The WikiLeaks founder begins the second and last day of his extradition hearing over allegations of rape and sexual assault in Sweden
I challenge you Marianne Ny, come to London, come on Friday, subject yourself to the cross-examination of Geoffrey Robertson
Stephens said Ny had been ready to feed the media with stories but not to speak for herself in court.
Standing outside the court Assange made a similar point about the prosecutor's absence from the hearing. He said:
It's been a long day. What we have seen is process abuse after process abuse being revealed hour after hour.
What we have not seen yet is the Swedish prosecutor at these proceedings.
He also asked "Where is the equality?" and said the "unlimited budget of Sweden and the UK" had been on display in the case to extradite him.
• The hearing has over-run and will resume on Friday at 10.30am.
• Julian Assange's Swedish lawyer, Björn Hurtig, admitted he had made a mistake when he said it was five weeks before Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny said she wanted to interview the WikiLeaks founder. He said texts he discovered yesterday showed it was three.
• Hurtig accused prosecutors of leaking details of the case to the media, specifically telling a Swedish newspaper Assange was suspected of rape.
• Sven-Erik Alhem, a retired Swedish prosecutor, said Ny should have allowed Assange to give his version of events before issuing an arrest warrant. He also said she should not have confirmed his name when it was put to her by the media.
• Clare Montgomery QC, representing the Swedish prosecutor, said Assange must have been aware of the intention to interview him. Alhem said Ny was not wrong to issue a European arrest warrant, but he would have sought to interview him in the UK first.
• Hurtig said Assange had been difficult to contact in mid to late September as he had gone into hiding, following what were described as "death threats" from some US politicians.
Robertson: Ny suggested I'viewing JA on 28 sept - 4 weeks after took over case, 5 1/2 weeks after alleged offences
estheraddley
Under cross-examination from Robertson, Hurtig has described his error on the date of the Swedish prosecutor's request as "embarrassing". He said he had made sure to mention it so his evidence was correct.
BH admits made error in statement, to JA's favour, that suggested Ny had not tried to I'view JA B4 left sweden on 27/9/10
estheraddley
He tells the court that he found the texts from Ny yesterday and is correcting the record today. He says he is busy and has many clients. (He has also said it is possible there were texts between him and Ny he can't remember.)
Montgomery still Xexamining: why cdnt u reach JA? Did u text him? leave a message? Hurtig: I assume so, don't recall
estheraddley
Hurtig says that it is important to bear in mind that Assange was diffcult to get hold of in mid to late September (see 2.50pm).
Hurtig says he thought carefully about coming to the Belmarsh hearing because of the confidential nature of this material.
BH: thanks to 'death threats' fm US politicians JA was 'worried' (mid sept) 'and he could be difficult to get hold of'
estheraddley
Assange's lawyer is also disputing the date when he was told by Ny of her intention to prosecute.
Here are the main points:
• Alhem said he had no interest in the case's outcome, just that Swedish justice was done and seen to be done.
• He said Marianne Ny, the Swedish prosecutor, should not have confirmed Assange's name when the media put it to her.
• He said Assange had not had the opportunity to put forward his side of the case before the arrest warrant was issued.
• Clare Montgomery QC, representing the Swedish prosecution, said Alhem only knew what he had been told by Assange's lawyers and took him through Ny's account of her attempts to interview Assange.
• He said based on his understanding of the case it was not wrong to issue a European arrest warrant against Assange, but he would have attempted to interview him in the UK first.
Hurtig is told he can't speak to anyone during the break.
GR taking Hurtig through sheaf of docs relating to Svea appeal court. Submissions and judgement all in writing #assange
estheraddley
He is also questioned on the possibilty of public trials for rape defendents in Sweden. He says he acted for very high profile rape defendent in 2004-05 with much media attention. He says he asked for a public trial but was denied.
In answer to a further question, he says there is no way he can protect his client from prejudical media coverage.
He tells the judge he is tired because he has been up since 4am but wishes to continue because he is enjoying the atmosphere.
Jones, Assange's junior counsel, will now return to questioning Alhem.
Q: given her statement it was reasonable for Ms Ny to issue EAW? A. Certainly. Q and lawful? A quite right. No doubt about that
estheraddley
Alhem though adds that he would have tried harder to interview Assange in the UK (see also 12pm).
He also says he would have interviewed Assange in the UK with a Swedish police officer present.
Earlier Alhem had said he had no interest in the outcome of the case. Only that "justice be done and be seen to be done". He said he cannot be "bought for money" – a response to some critics in Sweden.
Some legal experts think unlikely we'll get judgement 2day, #assange team say they don't know. Crown said yest unlikely
estheraddley
You can follow all her tweets from Belmarsh at @estheraddley
Assange and his legal team have arrived at Belmarsh magistrates' court, and so too have his supporters. The hearing is scheduled to begin at 10.30am.
Yesterday, the defence and prosecuting QCs made their opening arguments. Assange's QC, Geoffrey Robertson, said his client would not get a fair trial in Sweden and called on a witness, retired Swedish judge Brita Sundberg-Weitman, who said the Swedish prosecutor had "a rather biased view against men in the treatment of of sexual offence cases".
Clare Montgomery QC, representing the Swedish prosecutor, said the allegations against Assange would be offences under English law and she should be extradited. She also said the Swedish prosecutor intends to prosecute. A key defence argument, made again yesterday, is that extradition cannot be for the purposes of questioning.
Esther Addley / @estheraddley will be in the court again, supplying tweets and telephone reports. You can read her full report from yesterday here (excerpt below).
In caustic evidence on the first day of the two-day hearing, Brita Sundberg-Weitman, a former appeal court judge, told Belmarsh magistrates court that Sweden's chief prosecutor, Marianne Ny, who is seeking the WikiLeaks founder's extradition, "has a rather biased view against men". "I can't understand her attitude here. It looks malicious," she said.
Geoffrey Robertson QC, acting for Assange, asked if it was her view that Ny wanted "to get [Assange] into her clutches and then arrest him no matter what?"
"Yes" said Sundberg-Weitman. "It might be her attitude to have the man arrested and maybe let him suffer for a few weeks to have him softer [for interrogation]" [...]
[...] Under cross-examination by Clare Montgomery QC, for the Swedish government, however, Sundberg-Weitman admitted she had no personal knowledge of the conduct of the prosecutor in the case, basing her views instead on what she had been told.
He denies all the allegations and has not been charged.
• This report is compiled by Simon Jeffery at the Guardian based on the Twitter feed of Esther Addley at Belmarsh magistrates' court
No comments:
Post a Comment