>> he is just using the American thing as a smoke screen,
Perhaps.
However, if the US just said that they had no intention of issuing a warrant then the whole argument would go away.
Since the US has *not* said that, my superstitious mind says that they have every intention of issuing a warrant at some point, presumably when they think it will be most likely to succeed with the minimum of effort.
And for some reason they must think that an extradition warrant would be unsuccessful and/or counter productive at this time and more likely to be viable in the future.
Which is entirely within their rights, but it does make it unlikely that Assange is just using it as a smokescreen.
Also, I assume that he has breached bail conditions and is liable to be arrested in the UK under that warrant also?
Its all a screw up, but nonetheless in the middle is a man accused of some kind of sexual crime and that needs to be addressed. It doesn't sound a particularly serious* offence, though it does make hims sound pretty unpleasant.
I am not sure that his presence is required for a trial, but presumably the Swedish think it is essential.
*of course all sexual crimes are serious, but you know what I mean.
|
