The key points at issue were that Julian's defence was requesting more time to prepare their evidence; and arguing that political offences were specifically excluded from the extradition treaty.
The defence argued, they were in touch with the Spanish courts about a very important and relevant legal case in Madrid which would provide vital evidence.
After the recess the defence team stated they could not, in their professional opinion, adequately prepare if the hearing date were kept to February, but within Baraitser's instruction to do so they nevertheless outlined a proposed timetable on delivery of evidence.
Apart from a desire to pre-empt the Spanish court providing evidence on CIA activity in sabotaging the defence, what makes the February date so important to the USA? I would welcome any thoughts.
Baraitser dismissed the defence's request for a separate prior hearing to consider whether the extradition treaty applied at all, without bothering to give any reason why.
Just in case anybody was left in any doubt as to what was happening here, Lewis then stood up and suggested that the defence should not be allowed to waste the court's time with a lot of arguments.
All arguments for the substantive hearing should be given in writing in advance and a "Guillotine should be applied" to arguments and witnesses in court, perhaps of five hours for the defence.
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/24/assange-in-court/
The defence argued, they were in touch with the Spanish courts about a very important and relevant legal case in Madrid which would provide vital evidence.
After the recess the defence team stated they could not, in their professional opinion, adequately prepare if the hearing date were kept to February, but within Baraitser's instruction to do so they nevertheless outlined a proposed timetable on delivery of evidence.
Apart from a desire to pre-empt the Spanish court providing evidence on CIA activity in sabotaging the defence, what makes the February date so important to the USA? I would welcome any thoughts.
Baraitser dismissed the defence's request for a separate prior hearing to consider whether the extradition treaty applied at all, without bothering to give any reason why.
Just in case anybody was left in any doubt as to what was happening here, Lewis then stood up and suggested that the defence should not be allowed to waste the court's time with a lot of arguments.
All arguments for the substantive hearing should be given in writing in advance and a "Guillotine should be applied" to arguments and witnesses in court, perhaps of five hours for the defence.
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/october/24/assange-in-court/
No comments:
Post a Comment