I think John's point is that people are dismissing the actual allegations outright and assuming the conspiracy is true without any evidence at all. There's no

I think John's point is that people are dismissing the actual allegations outright and assuming the conspiracy is true without any evidence at all. There's no evidence I'm aware of to back up the conspiracy. On the other hand the Swedes obviously believe there is enough evidence for a prosecution given the extradition request. Why shouldn't the normal legal process occur? If he's got a good defence case then he should present it to the Swedish court. If he doesn't then he deserves the punishment for any crime he's found guilty of. Edit: I see John has responded himself. See his response :)