The UK or the Swedish government could easily determine his guilt or innocence -- as in questioning him in the embassy and he's said more than once he's willing, if that's really all they wanted to do instead of waste millions of dollars watching him. The burden of proof is never on the accused to prove his innocence. It's after all only an accusation.
If they want to bring formal charges in court and send him a summons and try him in abstention they can do that too. It's just funny how they have played the game while claiming b/s like you are claiming.
edit because of rate limit to the person below:
If he has no guilty mind then why should he be willing to be arrested? In fact if he's afraid they will do to him what they did to Chelsea Manning, then he's perfectly in his right mind to attempt to avoid extradition by whatever means necessary.
If a totalitarian government is pursuing you because you stole their secrets and exposed them to the public, and they have already imprisoned one of your partners for life in inhumane conditions. Why should you comply with that request?
If they want to bring formal charges in court and send him a summons and try him in abstention they can do that too. It's just funny how they have played the game while claiming b/s like you are claiming.
edit because of rate limit to the person below:
If he has no guilty mind then why should he be willing to be arrested? In fact if he's afraid they will do to him what they did to Chelsea Manning, then he's perfectly in his right mind to attempt to avoid extradition by whatever means necessary.
If a totalitarian government is pursuing you because you stole their secrets and exposed them to the public, and they have already imprisoned one of your partners for life in inhumane conditions. Why should you comply with that request?