How Julian Assange is about to get filthy rich (2024)

EXCLUSIVE

Freed WikiLeaks founderJulian Assange could make tens of millions of dollars from his years in custody, even under Australian laws meant to stop felons profiting from their crimes.

Despite his conviction for espionage in a US court,Assange would likely still be able to make a fortune from writing a book, speaking engagements and selling the movie rights to his tale.

Celebrity publicist and manager Max Markson said Assange could sign a book deal worth at least $10million, reap a further $10million from a film or TV series, and command $500,000 for each personal appearance.

'What he wants, he'll get,' Markson said.'There's rivers of gold to be had and he deserves it all.'

A legal expert told Daily Mail Australia it was unlikely laws previously used to prevent offenders financially benefitting from their crimes would be applied to Assange.

Markson said Assange's earning capacity would be restricted only by how much he wanted to do and at 52 with international interest in his story, 'the world's his oyster'.

'Everyone in the world will want to speak to him and hear from him and interview him and he'll get great money for that,' Markson said.

'He'll be getting a book deal - $10million, maybe $15million, maybe $20million - enormous money for a worldwide book deal.

'He'll get revenue from a movie deal - another $10million.However many countries he can go to he'll be able to to do speaking tours all over the world.

'If this guy wants to do 60 appearances a year at $500,000 he'll pick up $30million, maybe more.'

Former US president Barack Obama and wife Michelle signed a three-book deal for US$65million in 2017, while Prince Harry's advance for his memoir Spare was reportedly US$20million.

Fans of Assange view him as a whistleblowing crusader for truth who exposed American war crimes in the Middle East. Critics say he is a grossly irresponsible narcissist who has endangered or cost Western military lives.

Markson said he expected Assange to donate some of his earnings to fund WikiLeaks and support other causes.He could also see him endorsing products or services.

'He deserves every penny he can get - every million dollars,' Markson said. 'Every $10million he can get, he deserves it.'

Assange pleaded guilty on Wednesday to a single criminal count laid under the US Espionage Act ofconspiring to obtain and disclose classified national defence documents.

He flew home to Australian that nightafter making a plea deal which was ratified during a hearing in a US federal court on the Pacific island of Saipan.

That deal removed the possibility of Assange being taken to the US mainland where he had been indicted on 18 charges and faced a potential 175 years in jail.

Assange had been wanted for espionage in the US since 2010 after WikiLeaks released more than 700,000 military documents, videos, diplomatic cables and battlefield accounts of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In 2012, he sought refuge in Ecuador's British embassy as he faced allegations of sex crimes in Sweden which were later withdrawn.

After seven years Assange lost that protection and was arrested by UK authorities. He spent the next five years in the maximum-security Belmarsh Prison awaiting possible extradition to the US.

On Wednesday, he wassentenced to the time he had already served in Belmarsh - 62 months - and banned from entering the US again without permission.

The wording of the crime to which Assange pleaded guilty - conspiracy to obtain and disclose national (US) defence information - becomes relevant when considering his chances of making a financial windfall.

AustralianCommonwealth legislation, as well as separate laws in Australian states and territories, prevent offenders profiting from their crimes.

Assange's conviction would likely not trigger those restrictions because the specific offence he committed has no obvious equivalent under local law.

His case differs from that of drug smuggler Schapelle Corby and foreign fighter David Hicks because their international crimes wererecognised as offences throughout Australia.

Gold Coast beauty therapist Corby spent nine years in a Balinese prison after being caught smuggling 4.1kg of cannabis into Indonesia in a boogie board bag.

While still behind bars In 2006, Corby released an autobiography titled My Story, with copyright assigned to her sister Mercedes and co-author Kathryn Bonella.

The book sold more than 100,000 and in 2009 the Commonwealth seized $128,000 in payments made to the Corby family from $267,500 it had originally sought.

Adelaide factory worker David Hicks, who was captured by US forces in Afghanistan in 2001 after training with Al Qaeda, was also subjected to proceeds of crime laws.

Hicks served six years in Guantanamo Bay before being transferred to Australia to complete a sentence imposed by a US military court for supporting terrorism.

In 2001, the Commonwealth announced it had commenced proceeds of crime action over Hicks's autobiography Guantanamo: My Journey, which sold about 30,000 copies.

Book sale payments made to Hicks's family were frozen but the Commonwealth dropped the case in 2012 after Hicks claimed his conviction was unlawful.

Associate Professor Christopher Michaelsen from the University of NSW’s Law Faculty referred to both Corby and Hicks when asked if proceeds of crime laws would apply to Assange.

'They are good analogies to draw on although there are significant differences in my view,' Professor Michaelsen said.

'In the case of Hicks, it was terrorism offence. In the Schapelle Corby, it was offences relating to drug trafficking.

'Despite the fact the offences were committed outside of Australia the offences had equivalents under Australian law.'

The key difference in Assange's case was the crime he was convicted of having committed seemed to have no equivalent in Australian law.

'That probably poses a huge question as to whether any of Australia's proceeds of crime legislation either on Commonwealth level or on the state level kicks in here,' Professor Michaelsen said.

'The argument that the Director of Public Prosecutions or AFP would have to make is that there is an equivalent criminal offence in Australian domestic law.'

'I think the only way this case could potentially be successful is if there would be an argument to say that part of the US national defence documents relate to Australian national security information.

'That is a bit of a stretch, in my view.'

Professor Michaelsen also noted that while each state and territory's proceeds of crime laws operated on similar principles and overlapped to some degree with the Commonwealth, they were not identical.

'So, from a technical legal sense, I think it will also depend a little bit on the actual location of where Julian Assange chooses to proceed with any publication,' he said.

If Assange were to be subjected to proceeds of crime laws his story could be told through someone else who would receive any payment.

Foreign proceeds of crime laws could inhibit what money Assange was able to make overseas but freedom of speech was firmly entrenched in the US Constitution.

Professor Michaelsen said there were also political considerations when assessing whether Assange would be targeted with such legislation.

'Proceeds of crime legislation was brought in to prevent hardcore criminals from making a profit out of killing people and selling drugs on a huge scale,' he said.

'You may think about Assange what you like, but he's had a pretty miserable time in 14 years, in relation to the publication of classified documents.

'Should he really be now subject to some sort of criminal control with respect to telling his story? Personally, I'm not so convinced but that's more of a political question.'

Assange has been welcomed home by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and his release had the backing of Australia's ambassador to the UK, Stephen Smith, and his US counterpart Kevin Rudd.

Professor Michaelsen said much of the media coverage of Assange's release had portrayed him as a hero returning to Australia.

'I think that also impacts any decision-making on the part of the Commonwealth to potentially proceed with bringing proceeds of crime provisions,' he said.

'I'm not saying that this is decisive but I think these dynamics will play out in some way.'

Professor Michaelsen thought the Australian public was unlikely to begrudge Assange attempting to recoup money spent securing his release.

Assange's wife Stella, the mother of his two children, has appealed for help to pay the $780,000 bill to fly her husband from London to Saipan to Australia.

'Here's a guy who had a pretty miserable life for the past two decades, he forked out a half a million dollars to fly back,' Professor Michaelsen said.

'He's now trying to recuperate some of these debts telling his story, and what, the Commonwealth doesn't have anything better to do than trying to prevent him from doing that?'

'Obviously the Australian public has much more urgent things to worry about with rising costs of living. Put it this way, it's a politically sensitive issue also to consider for the Commonwealth prosecutor or the AFP.'