In that courtroom in London, over the past month, a magistrate has been reviewing a request by U.S. prosecutors, under the direction of Attorney General William Barr, to extradite Wikileaks founder Julian Assange — an Australian citizen — and try him, in the United States, under the Espionage Act. He could face life in prison, in solitary confinement, in a Colorado or Indiana supermax prison.

In Julian Assange’s extradition hearing in London, prosecutors have succeeded in proving both crimes and conspiracy. The proof however, condemned the British and American governments as the lawbreakers and conspiritors- Not Julian Assange!

UK Media sources reveal “Witness after witness detailed illegal measures to violate Assange’s right to a fair trial, destroy his health, assassinate his character, and imprison him in solitary confinement for the rest of his life. Courtroom evidence exposed illegality on an unprecedented scale by America’s and Britain’s intelligence, military, police, and judicial agencies to eliminate Assange”.

The governments are a law unto themselves. Dealing the cards, and stacking them in their favor, then calling foul play if they are caught cheating.

WikiLeaks, from the time Assange and his friends created it in 2006, was attracting sources around the world to entrust them, securely and anonymously, with documents exposing state crimes. In 2008 Wikileaks become a focus of Army Counterintelligence Center setying out, in its words, to “damage or destroy this center of gravity”.

The first recorded “black op” against Assange occurred on September 27, 2010, when a suitcase containing three laptops, hard drives, and clothing vanished from the aircraft carrying him from Sweden to Germany.

In 2011, FBI agents went to Iceland to employ an 18-year-old informant, Sigurdur “Siggi” Thordarson, to spy on WikiLeaks. When Iceland’s authorities discovered the FBI’s illegal activities, it deported the FBI agents.

In June 2012, Assange took political asylum in Ecuador’s London Embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden. Meanwhile, the NSA and Britain’s equivalent, GCHQ, tracked people who logged onto the WikiLeaks website.

In 2013, the contents of Assange stolen laptop became public knowledge when information from his laptops appeared in prosecution briefs against U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning.

The surveillance on any and all visitors continued over the years with many journalists declaring that computers or personal belongings were stolen only days after contact or interviewing Assange.

Legal experts have continuously testified that Assange would not receive a fair trial in the U.S., but at London’s Central Criminal Court it was becoming apparent that he was not receiving one in Britain either. The first magistrate assigned to his case, Emma Arbuthnot, in 2017, turned out to have a husband and a son with links to people cited for criminal activities in documents published by WikiLeaks.

When Assange’s hearing convened on September 8, the defense applied for more time to prepare their case, but this was denied. Vital documents were not reaching him. Baraitser rejected the request. She also forced Assange to observe the hearing from a glass cage, usually reserved for violent offenders, at the back of the courtroom where he could not confer with his lawyers. Technical problems interrupted sound transmission to Assange, causing him to miss much of the testimony. When Assange addressed his lawyers across the room, the prosecution could hear what he said. Edward Fitzgerald, Assange’s lead barrister and one of Britain’s best, was in the ring with his hands tied.

The U.N. special rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer, declared, “Mr. Assange has been deliberately exposed, for a period of several years, to persistent and progressively severe forms of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, the cumulative effects of which can only be described as psychological torture.”

Why You Should Care About the Extradition of Julian Assange?

Extradition to the United States could set a dangerous new precedent in international law by allowing powerful governments to demand the handing-over of foreign journalists who publish information they deem damaging to their interests.

Assange’s case deals with basic questions about the nature of a free press, justice for victims of torture, and accountability for powerful governments.

To read the full transcript of the closing case for the defense click here to download a copy.