
it would be up to the crown prosecution service to determine if there was a reasonable chance of conviction. The UK and Sweden have different rape laws, with the Swedish law lacking the test for "reasonable expectation of consent".
Even in the Swedish case, these are the facts:
the Swedish Director of Prosecutions recommended that the case shouldnt proceed based on his appraisal of the evidence. This advice was ignored by the lead prosecutor.
The lead prosecutor is a political appointee, as prosecutors are in sweden
She has a platform as a crusader for anti-sexual violence
Her office leaked assange arrest warrant to the press on their blog two hours after it was given, violating swedish confidentiality in rape cases
She convinced both women who initially approached her office to try to force assange to have an STI test to change their accusation to rape
These are just the facts. there are other irregularties that are alleged, such as the accusers contacting the media asking for payment for stories
I'll let people make up their mind about how justified the prosecution against assange is, but to me it seems very weak
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 23:32, Reply)

Two women have accused him of sexual misconduct; so you fly to Sweden and resolve the misunderstanding, or more serious rape accusations.
Or you don't and flee like a coward. But where exactly? He hasn't worked out nowhere is left to go.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 23:58, Reply)

it's very easy to call someone a coward, but it were you that was facing a lifetime stretch in a shitty US federal prison for being a whistleblower, then maybe you'd try to avoid it as well instead of proving how manly you are.
Whether his fears are justified is another debate, but I think based on some recent evidence they are not totally baseless
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 2:50, Reply)