Many are (rightly IMHO) concerned at US attempts unilaterally to extend its jurisdiction and enforcement processes into other sovereign states. For example the Southern district of New York asserts an international copyright jurisdiction, and South Texas an international patent jurisdiction, and US assertion of the ability to claim multiple damages (a creation of US statute and rare elsewhere) and enforce them in other jurisdictions where they are contrary to established rule of law ahve raised many hackles.

The extradition treaty in point here is one sided and unjust.

If the US were not concerned to obtain a procedural advantage they could have co-operated with UK authorities to prosecute here - but nothing would do but to take this technically ill young man to a foreign place and for the prosecutors to threaten him with unpleasant consequences.

The US, by way of contrast, has consistently refused to recognise the jurisdiction of the International War Crimes tribunal - preferring to protect its own from any foreign prosecution.

The US collects (for its composers) PRS fees collected by the PRS from what in the USA would be exempted from similar fees as being "small establishments".

The US took a WTO dispute out against the UK when the UK tried to honour its obligations to its former colonies by protecting the smaller sterling bananas from (IMHO) unfair competition from dollar bananas.

Is it much wonder that many of us outside the USA view the USA with some suspicion?