British Judge Vanessa Baraitser yesterday denied parole to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on the grounds that he faces a risk of escape, despite having previously refused his extradition to the United States for health reasons.
Announcing her decision in Westminster Magistrates’ Court, the judge noted that Assange “has not yet won his case,” as the U.S. will appeal the verdict against the surrender, and “has an incentive to flee.” “until you complete this process.
Baraitser said the 49-year-old Australian, who suffers from depression and other illnesses after ten years confined to the UK, has “repeatedly shown” that he is capable of escaping justice even if there are “strict conditions” control.
The judge’s decision means Assange, who was present in the courtroom, will remain in pretrial detention in London’s Belmarsh prison as his trial progresses.
At today’s hearing to determine whether he could be released on parole, Baraitser accepted the arguments against prosecutor Clair Dobbin, on behalf of the U.S. Justice Department, who alleged that the computer scientist has tried in the past that he is able to “reach extraordinary extremes” to prevent his extradition.
The judge ruled out the defense’s position, which proposed that his client be released from prison and be “effectively under house arrest” at a London home with his partner, Stella Morris and their two children. with a financial bond and “any other condition provided by the court.”
This Wednesday’s decision is a blow to Assange and his family, as well as his thousands of fans around the world, who for the first time saw the possibility of him leaving his closure.
Last Monday, Baraitser rejected, on finding suicide risk, the extradition of the former “hacker” to the US, which claims him to prosecute him for 18 alleged crimes of espionage and computer intrusion for the revelations of his WikiLeaks digital portal, sentenced to up to 175 years in prison in this country.
Although she accepted the health threats of an eventual surrender, the judge dismissed the rest of the defense’s arguments, arguing, among other things, that the charges were “politically motivated” and would not have a trial. right in this country.