Assange lawyer says US spying indictment imminent

[babsbunny]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/assange-lawyer-indictment-imminent/

By David Edwards
Friday, December 10th, 2010 -- 9:51 am

Update: Assange attorney says he's not been allowed to meet with his client

London lawyer, Mark Stephens, told Voice of Russia, the Russian government's international radio broadcasting service, that British officials will not allow him to meet with Julian Assange until the day before a Dec. 14 court hearing.

"The one thing that is slightly frustrating is that we have another court hearing on December 14 and I’ve not been permitted a legal visit until December 13, which, of course, gives me less than 24 hours to prepare his case," Stephens said.

[Smarmie Doofus]

1. "Spying"? On whom, for whom?

On the government, for the citizenry?

We live in strange times.

[walldude]

3. Spying on the UN...

Why do you think this is such a big deal? The man has info the US does not want public, and they will bury this guy if they can. Problem is at this point he's looking much smarter than they are.

[Catherina]

8. +1 for your subject line n/t

[sabrina 1]

11. The State Dept. was spying on the UN in violation of

International law. Why is there nothing being done about that?

I do NOT think they can charge him with spying without charging every news organization on the planet.

Howerve, they seem to be getting desperate to get their hands on him so they may file charges even though they cannot win such a case. The Pentagon Papers settled that issue when the Government went after the NYT for publishing the Papers.

They want him so badly. Probably planning to torture him into ordering the releases to stop.

Everyone on the planet who cares about Democracy should be speaking up NOW. I have seen only one member of Congress do that so far, Ron Paul.

This is truly an outrage, but the Brits are in the pocket of the U.S. WHICH we found out from the Wikileaks 'leaks'. Stooges, puppets, acolytes, shame on all of them.

[Robb]

2. One does wonder how his attorney knows the DOJ's plans.

:yoiks:

[TexasObserver]

5. They might have sent a "target" letter indicating so.

[msanthrope]

7. Unlikely.

A federal prosecutor isn't obligated to issue a target letter until a grand jury concludes. Target letters are very seldom issued before then. I think news of a Wikileaks grand jury would have, well, leaked...

[TexasObserver]

9. As I said, they could have sent a target letter.

[girl gone mad]

4. Yeah, bring that circus here.

I dare you, Holder.

[Ghost Dog]

6. You would expect to see a 'fair trial'?

Or, a 'gulag process'?

[intheflow]

10. I don't see how it can be spying when you share the info w/the whole world.

Spying by its very nature is relies on and revels in secrecy and deception. Assange's actions are the very antithesis of those concepts.

[Matilda]

12. But he was simply a recipient of the documents.

Just like a newspaper editor anywhere in the world.

I don't see how they can make it stick.

But perhaps they don't care about that - just get him to the U.S. and let an accident befall him. Like falling out of a window, maybe.