USA denied this Wednesday that the charges for which extradition of Julian Assange have character political and that their activities can be compared at the head WikiLeaks investigative journalists.

Advocate Claire Dobbinrepresenting American justice, said before London High Court that the defense is “mischaracterizing” the charges against the Australian, which are actually “for” criminal offenses based on evidence“.

Dobbin said Assange was wanted CONSPIRACY with a former American soldier Bradley Manning (Chelsea Manning today) to get secret military information and by spread thisendangering “numerous innocent US whistleblowers” in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, China, Iran or Syria.

The lawyer emphasized that it is incorrect when the defense tries to compare the accused, whom, according to her, they tried to recruit between 2009 and 2015 hackers for your portal with a “regular journalist or editor” who uses sources for your news.

“WikiLeaks has clearly requested classified materials and information. He encouraged others to hack and compiled a list of “Most Wanted Leaks.” It goes a lot in addition to the actions of the journalist to collect information,” he said.

You might be interested > Assange was absent again from his latest extradition hearing to the US.

Judge Adam Johnson inquired about the defense’s argument that it was not WikiLeaks that originally released the names of the whistleblowers, but that they were exposed when the journalist revealed in the book file password.

Dobbin responded that it was not for the court to delve into the matter, and Assange could use it eventually. US court.

The lawyer also said that they the defense’s arguments are unfounded that his client will not receive a fair trial in the United States or that the charges threaten his freedom of expression.

Assange, 52, did not attend the Supreme Court hearings on Tuesday and Wednesday due to illness, although they were present in the courtroom. his wife Stella, And his father, John Shipton.

After a hearing this Wednesday, two Supreme Court justices will have to decide, likely on another day, whether they will allow him to return to court. UK appeal – which would lead to a trial in which the arguments now put forward would be scrutinized – or if instead his extraditionapproved by the UK government in 2022.

(EFE)