That might make sense if one believed they were accused of fake charges by a private person, and are to be judged by an impartial legal system.

It makes no sense if one believes that they were accused of fake charges based on political pressure and are to be judged on a rigged legal system.

It would be like if J.E.Hoover had his eyes on you, had his police build some BS charges, and made sure (whether by police planting evidence, fake testimonies, etc or by having his judge pals on the case too) you'll be convicted.

Would you take your chances to have the case judged?

> If we was so sure of the charges being fake then he should have let them judge him.

Sure, because trumped up charges are symptomatic of a working justice system.

...except Assange would have been transferred to America to stand trial over Wikileaks before he would even have a chance to stand trial over the rape accusations.

I don't think there was an extradition request from the US, was there? Only one from Sweden. And it's very unlikely that Sweden would extradite him to the US for this. They value the free press, but take rape very seriously.

The plan was to get him to the US all along, unless you want to believe it was a coincidence that Sweden kept up the request for ten years but dropped it the minute it got in the way of extradition to the US.

As to why Sweden, who knows why they thought that would be preferable. Maybe just to smear his reputation a bit, to soften the protest at the treatment they want to give him? Very successful if so.

But either way, you're talking about the people who forced down the Bolivian president's plane because they thought Snowden might be hiding in it. When they say "the law only matters when the outcome doesn't", this would be an example of a case where the outcome (stop Wikileaks) mattered.

He know sthat there is little justice in the US system. It's not like he's going to a cushy Scandinavian prison. He will be going to max security federal prison with hardened criminals who will likely beat him to death or shank him.

He didn't fear the charges, he feared the extradition - and that's exactly what happened - Sweden dropped the charges anyway, but he ended-up being extradited.

Maybe he didn't trust the judge/court to fairly judge him?

It is still a choice he could make (and did), which is more than many have.

It is great that people are speaking up about the conditions under which people are punished and the no-win games that put them there. I only wish people could do so when it isn't some high-profile person.