Extradition Hearing #JulianAssange Phase 2:
7 Sept to 1 Oct 2020
DEFENCE WITNESS STATEMENTS
(in the order present in court or read into the record):
DAY 1 (7 Sept 2020)
Witness #1: Mark Feldstein
"The administration has already won a partial victory. Even if the espionage charges against Assange are ultimately dismissed, this politicized prosecution will still produce dividends ..."
"WikiLeaks cables have contributed to court findings that US drone strikes are criminal offences & that criminal
proceedings should be initiated against senior US officials ..."
"... WikiLeaks publications played a part in ... bringing to light in an irrefutable way, particular criminal acts on the part of US military previously deliberately covered up."
"If extradited to the US and convicted, it is my view that Mr Assange ... is highly likely to be sentenced to imprisonment that will constitute the rest of his likely natural lifespan."
"I have represented many defendants pre-trial in the federal system & [that system] severely compromises an attorney's ability to meaningfully review the discovery materials with the client."
"... when the partners published their respective stories on July 25, 2010, ... Wikileaks delayed the release of 15,000 documents as part of what Assange called "the harm minimisation process"."
RE "Collateral Murder":
"The American public needed urgently to know what was being done routinely in their name, & there was no other way for them to learn it than by unauthorized disclosure."
"It could well be argued ... that by making [the War Logs] public Manning & Assange were carrying out a duty on behalf of the victims & the public ... that the US govt was failing to carry out."
"The current US admin has signaled its desire to escalate prosecutions as well as “jailing journalists who publish classified info.” The Espionage Act’s breadth provides such a means."
"The [War Logs & "Collateral Murder"] publications demonstrated that the actions were unlawful both under international law and the US military's own Rules of Engagement."
"[The Rohrabacher] statements confirmed the specific proposal was that Mr Assange would not face US criminal prosecution if he provided info about the source of the DNC publications ... "
"As a result of the [WikiLeaks] cables it is now known (but not at the time in 2006) that the German govt bowed to pressure from the US govt to not seek the extradition of the rendition team."
After 'Collateral Murder':
"I immediately realised the US Military had lied to us. When I think back to that meeting with the two generals in Baghdad, I feel cheated. They were not being honest."
"Anyone who intercepted David Leigh’s transfer [could] decrypt the file ... Thus, no information security professional should have deemed the disclosure of this passphrase to be safe ..."
"He [said] the US govt would be going into the Embassy to get Assange. I responded that entering the embassy of a sovereign nation ... was an act of war
[Response] "not if they let us"."
Butler confirms that the Internet Archive
- holds copies of the relevant WikiLeaks archives
- has not been requested by the US govt to take down this data, and
- is a US based institution
"Since my publication on Cryptome.org of the unredacted diplomatic cables, no US law enforcement authority has notified me that this publication of the cables is illegal ..."
See comments on Craig's blog for updates re procedural hearing today, but main point seems to be:
"The Judges rejected the Crown application & basically said all the Defence evidence needs to be considered at the full hearing where they will decide if it is relevant or not."
Well, well, what have we here?
Seems it IS possible to do something about corruption in high places - at least in #Scotland. This might fix one tiny corner but looks like a very big broom is needed for the rest of the mess.
There's been a meme around for a long time that goes like this:
"First they came for the journalists. We don't know what happened after that."
Of course, it was obvious to all those who looked with open eyes that #JulianAssange was the canary in the #FreePress coal mine.
Or was, perhaps, Alexander Pope's butterfly - broken on a (Catherine) wheel. [From Pope's "Epistle to Dr Arbuthnot"]
Some journalists argued that Julian #Assange was "not a journalist" - maybe that made them feel safer.
Most just looked away - maybe after a carefully crafted sentence at a state-sponsored, glittery #FreePress event (where news platforms like #RT were shut out in the cold).
The NY book launch of "In Defense of Julian Assange" edited by Tariq Ali and Margaret Kustler, and published by @orbooks, was held at the former home of the late Michael Ratner, Assange's former attorney 21 Nov 2019.
@orbooks First speaker was civil rights attorney, Margaret Kunstler @granmarga.
"The Powers That Be are upping the ante.
Charging a journalist with espionage is eating the 1st Amendment. It’s outrageous. The 1st doesn’t allow for an espionage charge."
"When we think about [those] demonised in the West, it's usually reserved for foreign leaders ... we want to overthrow ... Rarely has [that] been used against somebody [like] Julian Assange.
And who is he? He's a media publisher."