"The problem that we have at the moment is a complicated one, and what the story really is hinges on the fact that we do not actually have proof that something

"The problem that we have at the moment is a complicated one, and what the story really is hinges on the fact that we do not actually have proof that something more than a stupid move by a stupid Swedish prosecutor without a case is actually happening." Why would you need proof that it is something more than a stupid move by a prosecutor. That's the wrong way round. Assange is innocent until proven guilty. The onus of proof is on the prosecution here to prove their case. The fact the case was dropped based on the evidence by the head of the prosecutor's office in the primary jurisdiction and picked up by an activist prosecutor in another jurisdiction is a pretty strong indication that the evidence doesn't support the charges. It is now up to the new prosecutor to prove that there is a case to answer and that Assange is being pursued for an actual real crime, not for who he is and the work he is involved with.