Difference between revisions of "Michael Snow"
m |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
===Disgrace to the bench=== | ===Disgrace to the bench=== | ||
| − | If a [[Russian]] opposition politician were dragged out by armed police, and within three hours had been convicted on a political charge by a patently biased judge with no jury, with a lengthy jail sentence to follow, can you imagine the [[ | + | If a [[Russian]] opposition politician were dragged out by armed police, and within three hours had been convicted on a political charge by a patently biased judge with no jury, with a lengthy jail sentence to follow, can you imagine the [[corporate media|Western media]] reaction to that kind of kangaroo court? Yet that is exactly what just happened in London. |
District Judge Michael Snow is a disgrace to the bench who deserves to be infamous well beyond his death. He displayed the most plain and open prejudice against [[Julian Assange|Assange]] in the 15 minutes it took for him to hear the case and declare Assange guilty, in a fashion which makes the dictators’ courts I had witnessed, in [[Ibrahim Babangida|Babangida]]’s [[Nigeria]] or [[Islam Karimov|Karimov]]’s [[Uzbekistan]], look fair and reasonable, in comparison to the gross charade of justice conducted by Michael Snow. | District Judge Michael Snow is a disgrace to the bench who deserves to be infamous well beyond his death. He displayed the most plain and open prejudice against [[Julian Assange|Assange]] in the 15 minutes it took for him to hear the case and declare Assange guilty, in a fashion which makes the dictators’ courts I had witnessed, in [[Ibrahim Babangida|Babangida]]’s [[Nigeria]] or [[Islam Karimov|Karimov]]’s [[Uzbekistan]], look fair and reasonable, in comparison to the gross charade of justice conducted by Michael Snow. | ||
| − | One key fact gave away Snow’s enormous prejudice. [[Julian Assange]] said nothing during the whole brief proceedings, other than to say “Not guilty” twice, and to ask a one sentence question about why the charges were changed midway through this sham “trial”. Yet Judge Michael Snow condemned Assange as “narcissistic”. There was nothing that happened in Snow’s brief court hearing that could conceivably have given rise to that opinion. It was plainly something he brought with him into the courtroom, and had read or heard in the [[corporate media| | + | One key fact gave away Snow’s enormous prejudice. [[Julian Assange]] said nothing during the whole brief proceedings, other than to say “Not guilty” twice, and to ask a one sentence question about why the charges were changed midway through this sham “trial”. Yet Judge Michael Snow condemned Assange as “narcissistic”.<ref>''[[Document:Assange Final Appeal – Your Man in the Public Gallery]]''</ref> There was nothing that happened in Snow’s brief court hearing that could conceivably have given rise to that opinion. It was plainly something he brought with him into the courtroom, and had read or heard in the [[corporate media|corporate media]] or picked up in his club. It was in short the very definition of prejudice, and “Judge” Michael Snow and his summary judgement is a total disgrace.<ref>''[https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2019/04/chelsea-and-julian-are-in-jail-history-trembles/ "Chelsea and Julian are in Jail. History Trembles."]''</ref> |
| + | |||
{{SMWDocs}} | {{SMWDocs}} | ||
| + | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Latest revision as of 15:12, 22 February 2024
 Michael Snow  (Judge) | |
|---|---|
| Born | Michael Paul Snow 1959 |
Michael Snow is a District Judge in London who in 2011 was critical of "pacissifical" protesters.[1]
"Narcissist" Assange
| Judge Michael Snow sending down "pacissifical" protesters in 2011 |
On 11 April 2019, at Westminster Magistrates Court, District Judge Michael Snow labelled WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange a “narcissist” as he was found guilty of skipping bail after spending nearly seven years holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy. The attempt by Assange’s legal team to paint the activist as a victim of bias in his previous hearings was “unacceptable”, Judge Snow told the packed courtroom:
- “His assertion that he has not had a fair hearing is laughable. And his behaviour is that of a narcissist who cannot get beyond his own selfish interests.”
The WikiLeaks founder, who had pleaded not guilty, now faces up to 12 months in prison in relation to the 2012 charge of failing to surrender to the court and will be later sentenced at Southwark Crown Court at an unspecified date.
Separately, Assange is due to appear in court via video link on 2 May 2019 at Westminster Magistrates Court in relation to the US extradition charge of conspiring with Chelsea Manning to break into a classified government computer and disclose sensitive documents in 2010.[2]
Disgrace to the bench
If a Russian opposition politician were dragged out by armed police, and within three hours had been convicted on a political charge by a patently biased judge with no jury, with a lengthy jail sentence to follow, can you imagine the Western media reaction to that kind of kangaroo court? Yet that is exactly what just happened in London.
District Judge Michael Snow is a disgrace to the bench who deserves to be infamous well beyond his death. He displayed the most plain and open prejudice against Assange in the 15 minutes it took for him to hear the case and declare Assange guilty, in a fashion which makes the dictators’ courts I had witnessed, in Babangida’s Nigeria or Karimov’s Uzbekistan, look fair and reasonable, in comparison to the gross charade of justice conducted by Michael Snow.
One key fact gave away Snow’s enormous prejudice. Julian Assange said nothing during the whole brief proceedings, other than to say “Not guilty” twice, and to ask a one sentence question about why the charges were changed midway through this sham “trial”. Yet Judge Michael Snow condemned Assange as “narcissistic”.[3] There was nothing that happened in Snow’s brief court hearing that could conceivably have given rise to that opinion. It was plainly something he brought with him into the courtroom, and had read or heard in the corporate media or picked up in his club. It was in short the very definition of prejudice, and “Judge” Michael Snow and his summary judgement is a total disgrace.[4]
Related Documents
| Title | Type | Publication date | Author(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Document:Assange Final Appeal Day 2 – Your Man in the Public Gallery | blog post | 29 February 2024 | Craig Murray | Initially US authorities were keen to downplay the possible sentence, but have radically changed tack and now emphasise 30 to 40 years as the norm, which is in effect a rest of life sentence. That shift, together with the refusal so far to rule out the death penalty, gives a measure of the ruthlessness with which the CIA is pursuing the extradition of Julian Assange. |
| Document:Assange Final Appeal – Your Man in the Public Gallery | blog post | 21 February 2024 | Craig Murray | The indictment describes Wikileaks as a “non-state hostile intelligence agency”. That was plainly an accusation of espionage. This is self-evidently a politically motivated prosecution for a political offence. |
| Document:Chelsea and Julian are in Jail. History Trembles. | blog post | 12 April 2019 | Craig Murray | Julian Assange said nothing during the whole brief proceedings, other than to say “Not guilty” twice, and to ask a one sentence question about why the charges were changed midway through this sham “trial”. Yet Judge Michael Snow condemned Assange as “narcissistic”. |
| Document:Julian Assange denied access to lawyers, visitors in Britain’s Belmarsh prison | Article | 24 April 2019 | Oscar Grenfell | Chelsea Manning’s punitive detention is a warning of the treatment that will be meted out to Julian Assange if he is extradited to the US |
