I like this article because it seems to be more informative than persuasive.

One thing I found interesting was the author's suggestion that the rule of law will result in the appropriate outcome. However, that assessment assumes that the legal system will basically always get it right.

I think that a lot of people are upset specifically because they don't trust the 'rule of law' cannot be subverted for political gain. In this case, it at least seems plausible that the rules of the courts could be influenced by political forces in some way; thus, people lack faith that the legal system in the UK or Sweden will provide what they believe is an appropriate response.

Both articles are fact-based, and neither contradicts the other as far as I can tell. But it's very easy to put a bias on fuzzy political issues.