Well, I know full well that 'sexual assault' does not have to be linked with physical violence, but lack of it certainly makes it somewhat less serious than oth

Well, I know full well that 'sexual assault' does not have to be linked with physical violence, but lack of it certainly makes it somewhat less serious than other cases, does it not? Also, the victims did not want to persecute him, they just wanted to know how they could make him take some test. Also, attorney (is it correct word?) who looked at the case closed (dismissed?) it, it was only reopened later, by another attorney. Also, it's not certain that the victim was 'asleep' or just 'half asleep', which would mean that she was NOT raped (because she was able to protest, which she didn't do, it's how I understand this). Also, interrogating suspects abroad IS possible and happens often - not that long ago two swedish officials were sent to my country (Poland) to interrogate someone. And so on. Sorry, I know that rape is very serious crime and should be punished, but I don't think your stance in this matter - that Assange is guilty of RAPE, omg, omg! - is valid. I think you're needlessly emotional about the matter. You may dislike him, but you should at least try being objective - you'd realize that finding him guilty here on forum is not a good thing at all, not to law, not to his victims, and not even to you.