Assange was denied bail because he faced what Judge Riddle called "serious possible allegations", although he is simply wanted for questioning over possible sexual integrity charges with no evidence being provided by the lawyers representing the Swedish authorities because " the strength of the evidence over the sex charges was not relevant ".

Dewani was freed despite the South African authorities stating there was a confession implicating him, CCTV footage of him handing a package to the murderer, testimony of him exchanging money and telephone calls between Dewani and the murderer.

Assange was deemed to have "someone with comparatively weak community ties in this country" whereas Dewani's "family was of high standing in Bristol". Why having a local family of high standing is relevant to a serious judicial process, or how the subjective issue of 'high standing' is assessed by a magistrate, was not expanded on and was presumed to be self-evident. This was not challenged in court or in the news-media because it is an accepted truism in Britain that there is one law for the rich, and a different law for the poor.

Dewani was described as having no criminal convictions by his Justice Ouseley, but Judge Riddle failed to mention that neither does Assange, not that previous convictions are necessarily relevant to unconnected charges.

Justice Ouseley stated that Dewani's face was well known and it would be difficult for him to leave the UK or go underground. Assange's face is far better known both in the UK and globally, and yet Judge Riddle claimed Assange "has the means and ability to abscond if he wants to". Riddle implies that it is beyond the wit of the British police and Borders agency to contain a man who has no visible means of support due to corporate and banking resources being denied him due to US political pressure, yet the millionaire Dewani who was able to provide £250,000 bail without fundraising was safe to leave at liberty.

I am not implying the guilt of Shrien Dewani, the innocence of Assange nor the corruption of Justice Ouseley in these matters, despite how likely those conclusions appear. There can be no doubt though of the guilt of Judge Riddle, a clearly corrupt political tool who abuses the law as an instrument of state control for his own financial benefit in the obsequious service of his masters. Such 'hanging Judges' are fit only for hanging from lampposts alongside their pseudo-democratic masters. We will never experience any democracy and justice when apparatchiks like Riddle are able to walk the streets without fear.

I hope on the 14th there are many people willing to block the extradition of Assange, and a few more aiming to block the exit of Riddle from the scene of his crime.