1 year, 4 months ago
Will Palin be arrested if she visits Australia?
Palin's target poster of the Cliffords and other Democrats was equivocal and moot; but, there is nothing equivocal about her statements about the Wikileaks guy. So his lawyer has said he'll press charges for incitement to murder if she sets foot in Australia. How would you interpret the relevant facts and Australian law?
images:
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$1 Answer
This wikileaks fellow and his lawyer are the only one's making any noise about this, from the Australian point of view. It is not in the Australian press at all, not a single mention. Since Wikileak lawyers cannot "press charges", and nobody in Australia seems the least bit interested, I'd say the chances of anyone being charged with incitement to murder are slim and none.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
Good, then you will see that my answer is correct, the chances of her arrest (and the interest in such) are slim and none. I will await you "mea culpa".
As usual you express what you would like to be the case without research.
Here's Asange's lawyer:
******
""We've been troubled by the sort of rhetoric that has come out of various commentators and principally Republican politicians — Sarah Palin and the like — saying Mr. Assange should be executed, assassinated."
Stary added: "Certainly if Sarah Palin or any of those other politicians come to Australia, for whatever purpose, then we can initiate a private prosecution, and that's what we intend to do."
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/assange-attorney-palin-prosecuted-inciting-violence-visits-australia/
******
Now if he were in the USA you would have a point because the old Common Law concept of private prosecution has become obsolete and is no longer the law. However, this is not the case in Australia.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1126439
------------
Also, note this poll from the Sydney Morning Herald at the bottom of the page:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/palin-did-not-pull-the-trigger-20110110-19l2i.html
While the writer is arguing don't blame Palin, 66% of the visitors choosing to vote their opinion think political rhetoric can be blamed.
"
Poll: Can the vigorous political rhetoric in the United States be blamed for the latest gun deaths?
No
34%
Yes
66%
Total votes: 9051.
Would you like to vote?
You will need Cookies enabled to use our Voting Feature.
Poll closed 12 Jan, 2011
Vote now: Oprah's show
Disclaimer:
These polls are not scientific and reflect the opinion only of visitors who have chosen to participate."
"
Although anyone could have voted, I'd bet almost all of the readers of the Sydney Morning Herald are Australian.
There is also an article in The Australian,
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/blaming-palin-will-not-help-the-healing-in-tucson/story-e6frg6zo-1225988003624,
which again defends Palin but mentions prominent Australian journalists apparently taking the other view.
My reference to your lack of research was based on your non-technical answer with no citations.
Your comment is better but still no citations.
I am not asking about your point 1.
Your point 2 is what I am asking about, since I am neither a lawyer nor Australian and hence definitely not an Australian lawyer. Stary is an Australian lawyer but he is involved on Assange's side. I found one Australian reference to private prosecution but there is undoubtedly more to be said about it.
Regarding your third point, I see some interest and debate in the Australian news as cited, there also was debate when Wikileaks hit the world news and it turned out to be led by an Australian. They investigated whether he broke Australian law and found he had not, and also there was outcry about the extradition attempts. Assange clearly has supporters in his native country. Is that enough to get Palin arrested for threatening him? That's part of this question.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/supporters-of-julian-assange-take-to-sydney-streets/story-e6frf7jx-1225988327985
http://www.npr.org/2011/01/21/133102953/wikileaks-assange-finds-support-in-native-australia
As usual, I see you post questions with preconceived answers, in order to argue with those who differ. My research, which you erroneously claim I did not do (how could you possibly know what I did or did not do, showed there was no Australian mention of Palin in connection to Assange, inciting murder, or being arrested, which WAS your question, was it not? Your question was not about Australian opinion of Palin's culpability in the Tuscon shootings, was it?
Please adress these issues:
1. Where, exactly, did Plain say "Assange should be executed or assasinated" as accused? The word I find she used is "pursued". (that's a fact that you and the attorney assert but does not seem substantiated by fact.).
2. Two points on Private prosecution in Australia: it does not carry the authority of arrest unless approved by a magistrate. In other words, Stary cannot "have someone arrested" unless a magistrate agrees. Further, private prosecution is intended for cases where prosecutors have been wrongly inactive, furthering my point that there is no interest in arresting Sarah Palin for inciting murder in Australia (other than by a desperate attorney). If there were, personal prosecution would not be needed because the prosecutors would not be inactive (this second is a rather weak argument, while the lack of authority to arrest is somewhat stronger). It IS interesting that Assange and his lawyer have cited a whole slew of individuals whom they intend to have arrested for this same thing, yet your research (and question) mention only Palin. Perhaps it is your own research that is lacking.
3. Neither source that you bring up as proof of Australian interest on the matter has anything whatsoever to do with Palin being arrested for inciting the murder of Assange (that was you question, correct?). Both of them have to do with Palin's culpability in the Tuscon shootings, which is obviously completley irrelevant to the question of Assange, inciting murder, and arrests. I must conclude that had you found any mention of Palin in connection with her possible arrest for inciting the murder of Assange, you would have said so. Your research found exactly what mine did, no Australian mention of arresting Palin for inciting the murder of Assange.
I see no hue and cry in Australia for Palin's arrest on charges of inciting the murder of Assange . In fact, I see no support or even interest outside of the US and UK. The US is full of folks with questionable motives when it comes to Palin, and the UK is where Assange is being held pending extradition, so it is where his lawyer is making his case in the slander-loving British press. This particular tactic has apparently failed to resonate back home in Australia.
As I said before, the chances of Palin being arrested for incinting the murder of Assange are slim and none. You don't like that answer, I get it. Sorry for expressing an opinon that is contrary to yours, but that does not make me wrong, and does not mean I did no research, as I did. It does make one wonder why you continually feel the need to post such drivel (and why I respond, for that matter). I suppose, that on my part, I believe mahalo has room for opposing viewpoints. I wonder if you agree?
In looking so specifically for a date after Assange's lawyer made his remarks and in looking so specifically for a debate about arresting Palin you are not really finding out anything about whether a magistrate would accept the lawyer's charges, if that is indeed necessary.
Back to the original question, a good answer would cite some opinion on Australian law, on Australian political climate, and Australian public opinion if relevant.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=465212788434
The relevant bit seems to be "He is an anti-American operative with blood on his hands. His past posting of classified documents revealed the identity of more than 100 Afghan sources to the Taliban. Why was he not pursued with the same urgency we pursue al Qaeda and Taliban leaders?"
The right wingers constantly talk and write like this, but that's a specific example you can check. And it is quite reasonable to conclude as this article does,
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/11/29/palin_hunt_down_assange
"It's first worth noting that there is no evidence that Assange has "blood on his hands." In a review of a previous round of leaks on Afghanistan, the Pentagon found no evidence that anyone had been endangered.
But more important: Palin is advocating that Assange be pursued like an al-Qaida operative. In the current context, it's not unreasonable to interpret that to mean he should be assassinated. "
We currently pursue al Qaeda and Taliban with drone attacks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan
Since there is absolutely no mention of the possibility of Palin being arrested in the Australian press, I stated that it was not there, indicating that I had looked and there WERE no sources. Are you looking for a SOURCE that says there are no sources? Should I post the negative results of my 12 searches in Australian News sources?
Your restatement that there is interest in the Australian press over Palin possibly being arrested for incitement to murder Assange is a complete fabrication, yet you question MY research? Tossing out citations (from January 11 and 15, both BEFORE the arrest threat) that NEVER MENTION the subject and claiming they do (your tactic) is much worse than stating I looked and couldn't find any mention of it.
"Pursue with the same urgency" is hardly equivalent to "Pursue using the same tactics". Not even close. I take your lack of a quote from Palin about "execution or assasination" to mean that you have none.
There is room on Mahalo for differing opinions. Repeating inaccuracies such as your documented Australian interest in Palin's arrest (which turns out to be nothing of the sort) and by continuing to "interpret" statements by replacing "Pursue with urgency" with "assasinate with drone attacks" does little to support your opinion. in truth, you look a little silly.
We get it, you don't like Palin, right wingers, Republicans, etc. etc.
I am not a Palin supporter, never voted for her, probably never will. When I look in the Australian press, and compare it to the US and UK press, I see a Palin feeding frenzy in the US, a bit more restraint (uncharacteristic) in the UK and not a single mention in the Australian press.
THERE ARE NO SOURCES (not a single one) proving any interest whatsoever in Australia for any arrest of anyone (including Palin) for inciting the murder of Assange. In light of this lack of interest and the linguistic gymnastics necessary to twist "pursue with urgency" to "execute with drones," the chances of her being arrested are slim and none, based on the facts and the law, which is what you asked about.
Many good questions are too difficult to get a good answer, especially when they require either specialized knowledge or lots of research. I guess I'll have to wait for Palin to plan a trip to Australia to see what the pro analysts have to say. She is planning her first foreign tour next year, and only likes English speaking countries, so maybe the question is not so far fetched.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6102306/sarah_palin_to_take_foreign_trip_in.html?cat=9
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/34247542/ns/today-books/
lousy questions don't get good answers. as you can see by the lack of answers. They do get the kind of answers they deserve, and then you have to fabricate "documentation" to prove your point and twist quotes beyond recognition. Vey weak, but very typical.