The United States doesn't want him nor expressed any interest in him. And there is not a request to detain him by team USA. But who knows what tomorrow will bring. The means. the time and where and how no one will ever know they are secrets. Wow it does sucks to be him.

No! He is either guilty or innocent. The full quote is that "Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law".

Regardless he will not be able to prove his innocence in any useful way until he stands before a court and faces the charges against him.

Hopefully his groupies have not intimidated and harrased his victums until they have dropped their charges! That would be truely sad.

Personally I just think that he is just a knobber and there are far more important things for the 'new' to be reporting about.

I would not want to be him. Must be awful to have to live always looking over your shoulder not knowing if a drone just spotted you. But it's interesting to watch from the sidelines.

Are you sure?

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...228-1u14o.html

No comment. LOL

Ok so anyway really what are his choices? I don't think he has any. He's done. Living on borrowed time. If I were him I'd seriously be worried. He's in that same spot once occupied by the likes of Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gaddafi and Osama Bin Laden. Plus many others. Sometimes its just best to get your things in order now and prepare for what is coming. There's just simply nothing he or anyone can do. Once that ship sets sail it's done. Hopeless. In Russia they lay a pistol before you and leave the room and expect to hear the shot while waiting outside the door. The US expects you to buy your own and take care of it. All of it. If not it's coming and often times at the hands of a hellfire launched by someone half a world away that will be home for dinner that evening. There are some things in life you do not want happening and being wanted by the US is right up there with a hot poker in your rear end. I'm just sayin...

I'm talking from a legal perspective rather than what he did or did not do in fact. Your comment accepted the facts as alleged.

He does not have to prove his innocence - the prosecution has to prove his guilt. His huge problem is that he has already been convicted by the court of public opinion.

He seems like a knobber though - no argument there!

Hood

Here in lies the crux of the problem, which court?

Swedish or the US "kangaroo" court. I'll go with the second option, refer link.

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/tec...228-1u14o.html