cont'd ...

Fester,

Here's a link on the subject of Pell:

http://theconversation.com/how-george-pell-won-in-the-high-court-on-a-legal-technicality-133156

"In contrast the complainant has been believed by a jury,
by a majority judgement and by a substantial body of
public opinion."

Foxy,

The technicality in Pell's case was that there was reasonable doubt about his guilt: I think it comes up quite a bit with not guilty verdicts. A friend of my mother's was one of Pell's parishioners many years ago and could not stand the fellow. I'm sure some people would see Pell rot in prison because they didn't like him. I'd be happy to see Jules rot in prison because I think he is revolting, but that wouldn't be justice. Nor would it be justice to withdraw all charges against Jules based on the pleas of his fans. To quote one commentator on Pell's case:

"Public opinion about the High Court’s decision and Cardinal Pell’s legacy in the church more broadly is unlikely to reach anything like the unanimity of the seven High Court judges. Viewed in this context, perhaps the most important feature of the case is its demonstration of the importance of courts that are independent and apolitical."

https://www.gnl.com.au/articles/2020/may/george-pell-case/

Jules needs to stop cowering in the shadows, George up and face justice. He's spent over ten years cowering. Manning only served seven years. Why would Jules get longer?

Foxy

And a happy new year to you too!

Fester

Assange did not hide to avoid rape charges. He made many offers to testify in London or via video link. The Swedish authorities weren’t interested. Their only aim was to entice him to Sweden where they could then extradite him to the US.

Assange is no coward. He sought political asylum to avoid extradition where he knew life imprisonment in brutal and unsurvivable conditions would await him.

Assange did not 'burn his bridges' with his Ecuadorian hosts. There was a change of government in Ecuador and the new government was amenable to economic inducement and as such betrayed Assange to the US.

The DNC emails were not hacked ... by the Russians or by anyone else. They were leaked by an insider.

Assange did not collude with the Russian government. He published their documents and revealed their secrets too.

Assange assiduously redacted the vast majority of the documents he published. Nobody has ever been harmed as a result of WikiLeaks publications.

The Daily Mail is a rightwing tabloid of dubious credibility. If this is your go-to source, it’s little wonder you’re so poorly informed.

Bronwyn,

We see things and make our own interpretations. The Swedish prosecutors had enough evidence for a trial, so there was little point in conducting further interviews.

<The DNC emails were not hacked ... by the Russians or by anyone else. They were leaked by an insider.>

That isn't the generally accepted view, and wasn't the view of investigators nor the judge who dismissed a subsequent lawsuit.

<Assange is no coward. He sought political asylum to avoid extradition where he knew life imprisonment in brutal and unsurvivable conditions would await him.>

Given what happened to Chelsea Manning I would think that very unlikely. Chelsea received a Presidential pardon. She didn't have her 35 year sentence commuted to gender reassignment surgery. Jules' conduct strikes me as paranoid and cowardly.

As with Pell, people will have a range of views about Jules' guilt. My contention is that the fairest way to determine guilt is via a judicial process. BTW, I like Daily Mail articles because they usually have comments which I enjoy reading. I believe it might be another year before Jules' appeal against extradition is heard. That will make it over eleven years of self-imposed incarceration. What a silly chump!

You just don't get it, Fester, Assange is fighting for his life. The US ruling and intelligence establishment will not rest until he is made to pay the ultimate price for having had the audacity and the nerve to reveal the depths of their corruption and the extent of their war crimes. The hatred they have for him and their determination to hold him up as an example to anyone else thinking to do the same runs much deeper than it did for Manning. The two sentences will not be at all comparable. But like Foxy, I will now admit that I must agree to disagree with you on this issue. I cannot compete with the Daily Mail. Its smear campaign has blinded you to reason.

Bronwyn,

Different interpretations, that is all. I find the contrast between Pell and Assange interesting. Pell didn't hide from justice. He wasn't dragged kicking and screaming. We didn't get a constant stream of reports of his deteriorating health and concerns that he would be tortured and murdered were he to face justice. There was also no hate campaign against Pell's alleged victims. Pell faced trial when he was widely believed to be trying to hide abuses by the Catholic clergy. Assange would face trial when he is widely regarded as exposing injustice. Despite all the hatred, Pell got a fair judicial process, so why wouldn't Assange?

I get the impression that Jules is a bit of a conspiracy nutter. As to whether he is a pathetic coward, I have gotten that impression from his conduct. He keeps saying that he has the courage to face justice, so why doesn't he?