Live court report from #JulianAssange’s extradition hearing [THREAD]:
We start the day by learning that Julian has not be allowed to participate in person at the most important hearing of his life.
This hearing will begin with the #Assange exception to the norm.
#FreeAssange
We start the day by learning that Julian has not be allowed to participate in person at the most important hearing of his life.
This hearing will begin with the #Assange exception to the norm.
#FreeAssange
The hearing will start soon. They are attempting to communicate with Belmarsh.
Judges are in.
The audio of the court video stream is almost inaudible.
US prosecutor Eric Lewis begins his arguments: We maintain that the district Judge was wrong.
Lewis outlining the US govt's lines of argument, including "assurances" that Assange won't be held in the most extreme & isolating prison conditions in the U.S. See more on the US's arguments here assangedefense.org/hearing-covera…
& on the "assurances
& on the "assurances
Lewis: In light of the "assurances" the district judge would have allowed the extradition.
Lewis: The appellant was not given the opportunity to submit assurances by the district judge.
Lewis: The next argument is concerning the importance that the district judge gave on the imposition to SAMs. The 'assurances' that Kromberg gave state that the defence's argument that the US would renege it's assurances is wrong as per long-standing diplomatic relation.
Lewis: The assurances are binding in the US.
Lewis: Is going through the defence's arguments of pre and post-trial detention conditions and SAMs.
Lewis is arguing that the defence's arguments concerning pre and post-trial detention are restricted to ADX Florence and SAM instead of the entire US prison system.
Lewis: The defence psychiatric evidence is predicated on detention on ADX Florence and the imposition of SAMs.
Lewis continues to cite examples about how the defence, specifically Prof. Kopelman, placed more emphasis in SAMs and detention on ADX Florence.
Amnesty International: The US diplomatic assurances are inherently unreliable. Julian Assange must be released #Assangecase @amnesty
amnesty.org/en/latest/news…
amnesty.org/en/latest/news…
Lewis continues to go through defence's arguments to argue himself that the defence focused solely on SAMs and ADX Florence. It is clear by now that he with then argue that Kromberg's "assurances" include that Julian will not be submitted to SAMs or incarcerated in ADX Florence.
@DefenseAssange:
"Judge interrupts Lewis to confirm that Julian has joined the proceedings late by videolink; a very brief camera shot showed him looking unwell."
"Judge interrupts Lewis to confirm that Julian has joined the proceedings late by videolink; a very brief camera shot showed him looking unwell."
@kgosztola: "Lewis is belaboring this point about SAMs and ADX Florence being a focus. It's as if the Crown Prosecution Service conducted a keyword search of the copious amount of legal submissions, and they decided let's open with a sentence from every single search result."
Lewis argues that assurances are placed that Assange will receive appropriate medical care and that he will be sent to Australia to serve the last part of his sentence.
Lewis argues that because assurances have been made, it is safe to say that the district judge would have not ruled against Assange extradition.
Lewis argues that Kromber sets out how SAMs could be imposed within the assurances. This means that they would place Julian under SAMs.
Lewis: Kromber says that there is no factual basis to suggest that the US would breach its assurances.
Lewis is not arguing that administrative segregation is not as bad as SAMs because the inmates have some form of [very reduced] socialization that includes being able to shout from cell to cell.
Lewis says that in pre-trial confinement, there's no chance that Assange would be fully in administrative segregation (solitary confinement) because he would be allowed to meet with his lawyers whenever he'd like.
Lewis is reviewing a case used by the defence as an example of a breach by assurances and arguing that the US actually did not.
Lewis is arguing that the assurances will be observed and that there has "never been" a breach of assurances.
Lewis says that there is no assurance that Julian could be placed under SAMs because if while he's in prison (in solitary confinement) and commits another crime that puts the US national security is put at risk, then he would have to be placed under SAMs.
Lewis now states that "SAMs are innopressive".
Lewis now turns to review the Abu Hamza case. Where the defence argues that the US breached the assurance that he would not be housed in the ADX. Lewis says that "it's simply not true".
@kgosztola
"After being questioned by one of the justices, Lewis says it was never the prosecutors' position it was necessary to offer "assurances." They thought it highly unlikely Assange would be subject to SAMs. But they have now dealt with that by way of assurances."
"After being questioned by one of the justices, Lewis says it was never the prosecutors' position it was necessary to offer "assurances." They thought it highly unlikely Assange would be subject to SAMs. But they have now dealt with that by way of assurances."
Lewis keeps arguing that with the absence of ADX and SAMs there is no breach to different articles in the extradition act.
Yet:
"the US retains the power to impose #SAMs on Mr. #Assange
"the US retains the power to designate Mr. Assange to #ADX"
Yet:
"the US retains the power to impose #SAMs on Mr. #Assange
"the US retains the power to designate Mr. Assange to #ADX"
Lewis argues that it's not possible to predict the risk of suicide so the mental state of Julian Assange today should be taken into consideration, not the future risk.
Julian is shown in the screen, he is having a conversation with his guard.
Julian and the guard leave the room.
Julian is no longer observing his hearing.
Lewis further attempting to distinguish between Assange's present mental state and his prospective mental health in a US prison (where Lewis contends he would have access to psychologists and other resources).
Lewis: the district judge did not regard the key issue in this case. In fact there is very little mention, which is the "forum bar"
@kgosztola: "James Lewis discusses the Lauri Love case and says, "This was not a pure suicide case."
The High Court made a "judgment on the combined factors of vulnerability - Asperger's, eczema, and asthma, which would be exacerbated by suicide watch." #Assange"
The High Court made a "judgment on the combined factors of vulnerability - Asperger's, eczema, and asthma, which would be exacerbated by suicide watch." #Assange"
Lewis argues that Love's case was both a mental and physical ill health, where as #Assange's case is only based on mental health. He also stated that the US prison system has a lower suicide rate than the UK one.
Lewis argues that the district judge did not consider the ability of the US to prevent suicide. "In fact", he says, "no one extradited to the US from the UK has ever committed suicide."
The district judge's decision puts a threshold on preventive measures that no one could ever meet.
Lewis requests for a break in two minutes.
Court is in recess.
Court is back in session.
@kgosztola:
"James Lewis: Position always was there was no real risk Assange would be held in SAMs or ADX Florence. "Issue of assurances only arisen because of the judge’s conclusions." That precipitated the requirement to give the "assurances.""
"James Lewis: Position always was there was no real risk Assange would be held in SAMs or ADX Florence. "Issue of assurances only arisen because of the judge’s conclusions." That precipitated the requirement to give the "assurances.""
Lewis says that the forensic evidence submitted by the defence was based on a sentence of life in prison.
Lewis uses the sentences of Daniel Hale (42 months) and Reality Winner (63 months) as an example of what Julian is likely to get.
Lewis says that Prof. Kopelman's observations were based upon the self review of Assange as opposite to what the prosecution doctors who took a long range approach. He says Assange had every reason to exaggerate his mental health issues.
Lewis argues that Julian went to "extreme measures" to avoid extradition, including seeking refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy. He says "if there ever was a case which required a dispassionate approach" in its evaluation, "it's this one."
Lewis says that Kopelman knew full well that Stella Moris had a relationship with Assange and was the mother of his children. Kopelman identifies Assange's children in his report. Lewis says that Kopelman was deceitful in the way he describes Stella, and their children.
Julian is seen on the screen holding his head, listening and closing his eyes. He appears tired.
Lewis continues to discredit defence doctor Prof. Kopelman, and raise the opinion of prosecution doctor, Dr. Blackwood. Here's some background on Blackwood.
dailymaverick.co.za/article/2020-1…
dailymaverick.co.za/article/2020-1…
Lewis reads Blackwood's conclusions that he saw little risk of suicide if extradited.
Lewis continues to argue by questioning Kopelman and elevating its own witnesses that Assange is not a suicide risk.
Lewis argues that because Julian visited the library and because he asked for more oranges and milk for breakfast, his behaviour is not consistent with a man who is prone to suicide.
Lewis continue to argue that Kopelman did not fulfil his obligation to the court because he reserved the identity of Stella Moris for her own safety.
Lewis argues that because #JulianAssange has good eye contact and is a good communicator he is not a risk of suicide.
Lewis argues that Judge Baraitser concluded that she "preferred" Kopelman's testimony, and that she did not explain why.
Lewis says that experts are not allowed to make misleading statements to the court under any reason. Baraitser [rightly so] treated it as a minor manner.
It is not true that the experts disagree. They all accepted autistic traits, but the autism expert concluded and diagnosed ASD.
The US doctors also accepted he suffers from a major depressive disorder.
In all of these cases, the divergence is a matter of degree.
The US doctors also accepted he suffers from a major depressive disorder.
In all of these cases, the divergence is a matter of degree.
Lewis concludes that the judge would have decided differently if she would have heard their arguments now.
Fitzgerald, defence barrister, argues that Judge Baraitser did give her reasons as to why she evaluated the medical evidence and that Lewis is misread the judgement.
Fitzgerald argues that the judge saw and heard Kopelman's evidence and she was best placed to evaluate this evidence. Also that the judge did not found that the evidence of professor Kopelman to be misleading, and understood the decision of omitting Setlla Moris' name from report
Fitzgerald argues that Lewis made "a load of completely unjustified suggestions" concerning the medical evidence. It's simply untrue that Kopelman did not referre to all other matters.
Fitzgerald argues that Assange was moved to suicide watch on July 2020, and Mr. Blackwood stated in his report that suicidal ideation was not a medical issue.
Fitzgerald argues that the judge found, as a basis of evaluating all the evidence, that there was a risk of suicide.
Fitzgerald: If one has respect for the fact, the judge made a detailed evaluation and Lewis is attempting to re-litigate the matter. In fact Lewis did not find a single matter of law to argue on.
Fitzgerald argues that the courts sometimes have to assess what is the future, and the court has to assess what will happen to #JulianAssange if he's sent to America.
Fitzgerald says that the Judge argued that Assange had consistently been severely depressed and at risk of suicide, and that there were numerous reports that Assange called the Samaritans frequently and that he had suicidal ideation.
Fitzgeral argues that the judge made a careful evaluation with all the evidence presented before her, and that this picture of Kopelman that Lewis is trying to create is absolute nonsense. #Assange
Fitzgeral argues that the reason Assange would find it unbearable to be extradited to the US is because of his mental disorder of Asperger's syndrome. #Assange
Fitzgerald argues that the judge presented numerous reasons as to why she preferred Prof Kopelman's evidence, and that no judge can do more than that.
As normal, the defence in the #AssangeCase is kicking ass!
The judge interrupts Fitzgerald saying that they had run out of time. Fitzgerald continues by saying that the judge gives 5 reasons in her judgment where she concludes that preventive measures may not be enough to prevent Assange from committing suicide.
Fitzgerald going point by point to show where the prosecution said the judge didn't explain her reasoning or address something, she actually said quite explicitly. "I wonder sometimes if we're reading the same judgement!"
Fitzgerald argues that the prosecution's arguments come very late in the day and that there is no reason why they should be admitted.
Court adjourned till tomorrow morning.
Court adjourned till tomorrow morning.
Summary: The prosecution used, without much success, the same tired techniques they have used to delegitimise the defence witnesses. Nothing unexpected came out of them. Their assurances are garbage & their claims on JA’s mental health are made up.
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1453291…
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1453291…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
