• sunzu
    link
    fedilink
    155 months ago

    u/@zabadoh@ani.social explained how

    the reason is that the US can exercise such authority in practice with any consequences.

    a bigger concern here is his native government’s limp dick response tbh

    aint he from AU?

    • @FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      the US can exercise such authority

      Many countries have the authority to prosecute crimes that occur on their soil even if the perpetrator is outside the country. Including Assange’s native country.

      The foreign interference crimes apply to conduct that occurs in Australia. So, if the perpetrator was in Australia at the time they engaged in interference, then prosecuting them would be relatively straightforward, provided there was sufficient evidence. If an offender is outside Australia at the time of the interference, they could still be charged with a crime.

      • sunzu
        link
        fedilink
        -15 months ago

        I don’t understand the point you are trying to make?

        AU is not prosecuting here

        • @FlowVoid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          The point is that the US is not unusual in prosecuting people in other countries. Australia and others do the same thing.

          • sunzu
            link
            fedilink
            -25 months ago

            Who did AU prosecute like this?

            Point I was making is that AU is failing to protect its citizen who is being harassed… BTW ;)

            • @FlowVoid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              4
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Australia, like the US and other countries, does not generally shield suspected criminals from prosecution.

              And that’s regardless of whether the person is actually guilty. Just ask Amanda Knox.