Makes one wonder why the US needed to reopen a closed Swiss rape allagation rather then the obvious facts you state. To convince an allied nation to extradite then?

Its fairly clear that the law is a little less direct then you claim when talking extradition.

[–] oahi@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

(Swedish =/= Swiss.)

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

Opps.

Honestly i do tend to muddle them up. Also been a few years so will use that as an excuse. Lame one but ah.

[–] Klypto@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Correct on that last part.

Why should foreign nations care about US laws? Any extradition by any nation is a courtesy at best.

However it is ludicrous to say US should drop charges.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Bit more then a curtasy as we have treaties to ensure rules.

But the UK will only do so if it is also a crime here. And not if the death sentence is likely. As our laws prohibit rhat. (For now).

But it is interesting that tue garedian and telegraph also published this data. And the US is ignoring them. Seems more of a power play against the idea of wiki lwaks then any actual risk to the US.