I agree with Larvidchr's scenario on the previous page and quoted by Little Chuchok above. (Little Chuchok...have you read the details of the case ? ) It is the simplest most direct explanation and takes into account human frailties.
However there is one part in all this I don't understand in light of the following post:

Originally Posted by
larvidchr
the EU including UK and Sweden have an extradition treaty for the whole of the EU, a treaty they all are legally bound by, the EU have then made a collective extradition treaty with the US, one of the conditions in said treaty is that any EU country can refuse to extradite anyone risking the death penalty in the US.
and that is : do you think that the US did not ask for extradition (on a possible charge of espionage) from Britain because Britain has a strong civil rights record ? That they would be less likely to extradite than Sweden ? Because this is the point I don't understand. Why the hullabaloo about extradition from Sweden, when it could have been requested from Britain ?
.
.
.