I have tried to have no bias in my comment, but if you detect it... I am English if they help contextualise it.
1. That the law was broken in the UK, and US should bring the complaint to the British authorities. If they do not find the resolve they wish through authorities than, and only then should they invoke any extradition agreement.
2. That is Britain or any country does not like the terms of an agreement, then they should have not entered into it. If (as in this case) there is a massive disparity in the in the guilty term, then we (The English) should have pushed for a clues cover what the British define as cruel or unusual or extreme... such as the death penalty, or 60 years.
3. All both UK and USA have a sense of honour and pride that has been damaged in this... Embarrassment on the part of the USA that needs to make out that some who tried the password '12345' (or whatever) is crafty hacker (The reality was a craft-less system). The UK that needs to show it's not America's bitch. Both have something to gain in dragging this out for a bit.
4. I have no doubt that the American court will recognise such things as 'compulsive behaviour', reduced responsibility. I think that American court has to recognise circumstantial evidence, and other evidence from a partner as being a fundamental part of any extradition agreement. I personally would like to Americans better manage that.
5. I find it hard to understand why we see 'stupidity' as mitigating on the part of the Hacker and damning on the part of the dipshits that set up a swiss-cheese of a system for the Americans. Sure I believe that the hacker broke the law and should get a fine (that is balanced to personal circumstance), and maybe a few months time and record. But he was not responsible for the security of system, and not negligent of that system, (and he did not damage the system, but i reconise the endless damage to organisations assurance and dependence on it) and it is my opinion the negligent party (who has not broken law, but a contract to supply a 'secure' system) who is most responsible for the cost (in terms of embarrassment) and the cost of audit, and the cost of locking an open door.