Assange: Is CPS taking orders from elsewhere?

What is the Crown Prosecution Service up to?  Irrespective of the rights or wrongs of the WikiLeaks release of US diplomatic cables, the CPS seems to be playing politics to deny Julian Assange his liberty without good reason.

Earlier this week Gareth Julian, head of extradition at the CPS, appealed against the decision to grant bail to Assange, in an attempt to keep him in custody pending the decision of whether or not to extradite him to Sweden to answer charges of sexual offences.  It was widely believed and reported in the media – without contradiction by the CPS – that Swedish prosecutors has opposed bail for Assange.

However the Swedes have gone on the record today (to Tim Marshall at Sky News) to state clearly they had no view about bail and had not made any such request of the British authorities. The CPS is not denying what the Swedes are saying. So why did the CPS oppose bail, in a case in which it was representing Sweden, when Sweden had no problem with Assange having his liberty until the extradition hearing?

Is it delving into the realms of conspiracy theory to suggest the CPS is taking instructions from elsewhere, such as the US government or the British government in an attempt to neuter Assange as the release of US cables continues?  Is it because the Americans want Assange in custody until they can make a move to have him shipped to Washington, where some of the more hysterical talking heads describe him as a terrorist?

What is clear is that Gareth Julian should be asked to explain why he opposed bail and who was instructing him to do so.  This has implications for the justice system in the UK and the matter should be completely transparent.

2 Responses to “Assange: Is CPS taking orders from elsewhere?”


  1. 1 Richard Tebboth 16/12/2010 at 11:50 am

    Just so long as he will not be subjected to ‘Extraordinary Rendition’

  2. 2 Agincourt 16/12/2010 at 12:22 pm

    Interesting that the ill-begotten Coalition had the chance recently to opt-out of the EU’s latest extradition plans, but instead agreed to opt-in. Seems like the UK government wanted to cover its back & have the excuse that it must obey the EU’s (evil) law on internal extradition, rather than have to face more pressures from the US – this time concerning Julain Assange. This could have significant legal bearings on the so-far unresolved case involving alleged Asperger’s sufferer Gary Mackinnon, & the US’s attempts to get him extradited to the USA for alleged computer hacking offenses. Any decision regarding Assange might therefore create legal precedents that could affect the Mackinnon case. Is this what is causing the crown prosecutor to act in this regretable way?


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive