pull down to refresh
594 sats \ 18 replies \ @siggy47 25 Jun 2024 \ on: Julian Assange has reached a plea deal with the U.S., allowing him to go free news
I'm happy for Assange, and I don't want to take away from the fact that he will soon be free, but the fact that the US gets a guilty plea out of this is bullshit. Leaking national security secrets? The case will now be precedent, and will basically put another nail in the coffin of a free press.
The fact that the US had to use a plea deal for time served, letting Assange go immediately, is a strong sign that they were concerned they wouldn't win in court in a real trial.
reply
I think so too. It also was a no win for the US. A trial would have exposed all the embarrassing shit again.
reply
Yep and another possibility is the fact that this isn't a good look for the US in general. The US is the big dog still but they can't do whatever they want without a cost.
reply
How much does that matter?
- Look at what they did to him without precedent.
- Are plea deals discounted to some degree in subsequent legal arguments?
I had never thought about that second question. It seems to me that jury decisions would carry more weight.
reply
Regarding #1, they didn't need a plea to make his life miserable, it will just make it easier next time.
#2 is more serious. In order to plead guilty, a defendant has to allocute. That means he or she has to admit to specific facts that constitute the crime. Often, a defendant will admit to stuff that they didn't do because they don't want to risk a jury trial. Here, I can't see how Assange can plead guilty based on what I know about the case. I'm pretty sure he didn't steal the docs. So, the prosecution and defense will get together to come up with a version of the facts that a judge believes constitutes the crime. Supposedly respectable news organizations did the same thing Assange did. I can see this case making disclosing information that is embarrassing to the government equate to leaking state secrets. As far as precedent goes, the facts the defendant admits to that constitute a crime can be used in future cases. Also, defendants waive their right to appeal as a condition of a guilty plea, so a higher court won't review it.
reply
“Allocution”
reply
So, what happens if the next person in a similar case insists on going to trial?
How does precedent factor in when a jury is making the decision?
reply
It's complicated and depends on many things, so I can't give a quick answer. Worst case scenario is that this case weakens the Pentagon Papers case as precedent :
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/09/us/pentagon-papers-journalism-leaks.html
That is true, because the Pentagon Papers case set the press free to publish secrets in ways that were unimaginable in 1971.
reply
Sounds like it could impact things like pretrial motions to dismiss.
Is that sort of directionally correct?
reply
Yes. I guess my real point is that the Assange case could have reaffirmed the Pentagon Papers case and discouraged this government intimidation of journalists in the future.
That is totally true, the free press will be the most harmed... those supposed state secrets... they manipulate them and let them be seen when they want and when it suits them... that is the truth...
reply
Glad he is free. Hopefully he gets a pardon. Maybe Trump will if he gets re-elected. Would be a nice way to F with the American Deep State.
reply
What happened in those first 4 years?
reply
Yeah, Trump could have pardoned him then. It's BS. I heard Trump tried to pardon Ross at least but the AG slow walked it and sunk it. Michael Malice has mentioned this a couple times.
reply
Pardons get done full stop. Anyone blame shifting that is just not be truthful. I hope Ross gets to go home soon but these fake based influencers are a blight.
reply
Freedom isn’t always free
reply