Assange Case 89

I am trying to write a report of what I saw in Westminster Magistrate’s Court today, but my hands keep shaking with rage, frustration and sadness to the point I can’t type, and my heart keeps going into atrial fibrillation. I have got myself a cheese sandwich and bottle of Irn Bru and still hope to finish it this evening.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

89 thoughts on “Assange Case

1 2 3
  • Mary Leslie

    If not you, then who? It is good that someone is speaking about what is happening. Thanks.


      In reply to the canary article, from John Pilger on twitter (1 hour ago)
      John Pilger @johnpilger 1h
      I was in court today to watch magistrate Vanessa Baraitser’s studied contempt for law and justice, as she denied Julian #Assange time to prepare his defence against America’s oafish, cowboy case to extradite him. An enfeebled Julian struggled to expose her. Stand with him please.

  • Terry Jones

    You will have noted that he was non-compis mentis and was very confused. He has apparently lost weight and is being kept in the medical wing of the prison.

    His confusion would indicate some form of medical treatment which would not, given the effects, involve an anti-depressant. The older tricyclic antidepressants which can sometimes have such effects require a special diet which would is unlikely to be available in prison. Indeed it would seem a lot of effort when there are easier options available.

    The likellihood is that he has been diagnosed with a form of manic depression/psychosis and has been cabbaged with an anti-psychotic. This would not be olanzipine given that it makes patients put on weight. The likelihood therefore is that he was prescribed quiteapine.

    I must express my lack of surprise that there should be such an outcome given that fact that government does resort to such methods to conceal complaints of their harassment or illegal activities..I had notified organisations like wikileaks who took no notice 2 years ago and am somewhat perplexed that they should think the law applies in this instance.

    Whatever Julian Assange is accused of, he is entitled to a fair trial and this does not come across well.

    • Cynicus

      “ October 21, 2019 at 21:23
      You will have noted that he was non-compis (SIC) mentis and was very confused.”
      Were you on court?

      Or do you rely on MSM reports?

      Presumably the “you” refers to CM who, like John Pilger and Tracy Keeling of The Canary may have “noted “ something other. We will soon find out.

    • Ingwe

      See DebO’Nair’s post at 21:18. You get the truth of what happened in the court today, not Guardian crap.

    • Chris Stevens

      Effects of quetiapine depend on dose. It is quite possible to be sleepy in the morning and high-functioning in the afternoon. Olanzipiine can cause weight gain which can be ameliorated by a low-calorie diet. I speak from experience. This is all speculation anyway.

  • Carlos Ramírez

    It used to be the white man’s burden to give laws and courts to the empire.
    Now we are in the strange situation of asking who’s burden it is to fix the unjust Kangaroo courts of England.
    Even then, i suspect the kangaroos would be more ethical: Maybe Julian can be exchanged by a dozen ‘roos from his native land so that they can stomp some common law sense into mis-judge Vanessa Baraitser

  • Alyson

    For the first time, today, Amnesty International mentioned Assange. It would be helpful if they could raise the profile of his case, and stop prevaricating

  • James Cook

    The idea/practice that we are governed by the rule of just laws, applied equally, is no longer viable if the empire is to survive.

    The “law” today is what the powerful of the empire says it is ……and tomorrow, if required, it will be different.

    Julian is being made an example of; perhaps he should consider embracing the role of a martyr? It would seem to be the only option the empire will currently allow?

  • Colin Goodayle

    Thanks Craig. Never good to see someone close being treated as badly as Julian Assange. His so called colleagues in journalism should be ashamed of their silence.

    • ReM

      I don’t know how any politician, media person or public figure can be respected or even taken seriously after failing to object to what’s happening to Julian Assange. Utterly obscene!

  • John Neal Spangler

    Can you dictate it to someone? Call someone by phone, preferably non-UK. Us foreigners who have read Orwell’s 1984 are not shocked by Airstrip One doing the bidding of the Oceania oligarchs. You are too close to the front, you lack an objective view of the situation.

  • Ros Thorpe

    Oh no. Try to calm your nerves and keep alive. Many of us have our last hopes invested in you. Believe in yourself and your cause. We do

  • Ingwe

    Mr Murray, don’t make yourself ill over this.
    The smug judiciary and those that don’t follow the precepts of natural justice will eventually face the wrath of the oppressed. Even the Nazi judges were eventually strung up. The State’s reaction to Mr Assange is a sign of its weakness. Many will suffer in the decay but end, it will.

  • james

    thanks craig.. you have covered this topic real well and i look forward to what you have to say.. the whole dog and pony show is very disturbing..

  • Tsar Nicholas

    Not on BBC. One of the independent media outlets covering this is Gordon Dimmack on Youtube. Thanks to him and thanks to you Craig.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Assange’s failure to make sure that the names in the Afghan File were redacted for publication in The Guardian et al, were just making him pay for the failure of others, resulting in the murders of Gareth Williams, Gudrun Loftus, and Steve Rawllings.

    When will we see media owners,editors and advisors in the box too for their crimes?

  • Gary

    The BBC VERY briefly said that Assange was refused a hearing? Blink and you’d miss their coverage. I tried the BBC website and had to search for it to get this gem:


    10:00 Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange is due to appear for an extradition case management hearing at Westminster Magistrates’ Court.

    Nineteen words (excl title) Bias can be as much about what ISN’T said…

  • glenn_uk

    The editor of the NYT or the Guardian could be put through this on precisely the same grounds.

    It is quite astonishing that the press are not up in arms about it, but instead regurgitate the lies about Assange causing problems at the Embassy and alleged crimes against two groupies from Sweden. The government, our press and the legal system are quite shameless, it would appear. We have little else to protect us against the excesses of state power.

    The US press is the only industry specifically mentioned in their constitution as having protection from this sort of abuse by the state, AFAIK only the Majority Report ( and Mike Malloy have been consistently outspoken against Assange’s treatment. Nothing at all in the UK (to the best of my knowledge), not even the Eye.

  • SayLess

    The judge was adamant to not move the hearing date of 20th Feb. I’m curious as to why not. I would have expected that any judge would encourage each team to take the time they need in order to adequately prepare their cases.

    Assange did seem to have difficulty getting words out when first beginning to speak. When he spoke about the inequity of the situation, though, he spoke reasonably clearly, albiet weakly. He has quite markedly deteriorated physically and mentally over the last 6 months, consistent with the findings of Nils Melzer.

    The judge explained the cornerstone for allowing the extradition case, which is that the she accepts the alleged US offences are crimes in the UK. Is it a crime in the UK for a non-UK, non-US journalist (who happens to be in the UK) to help a UK military source access and transmit classified UK documents for the purpose of furnishing the public with unquestionable evidence of US abuse of power, corruption, and potential war crimes?

    • Macky

      The refusal to grant the requested 3 month delay is probably out of fear that a Corbyn government might be in power then, and just might refuse the extradition.

    • German Hopeless

      Perhaps ‘they’ know already that his condition will detoriate to the worst (due to ‘their’ working) and don’t want him to die before he is extradited. Yes it’s cynical.

  • SayLess

    Thought experiment:
    image if Rachael Maddow obtained classified UK documents from a UK serviceperson which contained evidence of UK corruption and war crimes.
    Imagine she published the evidence. Would the UK seek her extradition?
    Would Pompeo approve UK’s request?
    Would the US detain Maddow in prison pending the extradition hearing?
    If the hearing decided Maddow should be extradited to UK, would Trump allow her to actually be sent to UK to face UK justice?

    • Tom Welsh

      or if Rachael Maddow obtained classified Russian documents from a Russian serviceperson.

      (Which, in fact, is precisely what unnamed British spooks did – from Sergei Skripal).

  • Gary

    Since my last comment, 2310hrs, the BBC have actually now decided to do a small article (more than the 19 words they had on the ‘upcoming hearing’ from this morning)

    They put the article on at about 2330hrs. Only 13 hours after his hearing? Break neck speed for one of their hacks then! There’s not much to it but still more than was on their TV news slot.

    What’s happening to Mr Assange is an affront to democracy and to proper journalism as well as free speech. The BBC are compounding this with their utter failure to report properly. This is complicity…

    • Tom Welsh

      “What’s happening to Mr Assange is an affront to democracy and to proper journalism as well as free speech”.

      Worse, it demonstrates that there is no rule of law in the UK. Might is right, and the law courts are compliant.

  • Karl Pomeroy

    I am 100% pro-Assange and want him freed. Yet it is not clear to me that delaying his February extradition hearing would have been good for his case. For example, if Trump emphasizes that Assange could face the death penalty if brought to the US, the British court might deny extradition, since it would then be illegal under British law. Once Assange is past the extradition threat, he might be freed shortly after. Thus, I don’t quite see why his lawyers wanted to delay the February hearing and prolong his stay at Belmarsh. They obviously have a darker view of Trump than I do.

  • Antiwar7

    Well, you know those arseholes fight to (the other’s) death, and have no moral compunctions whatever.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.