 John, we'll come to you. You, of course, along with Stella, are closest to Julian, to his lawyers, to his supporters, so we're very keen to hear from you today. Thank you, Mary. Well, just a couple of things to say. One is that it's the manipulations of the Crown Prosecuting Service and the Department of Justice that ensured that the entirety of the focus now is on Julian's character and his psychology, and they've also brought in Stella into the examination court. This is compared to the immolaya of crime and the benefits brought to the public in the United Kingdom and in the West by the exposure of those crimes on Wigili. Those benefits are clear. Afghanistan is now withdrawn. Iraq war is over. Guantanamo Bay is on the cusp of being closed. The revelations brought by Wigili and Chelsea Manning have worked their way through the body politic, and as a consequence, the people have removed support from governments in pursuing those wars. The scandals, of course, will continue to manifest themselves over the coming years, but the public even have invented amongst themselves a neem, endless wars all over the United States. It's set all the time. The support for the wars has been removed. The benefits of those leaks are tremendous. A gift to people right through Australia, the United Kingdom, Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East, and the United States. The focus being changed to Julian's psychology in itself is a scandal. What is to do with Julian coming to the end? Actually, what it has to do with the extradition is not. Nothing whatsoever. Also, I'd make the point that Professor Koppelman had 17 visits over a period of three months, plus spoke to me a couple of times we met, and then spoke on the phone a couple of times, other members of the family. Time, that is, if there's to be a re-evaluation of Julian's psychology via a psychiatrist, there's another year involved before hearing can be put together about that. That in itself is another scandal. Next, Professor Niel Melzer, Professor of International Law at Glasgow University and the Rapporteur on Torture and Unusual Punishment, has put together a report, an exacting report, on the procedural irregularities extending from Sweden, brought itself into disgrace in this matter, into the United Kingdom, brought the Crown Prosecuting Service and its Administration of Justice into disgrace, brought the Australian government and its ethereal standing above the circumstances of the prosecution and persecution of an Australian citizen, brought themselves into disgrace in every world forum. The standing of Australia is a multi-national. Relationships between nation emerges from the uni power. The standing to enable us to negotiate with other powers and other states is brought to ruin because we're just a bay, we're just a bay, so we're not significant. Next, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, 17 professors of law examining Julian's circumstance and declaring that Julian was arbitrarily, this is 2017, arbitrarily detained and ought to be released and compensation paid. Another report came out February 2018, asserting strongly the previous report of the working group. That report derided in the United Kingdom, ignored in Australia. In the hearing in September, Professor Nils Melza was just called Nils Melza and political dear tribe, when in fact every single point in the report is the abrogation of non-derogatable human rights and procedural irregularities committed by the Crown Prosecuting Service and the Swedish Prosecuting Authority in a documented conspiracy. This report is in the hands of the Australian Government. Well, I know this because Kelly Tramper's FOIs have the report before us. Four pages on either side of the report are completely redacted. A scandal which embraces Australia and its relationship with the United Kingdom and the United States. A scandal which embraces disgrace brought upon the Swedish Prosecuting Authority. A scandal which brings disgrace to the Crown Prosecuting Service. A scandal which brings disgrace to the Department of Justice if they need any more scandals to the CIA and its involvement with the United States German Ambassador Richard Grannell and I can't bring his name to mind. He's died recently, but as if they need any more. Sheldon Adelson, yes, an unpleasant man unfortunately, but so it goes that this is to the way out of this is clear to everybody that the Australian Government use the facilities of negotiation and the imagination of skilled diplomats to work a method of face-saving. If you can I mean it's just it's really is it's how to go about a face saving for the Crown Prosecuting Service and the Swedish Prosecuting Authority and the Department of Justice will be a rural test of Australian diplomats. However, the possibility is there that that's I just finish off my rather worked up and vigorous comments and say that we'll be over there for the hearing on the 27th and 28th. The support in Australia is magnificent. Everywhere I go, I get a good reception. The parliamentarians are generous with their time and with their advisors and staff. The people themselves are welcoming and these tours that I undergo go right up and down the east coast of Australia. Furthermore, that was the same in 17 cities in the United States and the same in Germany in five cities and the same in France in Paris and Leon, the same in Madrid, the same in Oslo in Norway, the same in surprisingly Stockholm. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, the reception and the strength of the support of Julian is very strong. Every single politician, parliamentarian and diplomat in the world would benefit vote-wise by supporting Julian. You might lose two votes, you'll get ten. It's the odds to nothing. I cannot understand why the Australian government and other governments don't put their shoulder behind this and solve it because it brings benefits. It's already brought huge benefits to populations throughout the world and it will bring benefits to governmental administration by showing that governments can support and can act in cases where clear injustices are seen. Thank you. Thank you, John. Thank you. I'd like to ask you a question about the appeal, one of the grounds of the appeal, that is the assurances. What's your response to the assurances that the United States has offered that Julian won't be held in the conditions that his doctors fear he will and lawyers fear he will and that he won't be going to ADX and he'll be able to come back to Australia to see out a sentence? Well, they're complete rubbish. You know, there's now 12 years moving towards 13 years. They just want to murder him. That's all they want him dead. They discuss means of doing it. They've found illegal means of doing it. It's 12 years. It's no joke that they're pursuing Julian Assange in the embassy. In fact, they conspired to keep Julian in the embassy. That's the Crown Prosecuting Service and the Swedish Prosecuting Authority. The Crown Prosecuting Service, Paul Close, told the Swedish Prosecuting Authority to bugger off. It's just documented. We have the evidence there. You shake it under Maurice Payne's nose. There was also evidence given at the extradition trial that the United States has offered such assurances to the United Kingdom in the past and reneged upon them. See, the thing is you can't refuse the assurances between states. It must be clear to us. They can't say no. Your assurances aren't worth too, Bob. They have to find something else. The European Court of Human Rights in a hearing was given the assurances by the United States in a particular case of extradition. The assurances naturally have to be accepted. They were accepted. The person was extradited to the United States and put in sands, especially administrative measures. The assurances are between states. They must be accepted. I understand that. Other means have to be found by the diplomats, by the lawyers, and by the administrators, and then enforced by the politicians.