In the case of swenden not really an issue. It's countries like greece where the justic system really is that much worse that are the real problem.
Short aside:
I invite you to look up the sentences following the 2001 EU Summit riots. The Swedish legal system really isn't that much better than the Greek. There were plenty of convictions on not-even-circumstantial-and-in-the-face-of-actual-evidence, with unusually harsh sentences to boot.
One particularly jarring example is the man, native of Gothenburg who was convicted for "våldsamt upplopp" (app: "Violent rioting") and for attacking a police officer on the sole basis on having a sweater of similar design as a - masked and hooded - person who was involved in brawling with the police and then managing to get away in the crowd. The actual culprit was of different build and the sweater in question is the one fans of a certain football team wear to show they are part of the cheer club. I.e. there are thousands of them around Gothenburg.
Top this off with the fact that
this man was actually caught on CCTV footage, at a tram stop on his way home, in a completely different part of town at the time of the scuffle (which was in turn also caught on camera, simultaneously in the other side of town). The CCTV footage was available for the preliminary investigation but the investigators decided it wasn't important and when the defence requested it for evidence, it had gone missing. The footage of the scuffle, on the other hand, was available and it very clearly showed someone wearing the same shirt, but very obviously a couple of sizes smaller than the one the police seized when they arrested your man.
Naturally, he was convicted and he also got an unusually long prison sentence. In fact all of the sentences handed out were well beyond common practice for similar crimes and very flimsy evidence was accepted. Actually reading the protocols from the trials there were plenty of cases where the evidence simply didn't hold up, but convictions were still handed out.
There's plenty more that stinks. But if you start reading investigations and convictions you could very easily get a feeling that the best bet to get off is to be guilty as hell. Because innocent people tend to try to prove their innocence, which pisses the courts off, but guilty people simply deny everything and wait out the system.
I still can't make heads or tails of the Assange case - it's all gibbrish to me - but I do not have much, if any, trust in the Swedish legal system. Particularly the first instance (Tingsrätten) seems to get it wrong more often than right. As the "Nämndemän" are neither a jury of peers, nor legal professionals, but usually the local moral majority and happy amateurs who are more concerned with an eyebrow piercing than evidence, looking wrong may very well put your ass in jail.
I'm not defending the Greek legal system (nor condemning it, because I know very little about it) but I'd be hard pressed to trust the Swedish any more than the Greek as long as they insist on upholding all the rulings after the 2001 riots.
/ Derail.
