Of course I have been following Assange's case. Here is my view of it all:
One of the alleged victims claims that she woke up with Assange inside her. That would be sex without consent, even if they had had consentual sex the night before. The other woman's case is not as clear. From all that I have heard of Assange, he is quite a megalomaniac. I think that it is within his character to do the things that he is accused of.
The alleged victims had not tried to press rape charges against him in the first place. The police had heard their story and was bound by protocol to take it further. The first prosecutor closed the case. Then a second prosecutor reopened the case because she is a ultra-feminist with a reputation of persecuting alleged rapists as far as possible. Also, the two women are represented by a lawyer who loves to be in the media. I am sure that there could have been pressure from the US gov. on the prosecutor, lawyer and victims, but I do not think at all that the USA is a factor to consider in this.
About Roman Polanski. The trial was a farce. The judge loved to be the judge in celebrity cases, and wanted to become a celebrity himself from them. Before the closing of the trial, he had instructed the prosecutor and lawyer what to say and do and that Polanski should get a 30-day psychological evaluation, and that was it. He even allowed Polanski to go to Germany to shoot a picture before it would take place. Polanski did, and then he flew back to the USA to receive his "sentence".
A newspaper then published a photo of Polanski with beer-drinking German fangirls -- and the judge thought that this made him look bad in the media, and changed his mind. At this point, Polanski realized that he would not get a fair trial in the US, and so he fled the country.
About the crime? Well, the sex was consentual. The girl was underage and had been much encouraged by her mother who wanted to push herself and her daughter into stardom. The daughter never saw it as a big deal.
