Australian lawyer James D. Catlin shares insights on the Assange case, after acting for the WikiLeaks founder in London.
After spending 10 days providing legal advice to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in London in October, Australian lawyer James Catlin called the Swedish rape case against Assange “completely flimsy and laughable.”
During a phone interview with The Epoch Times, Catlin said that when he first met Assange, nobody had taken his statement. This omission Catlin said was “fairly extraordinary” since details should always be taken as soon as possible “because memory fades.”
“Over a month after the event no statement had been taken, so I set to work on that,” Catlin said.
In contrast to reports attacking Assange’s character, Catlin said he found the 39-year-old Australian to be “a sensitive intellectual” and “kind,” noting he was “withstanding the enormous pressure extremely well.”
“I think anyone objectively would be impressed by him in that regard,” he said.
Assange surrendered himself to British authorities on Dec. 7 following events in August when he had relations with two women in Sweden, who went on to file allegations of sexual misconduct. Assange maintains the relations were consensual.
The women are being represented by Claes Borgstrom, Sweden’s former equal opportunities ombudsman and the Social Democratic Party’s spokesman on gender equality issues.
According to Borgstrom, Assange and his legal team are presenting the case as a vendetta. The stance is that this misrepresents a justice system that required approval from Sweden’s highest court of appeal to issue an extradition warrant for Assange.
Catlin said Assange was never charged and maintains that no concrete evidence has been disclosed.
“The evidence is completely flimsy and laughable,” Catlin said. “My fear for him is that the evidence will be secretly changed to deal with the international pressure the Swedes are currently enduring. Since the evidence is being kept a secret, it could be changed without anyone knowing.”
According to Catlin, Assange’s Swedish lawyer Bjorn Hurtig, who saw some of the prosecution evidence during a Swedish court hearing, has said publicly that if the English courts knew how little actual evidence there was against Assange, it would have been very unlikely that an arrest warrant would have been granted.
“It’s an extraordinary situation where the Swedes seem to be hoping to get a dramatic court outcome in England, simply on the back of their credibility of being a modern country with respect to the rule of law, because they are not telling anyone what the evidence is,” Catlin said. “It seems to be a ‘trust us’ situation.”
“Senior government lawyers in many countries embarrassed by WikiLeaks operations have found it difficult to find any crime on their statute books for which the organisation or Assange could be charged,” he said. “Only the Americans seem confident that WikiLeaks is in breach of their Espionage Act. WikiLeaks has distributed confidential reports stolen from the military.”
Assange is currently out on bail and is under house arrest at Ellingham Hall, a friend’s mansion in England. He is due back in court on Feb. 7 for the Swedish extradition hearing. There is wide speculation he may be further subjected to a U.S. extradition under the Espionage Act.
During a phone interview with The Epoch Times, Catlin said that when he first met Assange, nobody had taken his statement. This omission Catlin said was “fairly extraordinary” since details should always be taken as soon as possible “because memory fades.”
“Over a month after the event no statement had been taken, so I set to work on that,” Catlin said.
In contrast to reports attacking Assange’s character, Catlin said he found the 39-year-old Australian to be “a sensitive intellectual” and “kind,” noting he was “withstanding the enormous pressure extremely well.”
“I think anyone objectively would be impressed by him in that regard,” he said.
Assange surrendered himself to British authorities on Dec. 7 following events in August when he had relations with two women in Sweden, who went on to file allegations of sexual misconduct. Assange maintains the relations were consensual.
The women are being represented by Claes Borgstrom, Sweden’s former equal opportunities ombudsman and the Social Democratic Party’s spokesman on gender equality issues.
According to Borgstrom, Assange and his legal team are presenting the case as a vendetta. The stance is that this misrepresents a justice system that required approval from Sweden’s highest court of appeal to issue an extradition warrant for Assange.
Catlin said Assange was never charged and maintains that no concrete evidence has been disclosed.
“The evidence is completely flimsy and laughable,” Catlin said. “My fear for him is that the evidence will be secretly changed to deal with the international pressure the Swedes are currently enduring. Since the evidence is being kept a secret, it could be changed without anyone knowing.”
According to Catlin, Assange’s Swedish lawyer Bjorn Hurtig, who saw some of the prosecution evidence during a Swedish court hearing, has said publicly that if the English courts knew how little actual evidence there was against Assange, it would have been very unlikely that an arrest warrant would have been granted.
“It’s an extraordinary situation where the Swedes seem to be hoping to get a dramatic court outcome in England, simply on the back of their credibility of being a modern country with respect to the rule of law, because they are not telling anyone what the evidence is,” Catlin said. “It seems to be a ‘trust us’ situation.”
“Senior government lawyers in many countries embarrassed by WikiLeaks operations have found it difficult to find any crime on their statute books for which the organisation or Assange could be charged,” he said. “Only the Americans seem confident that WikiLeaks is in breach of their Espionage Act. WikiLeaks has distributed confidential reports stolen from the military.”
Assange is currently out on bail and is under house arrest at Ellingham Hall, a friend’s mansion in England. He is due back in court on Feb. 7 for the Swedish extradition hearing. There is wide speculation he may be further subjected to a U.S. extradition under the Espionage Act.
