You might have missed that the venue of a trial is usually pre-determined, certainly not chosen at the whim of the defendant.
Do you think she should go to Italy? If she doesn't go, would that make you believe she is guilty?
But the difference is: no one in their right mind expected Italy to let Ms. Knox leave for the United States when she was in custody.
Only when she was acquitted, the arrest warrant was lifted, and according to Italian law she was free to go, was she able to leave.
So I am really not sure what you are saying? WOuld you have said Amanda Knox should have gone to Italy, had she already been in the US before the first trial?
I don't understand the distinction you make between the two cases. Both people are wanted for trial in another country.
The difference is that noone forces Ms. Knox to Italy, because the USA don't extraditre their citizens, I guess.
Assange isn't in Australia. He's in the UK, and the UK forces him to Sweden.
If you don't see the difference, then there's nothing more I can do or say.