Where is Julian?

I believe some of the charges have already been dropped. In any event, the case is more complicated than appeared at first sight. From my recollection, there was an allegation that the two women involved were in collusion with each other in order to discredit Assange.

I can quite understand Assange being unwilling to go to Sweden since he and others suspected he would then be extradited to the USA.

trisher, I didn't know one of the women was a sex worker. I read some time ago that he had consensual sex with one of the accusers, using a condom but that she woke later to find him having penetrative sex without a condom. I'm not sure it matters whether she is a sex worker or not.
My comparison with Roman Polanski may have been a misnomer, it was prompted by the fact that both men were accused of sexual offences and promptly left the country in which the allegations were made and subsequently avoided extradition.

The sub-text was/is obvious. Get him extradited to the USA from any country with an extradition treaty with them, from the UK, Sweden or wherever.

I agree trisha, all done to please the USA

The rape charge is complicated because it apparently involved a prostitute and him not using a condom. It would have been quite possible for Swedish police to question him in the embassy but they insisted on extradition-(no pressure from the USA of course). Assange is Australian. Iam60 I don't understand the comparison to Roman Polanski and I don't think Assange was necessarily trying to dodge the Swedish charges but feared being extradited from Sweden to the USA, which given their record seems highly likely. There was the case of the British student for example www.rt.com/usa/us-extradition-student-uk-493/

Ridiculous situation, the sooner he's expelled or whatever the better.

This gets more and more complicated!

I think Assange is Australian.

That is as may be, but I cannot get worked up about the huge expense the UK has been put to on behalf of someone presumably a US national who a) faces a rape charge and b) broke the law in his own country.
And where the Ecuadorian Embassy features just reduces it to farce.

Sweden now only has one case they want to question him on, if he goes there he can then be bundled off to America because they want him

But wasn't the asylum in the Embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden /Norway (?) where he faces sexual assault charges, rather than in connection with his Wikileaks activity?

All done to please the USA

Ridiculous amount of money i agree, but hardly his fault that our government and police can be used to fulfil the aims of the US when they are upset about someone leaking information. I gather the withdrawal is possible an early response to a UN ruling on arbitrary detention which is likely to be in favour of Julian.

Yes, good riddance!

Good riddance?

When I first saw the heading I thought we had mislaid a poster and racked (or is it wracked?) my brains for anything they had said on here. Well, I've had a trying week.

Now I know who we are talking about, I agree with all the above!

It's a staggering amount of money, at a time when the police face severe cuts to their budgets. Loathsome little creep, reminds me of Roman Polanski, maybe the alleged offences aren't identical but the responses seem to be. These men who think they're so special that normal rules of law shouldn't apply to them.

Didn't I hear that the suggestion has been made that the Swedes come here to interview him? And that they've now accepted that may be a good idea?

They have stopped the constant guard because of its cost;£12 million so far. However, although they may have stopped the physical guard on the embassy, I am sure there will still be covert surveillance going on, whether physical or electronic - and once Assange leaves the embassy he can be arrested at any point.

Personally, I think that the sooner this little twerp is arrested and extradited to Sweden the better. He can then return to the obscurity he so richly deserves.

No offence taken Alea. I absolutely agree that a ridiculous amount of money has been spent and I can't quite understand why now they've decided to suddenly stop.

No disrespect, petitpois, but does anybody care, and did anybody ask the tax payer/London rate payer, if they wanted their money spent on "guarding" the Embassy?

What a bloody pointless waste of time and money.