courteous.

  10. MrMerrymaker

    So he DOES respect the law!

    Oh, he's suing!

    And here's me thinking fleeing bail, and hiding out in an embassy to escape the law, meant he didn't respect it.

    ... What do you mean, 'he's making a mockery of the law by suing his hosts'?

    Ah well. As long as he's required to attend court in person to give evidence.

    1. lglethal Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: So he DOES respect the law!

      It should be funny. The court says that he has to be in there person, or give testimony over video link. Oh look, his internet access is blocked and he's holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London. Well sorry, thats cased dismissed right there...

      1. Scunner

        Re: So he DOES respect the law!

        By default UK courts expect witnesses to give evidence in person, and only offer the use of video links under extreme circumstances - e.g. witness identity needs to be protected, or where a witness is considered too vulnerable and/or traumatised to give evidence in front of an open court. In this case the reason for wanting a video link would be that the witness is on the run from UK authorities for bail jumping, and wants to give video evidence so they can avoid risk of capture. I don't think any judge is going to grant permission for that, so this legal action will likely fizzle out fairly quickly.

  11. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

    The whole rationale for Assange's hiding is, err, problematic.

    The argument is that the Swedish allegations are all false, and once Assange talks to the Swedish police there will be no issue, since it was all just a misunderstanding/stitch-up which has been resolved in the interim, etc. But Assange is afraid of going to Sweden because the Swedes will hand him over to the USA.

    But anyone with half a clue knows that probably the least restrictive extradition treaty is not the Sweden/USA one, but the UK/USA one which can be summarized as being met by a request written on a cocktail napkin by an intern in any prosecutor's office.

    So if the fear is extradition to the USA, the best move would have been to answer the arrest warrant and go to Sweden. The worst move was to fight extradition *in the UK*, because if there was a plan to extradite him to the USA, HMG would be fully complicit... the most they'd ask is for a "no death penalty" undertaking, unless that would annoy that nice Mr Trump, in which case they'd avoid even that request.

    1. FrankAlphaXII Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      I've been saying that exact same thing since the whole fiasco started.

      It just shows how much our "friend" here knows about geopolitics. Sweden isn't a NATO member. The Swedes used to try to get radar locks on the SR-71 back in the 80's and were successful a number of times when they got the SAAB JA-37. The UK is and has been since the beginning, they're also one of the stronger members of the Alliance which has a definite interest in keeping the US happy. Sweden also has a fairly tough extradition treaty with the US, and I doubt they'd extradite someone over what can be considered a Political crime or allow an extraordinary rendition on their territory.

      The UK has a very loose extradition treaty with the US, where basically if Uncle Sam wants your ass they're going to get you from the UK in all but a very few and long fought cases. And I strongly doubt that there would be much, if any, resistance from the Security Service or whatever you call Special Branch nowadays to the CIA yanking someone off the street.

      And really, even if the US decided to say fuck it and sent somebody to kill him, they'd do it, embassy or not. The Special Collection Service and/or the artist formerly known as US Army Intelligence Support Activity have quite likely been inside the embassy he lives in while he's been living there. They're very good at it. Ecuador isn't a huge target, but they do have a number of human and drug trafficking routes which do warrant some attention. Simply put, If they wanted him dead, he would be but he's not that important, however much he thinks he is.

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      "But anyone with half a clue knows that probably the least restrictive extradition treaty is not the Sweden/USA one"

      With a European Arrest Warrant in place the UK couldn't have extradited him to the US anyway. He'd have had to be sent to Sweden. If he'd succeeded in appealing the warrant here then he would have been at risk had the US applied for extradition. It's a moot point whether the then US administration would have bothered with him. The US administration now seems to want to get their little hands on him.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      The charges he will face in the USA are in a section of 18 USC with the maximum penalty is death just like his charges decades ago. The UK will not extradite if the section of law has the death penalty but Sweden will if the specific sub-charge doesn’t or if the other country pinky swears they won’t execute. If he gets handed to the USA, he is looking at 18 years in Leavenworth for each charge.

      1. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

        "The UK will not extradite if the section of law has the death penalty"...

        ... unless they decide they don't want to upset Trump, in which case...

        Yes, I know the situation with Kotey and Elsheikh is a "mutual legal assistance" issue, not fully an extradition, but make no mistake, Javid is a scumbag on a par with May ("out of ECHR!") when it comes to human rights. If the UK declines to follow long-established policy for no reason other that to curry favor with a foreign power, no-one should seriously expect the UK government to provide any real support to people accused of capital crimes.

        1. Jove Bronze badge

          Lefty-character assassination

          ... if you can not argue based on evidence and real-world realities, go for the mud-slinging instead.

        2. DavCrav Silver badge

          "Yes, I know the situation with Kotey and Elsheikh is a "mutual legal assistance" issue, not fully an extradition, but make no mistake, Javid is a scumbag on a par with May ("out of ECHR!") when it comes to human rights. If the UK declines to follow long-established policy for no reason other that to curry favor with a foreign power, no-one should seriously expect the UK government to provide any real support to people accused of capital crimes."

          Fine, but how well did that go down with the Judiciary? Not well, if I seem to recall. Extradition requests can be blocked by the Home Secretary, but can also be blocked by the Judiciary. And they will block any request without a guarantee of no death penalty.

  12. FrankAlphaXII Silver badge
    WTF?

    Assange is a prick, but this is insane. Something I learned when I was a kid is that you don't shit on your own block unless you're prepared for the consequences. Apparently our six toed alleged rapist never learned that very important lesson.

    If I were Ecuador's foreign ministry I'd have a few burly diplomatic security types toss him out the front door into the waiting arms of the filth.

    Given the constant state of anarchy and systemic attention deficit disorder that the Trump administration embodies, they would likely never even notice unless someone from the Met goes on Fox and Friends to talk about it, and I really don't think that CIA's SAD or JSOC are about to go do wetwork in the UK.

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge
      Joke

      and I really don't think that CIA's SAD or JSOC are about to go do wetwork in the UK.

      There's certainly no need for them to get their hands dirty. They could just contract it out to the Russians.

      1. Mage Silver badge
        Facepalm

        Re: contract it out to the Russians

        They don't seem very competent these days, The GU anyway (often misnamed GRU). The SVR are a lot smaller (GU boasts it has x6 as many field agents). Maybe they are more efficient, though I think they mostly do industrial* espionage rather than assassinations or abductions.

        [* Actually these days most State run espionage is for commercial rather than the Deighton / Le Carré style spy story. Ian Fleming's Bond was maybe Wish Fulfilment, hence the locations, drink and woman for desk jockey. His brother, Peter, might have been a real spy]

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        There's certainly no need for them to get their hands dirty. They could just contract it out to the Russians.

        Why do that? Get the Saudis to offer him asylum in their nearest embassy or consulate. Before he knows it Assange will be in kit form, and dissolving in a bucket of acid, and all of the Western world will be saying "Oh, yeah, right, he started a fight, slipped on a banana, fell down a toilet and inadvertently pulled the handle as he went in. We believe that, so carry on."

    2. ratfox Silver badge

      Apparently our six toed alleged rapist never learned that very important lesson

      I feel myself compelled to correct you: Assange does not have six toes, or six fingers. The rumor may have been started by a heavily modified picture of him that was sometimes used by the reg.

  13. Martin-73 Silver badge

    "Iron Mike Pence"

    Iron , as in 'iron hoof'?

    Yes I know, politically incorrect, but...yeesh

    1. FrankAlphaXII Silver badge

      Re: "Iron Mike Pence"

      Maybe in Pence's own mind, if he can string a coherent sentence together that someone didn't write for him and I have my doubts about that.

    2. Rich 11 Silver badge

      Re: "Iron Mike Pence"

      Yes I know, politically incorrect, but...yeesh

      Definitely the wrong track there. After all, we know that he himself believes that he can't be left alone in a room with any woman who isn't his wife.

  14. ClosedJar

    arrogance

    what an arrogance jerk. He should be grateful to Ecuador for putting up with him. He should be toss out to the curve.

    1. Rameses Niblick the Third Kerplunk Kerplunk Whoops Where's My Thribble? Silver badge

      Re: arrogance

      Tossed out to the curb, I think you'll find. Like you do with the rest of the trash.

      1. dak
        Headmaster

        Re: arrogance

        No, I think you'll actually find it is "tossed out to the kerb".

    2. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: arrogance

      They could always call-in the Saudis for a spot of house cleaning. :)

    3. RancidOrange

      Re: arrogance

      I would like to report you for abuse of the English language.

  15. Yes Me Silver badge
    Childcatcher

    Won't someone think of the cat?

    I feel much more sorry for the cat than for JA. It seems he isn't willing to empty its litter tray. I'm sorry, but when a cat agrees to live with you, emptying the litter tray is part of the deal, and you can't delegate it.

    1. TRT Silver badge
      1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Won't someone think of the cat?

        @TRT

        Did he agree to look after Mrs Slocombe's pussy?

        That really is an uncanny resemblance!

    2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Won't someone think of the cat?

      "when a cat agrees to live with you"

      Did the cat get any say in the matter?

    3. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: Won't someone think of the cat?

      I would not wast your time - the cat is clearly Putin's inside Dog.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I sense a revoking of citizenship coming soon. I'm guessing they can't kick him out till that happens. The current American government won't think twice about extraditing him, he should have walked when it was still Obama. Trump will go twitter crazy when they get him probably calling him a traitor which would make no sense but what tweets of his do?

    1. Velv Silver badge
      Boffin

      If the current US government want to extradite him, why haven’t they requested extradition from Ecuador? They’ve had extradition treaties since 1839

      1. Stork Bronze badge

        Because the Equadorean law does not allow extradition of its own citizens?

    2. Orv Silver badge

      Do you really think Donald "I Love Wikileaks" Trump is going to be interested in punishing him? The only way Trump won't let him walk is if a Democrat praises him.

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What exactly is his long term plan. Die in that embassy in another 40 years? What is he waiting for exactly?!

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge

      He's waiting for us to all bow down and worship him. Nothing less will do.

    2. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      In my opinion, he's waiting a couple more years for the 10 year statute of limitations on those 2 Swedish rape charges to run out. The Swedes can always re-request extradition, if he leaves early.

  18. Chris Miller

    My gaff, my rules

    Which bit are you not understanding, Jules? The door's over there, BTW.

  19. Nick Kew Silver badge

    Asylum

    This looks somewhat analogous to Political Asylum in the UK and other Western countries.

    Those who seek Political Asylum are disproportionately likely to be troublemakers, attention-seekers, or just plain crooks: after all, the silent majority don't incur the wrath even of pretty nasty governments, and persecution by more brutal organisations - like religious nuts - that aren't recognised governments doesn't qualify for asylum.

    And some of them do sue countries that have given them asylum (and in Blighty get Legal Aid for it).

    Compare some of the foreign criminals who argue Human Rights to avoid deportation, and one might argue Assange looks like a harmless also-ran by comparison.

    Maybe Ecuador will eventually do to him what Blighty eventually did to Abu Hamza after all those years of legal battle? Then we can see if anyone cares about him enough to do more than go through the motions of arresting him for skipping bail.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Asylum

      "Those who seek Political Asylum are disproportionately likely to be troublemakers, attention-seekers, or just plain crooks:"

      Evidence please!

      1. Nick Kew Silver badge

        Re: Asylum

        Evidence please!

        Assange is evidence.

        Before dismissing that, note a couple of things:

        • I didn't claim (nor would I) anything about all asylum seekers. Or even any weaker quantification beyond a comparison with the general population.
        • Evidence and proof are of course very different things.

        So yes, a sample of 1 can be evidence - and is easier to quote here than any more detailed or authoritative report containing stronger evidence. Just apply Bayes' Theorem using the sample we're discussing.

        1. Francis Boyle Silver badge

          Assange isn't evidence

          of anything other than the fact that Assange is a prick.

    2. Andrew Norton

      Re: Asylum

      Big flaw in your reasoning...

      He never claimed political asylum, he has stated over and over that he specifically didn't claim asylum, but instead some completely unheard of 'refugee' status, that he created himself.

      Another problem, is that he is an Australian citizen, claiming refugee status in Ecuador, but he can't decide if he's a refugee from Sweden (where he applied for residency and heavily praised their courts in announcing that) his home country of Australia, or the UK, a country he decided to travel to solely to avoid interview/arrest in Sweden.

      He 100% doesn't fit any of the accepted refugee categories, which is why no-one accepts his claims, and why it always makes me laugh when he says 'we've a 100% record for truth' when they have a 20% record on truth (and dropping all the time) - they have a 100% authenticity record with released documents, so far, but that's a very different thing.

  20. TRT Silver badge

    It's reassuring...

    Tidy your room, take better care of your cat, clean the bathroom after yourself, eat your greens, you're only allowed visitors your parents approve of. Or you don't get any internet.

    It's reassuring that a normal upbringing really does prepare one for adult life, even one in the public limelight and at the highest echelons of international diplomacy.

    Now take out those papers and that trash, or you don't get no spendi' cash. If you don't scrub that kitchen floor. You ain't gonna rock and roll no more. Just finish cleanin' up your room. Let's see that dust fly with that broom. Get all that garbage out of sight. Or you don't go out Friday night... ah.

    Yakety yak (Don't talk back)

    You just put on your coat and hat And walk yourself to the laundromat.

    And when you finish doin' that. Bring in the dog and put out the cat

    Don't you give me no dirty looks. Your father's hip; he knows what cooks

    Just tell your hoodlum friend outside. You ain't got time to take a ride

    Yakety yak (Don't talk back)

    1. dbtx Bronze badge

      from through the fog

      30-ish years ago some fuel station chain (Shell? I forget) was branding and selling oldies mixtapes on the cheap. And we listened to 'em. But now I'm thinking:

      You're feeling so weighed down

      Forget the losses and burn down

      Fall into city lights

      Nothing else is easy

      1. dbtx Bronze badge

        found it.

        Cruisin' Classics Vol. 6 must be the only one we had. Of course, 'oldies' just means 'that stuff they play mercilessly over the muzak system at Magic City Shopping Center' because that town is weird. You can't see it in the 11th photo here but I kid you not, that funeral home facing the lake has its sign lettering done up in PINK NEON.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Devious masterplan?

    Maybe he is planning:

    1. Create enough shit - literally, as it turns out - to be taken to task.

    2. Counter with enough vaguely plausible accusations to drum up a court case.

    3. Be taken to the Ecuadorian mainland for the hearings.

    4. Lose the court case.

    5. Walk off into the Ecuadorian crowd.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Devious masterplan?

      "Be taken to the Ecuadorian mainland for the hearings."

      That means transiting the UK. Are the Ecuadorans going to give him diplomatic protection to stop him being nabbed for bail jumping on the way? I doubt it.

      1. Ben Tasker Silver badge

        Re: Devious masterplan?

        > Are the Ecuadorans going to give him diplomatic protection to stop him being nabbed for bail jumping on the way?

        They already tried/discussed reportedly, and failed, because the UK rejected it.

        Remember, a country only *nominates* someone as a diplomat, the host country has to approve it. Funnily enough in Julian's case, that approval isn't likely to be forthcoming.

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Devious masterplan?

        The UK rejected is Diplomatic Status, so that is not an option.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Here we go again...

    Every time Julian Assange's name gets mentioned on here, there's an outpouring of ugliness. I really don't understand all the hate and personal insults that people throw in his direction, the guy is a publisher not a murderer. Maybe even a hero? The current state of affairs is government propaganda 101, it's an old trick to call someone a rapist/paedo/etc. to try to remove any public support that he may have previously had. Disappointingly, it seems to be working even among the educated commentards.

    The US were acting badly to put it bluntly, and (IMHO) revealing that information was of benefit to everyone. Whether you like Julian Assange personally or not, he actually did us all a favour here.

    The Swedish legal case had already been dropped until Uncle Sam leaned on the Swedes, and their law allows for a case to be resurrected in another city, which is what they did. They already found he had no case to answer, so why should he have to be investigated or tried for the same thing again? I am not a legal expert, but that wouldn't even be allowed in the UK or US, once they have decided that you broke no laws, or you're found not guilty, isn't that usually the end of the matter?

    Now the US have been pressuring the Ecuadoran government to make life even more unbearable for him. Confiscating his visitor's possessions and denying him visitors and legal council is completely out of order.

    There is no doubt that the US would grab him if he ever left the embassy, and who wants to end up in their Guantanamo Bay torture camp? Other than bail jumping, he broke no other laws AFAIK, and I think he has a pretty good case to be concerned and as good a reason as any for not turning up at UK court when he should have done.

    I sincerely hope he manages to sort this out, or escapes safely. Nobody deserves to end up being tortured by the US regardless of what they may have done (or not done in his case). Just how long is he supposed to suffer for this?

    *opens downvote umbrella*

    1. cosymart
      WTF?

      Re: Here we go again...

      No one is arguing that his WikiLeaks things are bad. Hmm, apart from a few governments. What we are all tending to agree with is that he is a complete and utter prat and given his fondness for lawyers you would have thought that someone in the legal profession would have advised him (kicked him up the arse!) that this situation is stupid.

    2. JimC Silver badge

      Re: Here we go again...

      Amazing how many ACs wave the #Idon'tbelieveher flag. Times have changed you know...

    3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Here we go again...

      "The current state of affairs is government propaganda 101, it's an old trick to call someone a rapist/paedo/etc."

      We all know what the charges are in Sweden, and even by their own standards, it's a mild[1] form of rape.

      If this was govt. propaganda, I would expect there to be much stronger charges. And anyway, what most people are against is his stupidity and self-aggrandisement. We all know what wikileak is (or used to be, it's hard to tell what their agenda is these days), but it looks like their biggest problem is Assange himself and the way he treats the people who help him. Biting the Hand That Feeds IT might make an amusing strap-line for El-Reg, but it's not an instruction on how to live your life. Maybe it's time the biter was bit? After all, look at the hollow promises made to Bradly/Chelsea Manning and other?

      [1]Yeah, I know, but how else to describe it?

    4. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: Here we go again...

      ... and These Snowflakes keep popping-up with their skewed views of the world.

    5. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: Here we go again...

      ... and These Snowflakes keep popping-up with their skewed views of the world.

      - just so that the Virtue Signallers will stop fiddling in their underpants long enough to register a down vote. :)

      Click away Snowflakes - that's all your lives will amount to.

  23. Rol Silver badge

    Complete buffoon or not...

    He has in his head the names of many people who risked their freedom to bring the world a more fuller story of what goes on behind their backs.

    For him to fall into a black bag is to also condemn those very people.

    In that light, he is honour bound to keep himself safe from American interrogators.

    And if that means he needs to look after his cat better, and tidy up after himself, then stop quibbling and do what's right Mr Assange.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Complete buffoon or not...

      "In that light, he is honour bound to keep himself safe from American interrogators."

      To date, there is no indication that the US has ever wanted him. There's been a bit of political rhetoric, but not a single legal move has been made yet.

      1. Rol Silver badge

        Re: Complete buffoon or not...

        Just because America isn't making noises, doesn't in the slightest suggest they have lost interest.

        But hold on, they have been making noises.

        Like dangling the prospect of Ecuador getting some American relief funds on the basis they cooperate more fully with America.

        I imagine a visit to a Saudi embassy seemed quite innocuous at the time.

      2. Jove Bronze badge

        Re: Complete buffoon or not...

        Sorry, but they already have the case from which they will display his bollocks.

  24. Franco Silver badge

    "The WikiLeaks supremo is fed up with being essentially held in near-solitary confinement in an Ecuadorian embassy broom cupboard in London, England."

    Simple solution there Jules, walk out the front door and face the music.

    Regardless of whatever good wikileaks has done, and Assange as a part of that, this has long since ceased to be about "the truth" and has become the Assange show. I don't wish harm on the guy, but I am sick to the back teeth of him claiming martyrdom for his own decision to hide in that embassy. Come out or shut the fuck up.

  25. Bibbit

    Sounds like the self-important sod is suffering.

    Good.

    Even being played by Cumberbatch does not stop one being a twat.

  26. Scorchio!!

    He's treating the Ecuadorians like gaolers, yet the funny thing is that they have given him sanctuary. Why is it that everyone in the world is wrong except for Julie?

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Something for the weekend...

    Why does he always make the news late Friday?

  28. Marketing Hack Silver badge
    WTF?

    In guess Julian wants to double down on his reputation for being self-indulgent

    You're supposedly afraid that if you get expelled from your current embassy nesting place, you will be extradited to the U.S. and spend the rest of your life in Club Fed. So what do you do? Naturally you sue the country who's government is sheltering you.

    Yes, some of the particulars of Ecuador's rules about visitors needing to give mobile device codes and such are a bit much, but to the point that you would really feel this intolerable and you have to sue them?

  29. Danny 2 Silver badge

    He can come and live at my flat

    The cat, I mean. I'll change his litter, buy him treats, and I even seem to have a visiting mouse he can play with.

  30. Velv Silver badge
    Terminator

    Maybe we should ask Ecuador to build a cathedral inside the embassy. I hear there’s some Russians who like visiting Cathedrals...

    1. Hopalong

      They might have an issue getting a 123 Meter spire in there.......

  31. Lee D Silver badge

    Data given to his organisation ends up being released unsanitised, putting people's lives at risk and identifying his sources. One source goes to jail for that, another ends up fleeing to Russia to escape.

    Court gives the man a chance to be free on bail, he skips it.

    Friends of his donate money to secure that bail, he skips on them, losing that money for them.

    Ecuador give him asylum (the only place really willing to), he abuses it for years and then tries to sue them.

    All I take away (even assuming that the Buzzfeed link with all the crap about his behaviour inside is just hyperbole) is that he's a twat who abuses trust.

    And yet, we're supposed to believe this guy is going to be sniped by American agents the second he shows his face?

    At one point, very early on, he could have had a message, a cause, a reason to back him. All he's done in the years since is drop other people in it, cause hassle for those who back him, and run from the law that isn't even really chasing him (our police ARE chasing him, but then they have a cast-iron admission of guilt for failing to abide by court bail, in that he's not abided by the court's bail conditions - they don't need to prove anything).

  32. spold Bronze badge

    There comes a point....

    When Ecuador just decides to move it's embassy to a new building and not tell him...

    (please take the cat - an unhappy pussy is always a problem)

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge

      Re: There comes a point....

      Why do that? All they need to do is shove him out the door. Or even invite the UK plod inside for a cup of tea and a quick arrest.

      1. Hopalong

        Re: There comes a point....

        Even better, arrange for a special edition of 'Hunted'. Chuck him out and have a couple of TV crews follow him has he tries to avoid the following -

        UK Police

        Swedish Police

        CIA/FBI/NSA

        And the most dangerous - a posse of cat lovers....

        1. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: There comes a point....

          Chuck him out and have a couple of TV crews follow him

          Speed up the footage and add a soundtrack of "Yakety Sax"

      2. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
        Joke

        Re: There comes a point....

        Or even invite the UK plod inside for a cup of tea and a quick arrest.

        And say bye-bye to our overtime? says PC Plod of the Yard

  33. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
    Facepalm

    UK can give him polical asylum

    and free board and lodgings, access to medical care, and plenty of space to exercise in the open air.

    At Wormwood Scrubs in London

  34. ronaldaustin

    I feel so sorry for him. I do have a team of Saudi gentleman who are eager just to meet with him in the embassy if he'd like.

  35. Valerion

    Ecuador could solve this in about 3 minutes

    Pull the fire alarm and make everyone, including Assange, evacuate the building. They could add some canned smoke for extra realism.

    1. Lee D Silver badge

      Re: Ecuador could solve this in about 3 minutes

      They really don't need to even do that (and he wouldn't evacuate anyway, would he?).

      Just phone the police and say "I invite you to come arrest Mr Assange at your earliest convenience".

      The ambassador wouldn't even need to leave their desk.

  36. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge

    Allo, Allo

    Remake of "Allo, Allo" - story moves from a café in occupied France during the Second World War to the present day Embassy of a South American country in a European capital city.

    "Mr Julian" - "A person of interest" to the "Police". A bit like the hapless British Airmen, never managing to escape

    "Frau Dick" - The Chief of Police. Walks with a limp, just like Herr Flick

    "PC Plod" - himself - patrols the perimeter of the Embassy

    "Rene" - "The Ambassador" - Keeps trying to evict "Mr Julian"

    "Michelle" - Pamela Anderson

    "Mimi" - Paris Hilton

    "Tiddles" - Mrs Slocombe's Pussy

  37. Frank Oz

    Oh the Humanity!!!!!

    You mean he's got to clean his toilet and look after his cat?

    Personally!!!!!

    Where do these Ecuadorans get off?

    I mean, the line has to be drawn somewhere!

  38. Ishtiaq

    He is a twat

    Just a reminder that when he skipped bail, he also shat on the friends that had put up the bail money for him. What sort of shit does that? I hope they throw the twat out. I also don't care how much to costs to keep him in his self caused "solitary". Suffer you self centred alleged rapist fucker.

    Cheers… Ishy

  39. Jove Bronze badge

    Update ...

    So the latest clarification is that he is suing both the Embassy and Ecuadorian Foreign Minster, in an Ecuadorian Court, to have the protocol over-turned on the basis that he was not consulted when the protocol was drawn up. Is that the full extent of the legal action?

    And the Foreign Minister's response:

    "... the Government will respond in an appropriate manner."

    1. Jove Bronze badge

      Re: Update ...

      Fri 2018-10-26:

      "In a written response to queries from Ecuador, the UK explained that it had not received any extradition request, and said Assange’s jail time in the UK for violating bail terms by seeking refuge in the embassy would not exceed six months, Iñigo Salvador, who represents the Ecuadorean government in court proceedings, told reporters. "

      - Reuters

  40. Alan Brown Silver badge

    "Being held in"

    Saint Jules the Asshat isn't being held in anything. He's hiding indoors and free to go for a walk at any time. In fact his hosts would like him to do so.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019