The police stake out at the Ecuadorian Embassy, in an attempt to arrest Julian Assange in breach of his bail conditions and in accordance with a European Arrest Warrant, ends after three years, as police say they cannot afford to continue it.
“The force has to balance the interests of justice in this case with the ongoing risks to the safety of Londoners and all those we protect, investigating crime and arresting offenders wanted for serious offences, in deciding what a proportionate response is.
Like all public services, our resources are finite. With so many different criminal, and other, threats to the city it protects, the current deployment of officers is no longer believed proportionate.” A police spokesman said
In June, the police said the stakeout had cost £11.1 million.
It is unbelievable that the police took 3 years and spent in excess of 12 million pounds, of tax payer’s money, before reaching that conclusion. It is also beyond belief that such an amount of money was spent by the police in trying to enforce an Arrest Warrant, on behalf of another European Country, rather than on investigating crime in Britain and protecting our own society.
“1. Unlawful coercion
On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm. Assange, by using violence. forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight preventing her from moving or shifting.
- Sexual molestation
On 13-14 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity. Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge.
- Sexual molestation
On 18 August 2010 or on any of the days before or after that date, in the home of the injured party [AA] in Stockholm, Assange deliberately molested the injured party by acting in a manner designed to violate her sexual integrity i.e. lying next to her and pressing his naked, erect penis to her body.
On 17 August 2010, in the home of the injured party [SW] in Enkoping, Assange deliberately consummated sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep. was in a helpless state.
It is an aggravating circumstance that Assange. who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a prerequisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used. still consummated unprotected sexual intercourse with her. The sexual act was designed to violate the injured party’s sexual integrity.”
Only one of the four charges is now current the others have since time expired.
The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) agreement, which came into operation in 2004, allows for the speedy extradition of suspects from one European country to another to face trial or serve a prison sentence.
Unintended consequences of the EAW:
- An EU Country can use it to pursue non EU Citizens visiting other EU Countries. This recently occurred when Britain arrested General Karenzi Karake from Rwanda on a warrant issued by Spain in June 2015, angering Rwanda and the African Union.
A spokesman for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said
“following advice from the prosecutors the case against General Karenzi Karake was dismissed. This was a complex case and we have worked swiftly to consider the UK law against the conduct alleged by the Spanish authorities in the [European arrest warrant]”
It would have been less costly to the tax payer had the CPS properly investigated the alleged Spanish case against General Karenzi Karake before arresting and taking him to court.
2. Opponents of the EAW cite concerns that it is too easy for UK citizens to be extradited and can be used for relatively minor offences. Poland has made most use of the system, but not always for serious offences. It has been argued that it is a waste of money to spend £30,000 sending a Pole back from London to Warsaw to face charges of 100 outstanding parking tickets.
EAWs are also seen as an erosion of British Sovereignty as once one is issued by any EU Country it is a lawful obligation on others to enforce it. It could be argued that the British Police and Prosecution Service are too enthusiastic in enforcing these warrants since they do not appear to properly investigate them before taking action, as in the case of General Karenzi Karake and cost appears to be no object, as in the case of Julian Assange .
The Conservative leadership was savaged by its own MPs and the Commons Speaker, in November 2014, for denying parliament a vote on whether to rejoin the European arrest warrant agreement. It was railroaded through the Lords and Parliament by David Cameron without any debate.
This is the man presently negotiating better terms (reforms) for Britain’s continued membership of the EU which he will place before the British People in a referendum in 2016/2017. The problem is, David Cameron, has never defined the ‘better terms’ he has set out to achieve. We will therefore never know the extent of his success when he advises the reforms have been agreed and the British People should now vote to remain in the EU.
If he is capable of duping the House of Lords and Parliament on such an important issue as re-joining the European Arrest Warrant agreement, he will have no hesitation, in attempting to dupe the British People into voting for continued British membership of the EU.
VOTE TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION