He seems to have proven himself to be a hypocritical narcissist, yes. If wikileaks is supposed to be about freedom of speech and challenging state oppression, he could have picked a better nation to hide under than Ecuador, that's for sure. And, it is far more likely he would be extradited from the UK than from Sweden to the US, looking at previous cases involving political dissidents. I seem to recall there is or at least was for a long time an American citizen who sought asylum in Sweden from persecution by the American Government. He wasn't granted it, but they didn't round him up and send him back, either.
On one level, I can understand concerns by some supporters that he could be extradited, subjected to rendition or in some other way sent to the US to face charges connected to the disclosure of confidential information via Wikileaks. But, the fear that that will be more likely to happen if he goes to Sweden is pretty ridiculous.
What is most disturbing is that many of his defenders, folks I'd otherwise rate for their political views like John Pilger and (sort of, just) George Galloway, insist that the sexual assault charges either were deliberately trumped up, or worse, the idea that what happened to the women concerned even if true was not "really rape." However long ago, I came to realise that folks on the left of politics aren't automatically any less misogynistic in their views than those on the right of politics.
I suppose it's not just that his supporters don't believe he could be a rapist. It's that they are willing to bend the definition of what rape means in order to insist he isn't a rapist, because that suits their agenda. The will insist that his (and their) loftier ideals take precedence over the rights and safety of women.