skinster wrote:He wasn't "hiding" in the embassy, he was granted political asylum by Ecuador after the U.S. was threatening him, which preceded and is unrelated to the accusations of skipping bail re: Sweden allegations. Regarding the latter, he offered to go to Sweden to face charges if they could guarantee he wouldn't be extradited to the U.S., which the Swedish refused. He then invited Swedish prosecutors to the embassy for interviews - something not abnormal - and they refused that too.
Even if one was to argue that he skipped bail, he's done way beyond more than the jail time for it, about a year ago.
The UK had no choice but to adhere to a European Arrest Warrant, and once you break bail conditions you are not given the opportunity of bail in the future.
The initial case was for Sweden to decide, the UK only had to satisfy itself that the case met the legal requirements as laid out in European Arrest Warrant legislation.
Assange may well have served his sentence in relation to breaking bail conditions but is not legally being held on 'Remand', which is reserved for those who have previously not adhered to bail conditions or those accused of serious crimes.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remand_(detention
The UK has to adhere to extradition treaties and given that the policing bill for Assange whilst he was in the Embassy was over £10 million, the authorities are keen not to have that happen again.https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/ ... an-embassy
Assange who is an Australian wanted by the United States, will have his case heard in relation to the current extradition arrangements between the UK and US and the UK Courts will merely establish if there is a case to answer for in the US.
If the extradition is granted, then a US Court will decide on his guilt and any sentence.