Item — HN Reader

I think she'd be stupid to go there.

But the difference is: no one in their right mind expected Italy to let Ms. Knox leave for the United States when she was in custody.

Only when she was acquitted, the arrest warrant was lifted, and according to Italian law she was free to go, was she able to leave.

1 comments

I don't remember - how did Assange get out of Sweden? I assume he wasn't in Sweden anymore when the accusations were made?

So I am really not sure what you are saying? WOuld you have said Amanda Knox should have gone to Italy, had she already been in the US before the first trial?

He is in the UK and is wanted for arrest in the UK. What's difficult to understand?

I think technically he is in Ecuador.

I don't understand the distinction you make between the two cases. Both people are wanted for trial in another country.

No, he isn't. Can the old urban legend about exteritoriality please already die?

The difference is that noone forces Ms. Knox to Italy, because the USA don't extraditre their citizens, I guess.

Assange isn't in Australia. He's in the UK, and the UK forces him to Sweden.

If you don't see the difference, then there's nothing more I can do or say.

Well if they force him, I expect he will go. That's the definition of forcing somebody to do something. So what was your problem again?