1. He was not accused (by Swedish, UK, or US authorities) of being a horrible person, and if he were, they'd be laughed out of court.

2. Even if what you said was provably true (which, to stress, it is not. Go read the article I linked) then none of what you listed would justify stripping him of his fundamental rights like access to a lawyer, protection from cruel and unusual punishment, etc.

3. You totally fail to mention the rest of the context like... oh I don't know... that he published documents that clearly and without a doubt documented war crimes and others crimes that had wilfully been covered up.

He was never, for even a second, stripped of his fundamental right of access to a lawyer. He, by his own free will, chose not to take part in the legal process that would grant him his access to a lawyer. Nor was any cruel or unjust punishment enforced on him. No punishment whatsoever was enforced on him. Every thing that happened to him happened, again, of his own free will. He chose to lock himself in a house. Nobody forced him to do so. He could, every hour of every day of all those years, open the door and walk out.

Seriously? Read the article. Especially the later part about, how the UK and the US are... denying him access to his lawyers.

The article makes so many misrepresentations, I am not very inclined to take what is says at face value.

It tries hard to make it sound like he does not have access to a lawyer, but what it actually seems to say is that he is not able to bring documents to his cell from the lawyer that he does have access to.

Did you actually read the interview? It lists and explains evidence that this history of sexual misconduct is, at least in large parts, intentionally constructed by the public authorities

There are other cases that are not related to these particular two at all.

could you point me to some article about that?

This is an article about general absolutely awful behaviour: https://theintercept.com/2018/02/14/julian-assange-wikileaks...

Also, https://www.thedailybeast.com/free-press-group-set-to-cut-of...

While both these articles go into details about unsavory awful behavior, there is no indication of (additional) sexual misconduct in them. Claiming that there are more cases despite that seems misleading. While I do not approve of Assanges actions and statements as detailed in the intercept article, being a douche is not evidence of sexual misconduct

It is not, but there is a strong correlation, and you should bear it in mind when evaluating how likely you think those accusations are to be true.

I am sure I have read other more direct accusations, but unfortunately I am not finding the sources at the moment.

I still think these articles are more than enough to cast some pretty strong doubts over the claims of his defences, and I think nobody who has read them should be quite so eager to run to his defence.

Assange can be a horrible person and also be targeted for his political actions. The Snowen documents confirmed that the US had been targeting him since around 2008.

Any Trump or Russia connections do not make the Manning leaks a crime.

True. But it also does not make him a good person, or worthy of support. He very deliberately turned Wikileaks into a propaganda tool for Russia. And their motives are no more pure than those of the US.

He has done massive damage by allowing his organisation to be used to promote the oppression and cruelty of the Trump regime, and he has throughly poisoned the waters for anyone else wanting to leak information.

"it also does not make him a good person, or worthy of support."

What's that got to do with anything? How about just upholding the rule of law? Justice isn't supposed to be a popularity contest.

What law is not being upheld?

As I said in cousin comment: his access to lawyers, right now. For starters.

>He very deliberately turned Wikileaks into a propaganda tool for Russia. And their motives are no more pure than those of the US.

Though I don't agree with this statement, that is not a crime and not what he is being charged with.

>He has done massive damage by allowing his organisation to be used to promote the oppression and cruelty of the Trump regime, and he has throughly poisoned the waters for anyone else wanting to leak information

I agree, seeing Assange get tortured for 8 years probably has caused people to become less willing to publish leaks. I don't see how you can blame the person undergoing such treatment for trying to escape it.

> Though I don't agree with this statement, that is not a crime and not what he is being charged with.

I am not interested in what is legal, I am interested in what is moral.

> I agree, seeing Assange get tortured for 8 years

Assange tortured himself for 8 years. He was free to walk out the door every hour of every day of those eight years.