I KNOW THAT THIS IS A 2016 ARTICLE , BUT THE REASON I AM POSTING IT NOW IS BECAUSE THE SWEDISH PROSECUTORS HAVE...

I KNOW THAT THIS IS A 2016 ARTICLE , BUT THE REASON I AM POSTING IT NOW IS BECAUSE THE SWEDISH PROSECUTORS HAVE DECLARED, AT THE RECENT PRESS RELEASE, THAT INABILITY TO HAVE ACCESS TO ASSANGE PREVENTED THEM FROM MOVING FORWARD AND, AS SUCH, THEY DROPPED THE CHARGES.

THE NOTED PRESS RELEASE HAS BEEN POSTED

SEE THE PRESS RELEASE IN THE FIRST LINKS OF THIS RECENT POST
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+GovernmentGangStalkingandElectronicHarassment/posts/aH4u5y9CeWu

ASSANGE ALWAYS MADE HIMSELF AVAILABLE TO THEM AND THEY DID NOT COMPLY WITH HIS REQUESTS BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO GET HIM EXTRADITED TO SWEDEN AND SUBSEQUENTLY GET HIM EXTRADITED TO THE US FOR THE ESPIONAGE PROSECUTION.

AT THE END OF 2016, AND AFTER OCTOBER 2016, THE SWEDISH PROSECUTORS WENT TO ECUADOR, AFTER ALL THESE YEARS MIND YOU, TO INTERVIEW ASSANGE.

IF YOU LISTEN TO THE PRESS RELEASE THEY HELD AFTER THEY ANNOUNCED THE DROPPING OF THE RAPE CHARGES AGAINST ASSANGE, YOU WILL HEAR A REPORTER GRILLING THE SWEDISH PROSECUTORS ABOUT THEIR ODD FAILURE TO COME TO ECUADOR AND INTERVIEW ASSANGE AT AN EARLIER TIME AND IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CHARGES WERE LAUNCHED AGAINST HIM. THE REPORTER NOTED THAT THIS TYPE OF PROCEDURE, FLYING TO ANOTHER COUNTRY IN ORDER TO INTERVIEW SUSPECTS, IS COMMON PROCEDURE IN SWEDEN.

THIS ARTICLE BELOW INDICATES THE SUSPECT MISHANDLING OF THE RAPE CHARGES AS WELL AS THE AVAILABILITY OF COMMON PROCEDURES THAT WOULD HAVE PROVIDED EASY ACCESS TO ASSANGE, BE IT FOR INTERVIEW PURPOSES AND/OR FOR OTHER RELATED MATTERS.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-02-09/no-need-to-extradite-assange-court-told/1935174

THIS ARTICLE, WHICH WAS PUBLISHED BACK ON FEBRUARY 8, 2011, STATED, IN PART:

"Sven-Erik Alhem, a former Swedish prosecutor and now a legal commentator who appeared as a witness for Mr Assange, said Ms Ny could have questioned Mr Assange via videolink from Britain and there was no need to extradite him for interview.

"I don't really understand why you could not hear Julian Assange here in this country, if the British authorities allowed such a hearing to take place," he told the Belmarsh Magistrates' Court in south-east London through an interpreter.

He also criticised the case on the grounds that Mr Assange was identified, as rape suspects in Sweden should not be; that rape suspects in general are kept without bail in Sweden; and that rape trials are held behind closed doors.

In the legal papers quoted by lawyers for the Swedish authorities, Ms Ny said she made repeated attempts in September and October to contact Mr Assange by phone and text message to set up an interview in Sweden but had no success.

She was quoted as saying that Mr Assange's Swedish lawyer offered a telephone interview but Ms Ny declined and warned him that she was going to issue a warrant.

"It must have been crystal clear to Julian Assange since the arrest warrant of September 27 that we were extremely anxious to interview him," Ms Ny said, according to evidence."



BASED ON THE FORGOING FACTS SURROUNDING THE MISHANDLING OF THE RAPE CHARGES AS WELL AS THE BASIS FOR DROPPING THE RAPE CHARGES, IT IS EASY TO CONCLUDE THAT THE SWEDISH PROSECUTORS INTENTIONALLY DEVIATED FROM THE ABOVE NOTED COMMON PROCEDURE AS WELL AS FROM OTHER PROCEDURES AVAILABLE TO THEM IN ORDER TO CAUSE ASSANGE TO BE EXTRADITED TO SWEDEN FOR THE INTERVIEW AND THEN BE EXTRADITED TO THE US FOR THE ESPIONAGE CHARGES PENDING AGAINST HIM... PERIOD...END OF STORY..!!

IT IS ALSO EASY TO CONCLUDE THAT ACCESS TO ASSANGE WAS NOT THE REASON THE CHARGES WERE DROPPED AND THAT NOT HAVING A STRONG EVIDENTIARY CASE AGAINST HIM WAS THE REASON THEY DROPPED THE CHARGES. THIS IS THE REASON THAT THE SWEDISH PROSECUTORS DECLINED TO MAKE STATEMENTS AS TO THE GUILT OR INNOCENCE OF ASSANGE


THIS IS MY HUMBLE OPINION, AS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY CRITIC

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-14/julian-assange-to-be-interviewed-over-allegations-sexual-assault/8021186