Gary Mckinnon, and the debate of extradition

[BruceVC]

http://news.techworl...-today/?olo=rss

 

Hi All

Some of you may have followed this story. In summary a UK based computer expert, Gary Mckinnon, hacked into the Pentagon in 2002 and caused major system disruption. He was charged in the USA but has been fighting extradition the last 10 years. His defense claims, amongst other things, that being sent to the USA would be considered a "cruel punishment" and he wants to be charged in the UK.

 

Whats your view on this and people that fight extradition. I notice that people seem to particularly fight extradition to the USA. I think its a joke and amounts to people not wanting to face an effective court system. Recently in the UK we had the convicted terrorist, Abu Hamza, also fighting extradition. Thankfully he is now in the USA and faces numerous charges related to terrorism. People commit crimes and then don't want to take responsibility in a US court. In South Africa we also get people that fight extradition to South Africa to face charges like murder and rape. They claim a prison sentence in South Africa is the same as a death sentence due to gangs, over crowding and HIV. This of course is an exaggeration but they try this argument. Anyway you can't compare the prisons in the USA to South Africa.

 

I feel Gary Mckinnon needs to go the USA and face the charges, jail time in the USA doesn't mean a death sentence.

Edited October 16, 2012 by BruceVC

[Gorgon]

Every case is different. They would probably come down extremely hard on the hacker in the name of national security. In those cases you want all the help your embassy and your legal system can provide. Extradition treaties also allow for nationals to serve prison sentences in their country of origin.

[Raithe]

Part of it was political as well. The US pushed through a treaty after 9/11 that let them demand extradition from the UK, but gave them the easy right to refuse extradition of people the UK wanted to charge from the US.

 

One point I always found dubious about McKinnons defense was that his mother didn't want him stuck in an american jail because she thought he had Aspergers and wouldn't be able to visit him if he was jailed in the US. He was only diagnosed with it after the arrest and potential extradition cropped up.

 

On the flip side, in the UK he'd be charged with the computer crimes, but not in the potential terrorist/national security issues. Mostly because when you get down to it, he's a bit of a weird guy who really wanted to find evidence of UFO's on the pentagon servers... While if he does end up in a US court, he gets slapped with the whole national security aspect and a jury of americans who will see some annoying Brit... (can we say fair trial here..). So depending on exactly where he gets tried and the language used , he could go from facing a few years jail time and a big slap on the wrist, to potentially a couple of decades if the US pulls out all the stops.

[Blarghagh]

Having to go to the USA is a cruel punishment, in context and out of it.

[BruceVC]

Part of it was political as well. The US pushed through a treaty after 9/11 that let them demand extradition from the UK, but gave them the easy right to refuse extradition of people the UK wanted to charge from the US.

 

One point I always found dubious about McKinnons defense was that his mother didn't want him stuck in an american jail because she thought he had Aspergers and wouldn't be able to visit him if he was jailed in the US. He was only diagnosed with it after the arrest and potential extradition cropped up.

 

On the flip side, in the UK he'd be charged with the computer crimes, but not in the potential terrorist/national security issues. Mostly because when you get down to it, he's a bit of a weird guy who really wanted to find evidence of UFO's on the pentagon servers... While if he does end up in a US court, he gets slapped with the whole national security aspect and a jury of americans who will see some annoying Brit... (can we say fair trial here..). So depending on exactly where he gets tried and the language used , he could go from facing a few years jail time and a big slap on the wrist, to potentially a couple of decades if the US pulls out all the stops.

 

You have raised some good points about what might happen to him in the USA. I see his extradition has now been blocked. The UK authorities feel due to his mental state he may commit suicide as he is apparently suffering from Aspergers as you mentioned. Now that he probably won't be prosecuted anymore I wonder how "depressed" he will be. You will be amazed how happy people become when they aren't facing criminal charges

Edited October 16, 2012 by BruceVC

[Morgoth]

The Pentagon was just scared ****less that some of their UFO related information would get leaked, so they had to statute an example by destroying a young man's life.

 

Kinda like the Nazis.

[Malcador]

Well, that scheme worked out for him I guess, heh. Also, Nazis would just kill him outright, zealots tend to not bother with graceful destruction of him.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Malcador

[BruceVC]

The Pentagon was just scared ****less that some of their UFO related information would get leaked, so they had to statute an example by destroying a young man's life.

 

Kinda like the Nazis.

 

You joking I assume, and if you are your comment is funny

Edited October 16, 2012 by BruceVC

[Morgoth]

The Pentagon was just scared ****less that some of their UFO related information would get leaked, so they had to statute an example by destroying a young man's life.

 

Kinda like the Nazis.

 

You joking I assume, and if you are your comment is funny

 

What do you mean with joking? You're the one who made the topic. You *do* know that Gary was searching for UFO files and was catched, right?

[Raithe]

Another aspect that probably has been overshadowed now, was that back when he was first charged and the US wanted to extradite him, there had been a spate of UK based hackers hitting various US servers. In each of those other cases, the UK tried them and gave minimal sentences. So the US were going all out to make a severe example out of McKinnon and really didn't want another "soft trial and sentence" simply because it was some computer crime rather then violent behaviour.

 

Of course, its now a decade on and most of thats forgotten, now its all about the "principle" of the matter..

[Malcador]

Probably wondering at your "Americans are Nazis!!!" comment. I should read the Guardian comments on this, people there are probably breaking their wrists over the joy that he wasn't going to end up in Gitmo or tortured...for some reason. Also he's a whistleblower

 

Lucky he's not a brown guy, they'd have shipped him off ages ago.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Malcador

[Morgoth]

These totalitarian regimes, they always start with small steps.

[BruceVC]

The Pentagon was just scared ****less that some of their UFO related information would get leaked, so they had to statute an example by destroying a young man's life.

 

Kinda like the Nazis.

 

You joking I assume, and if you are your comment is funny

 

What do you mean with joking? You're the one who made the topic. You *do* know that Gary was searching for UFO files and was catched, right?

 

Yes I am aware I made the topic and what Gary's defense team claims he was doing when he hacked into the Pentagon

 

The reason I asked if you were joking was because you can't seriously think the reason the USA wants to charge him is because he may leak UFO information?

[BruceVC]

Probably wondering at your "Americans are Nazis!!!" comment. I should read the Guardian comments on this, people there are probably breaking their wrists over the joy that he wasn't going to end up in Gitmo or tortured...for some reason. Also he's a whistleblower

 

Lucky he's not a brown guy, they'd have shipped him off ages ago.

 

It just shows the ignorance that people have around the American legal system. Mckinnon wouldn't have been tortured or sent to Guantanamo Bay, he would have ended up in any normal Federal prison. Just like all other hackers

[Morgoth]

"Normal" Federal prison.

 

Right.

[Walsingham]

I think it's bizarre that the British people get so animated about losing judicial sovereignty to the US on a pretty limited range of offences, but cheerfully ignore the complete subordination of our system to the EU.

 

Makes the case moot in my opinion.

 

However, that said, I also think it's ludicrous to conduct an assault on a US system and then claim that one shouldn't face prosecution by the US. If he was lofting coconuts at greenhouses we'd get it. Unless I've understood the nature of the offence.

[Raithe]

I think part of the fuss was how the UK viewed it purely as a "Computer Crime" while the US was lobbying to stress the "Terrorist" nature of it since it was the Pentagon.

[Walsingham]

I suppose there's no chance of trying him for 'botherist' offences. The crime of being an annoying ****.

[Gorgon]

I still think I would prefer an EU criminal court (if such a thing existed) over the US when the charges are national security related.

 

Nice of you to drop by.

[Humodour]

Having to go to the USA is a cruel punishment, in context and out of it.

 

This.

 

There are few circumstance where anybody should have to suffer extradition to the USA. You just can't trust that country to protect someone's human rights.

[Volourn]

"Every case is different. They would probably come down extremely hard on the hacker in the name of national security. In those cases you want all the help your embassy and your legal system can provide. Extradition treaties also allow for nationals to serve prison sentences in their country of origin. "

 

Don't do the crime if you cna't do the time.

 

 

"This.

 

There are few circumstance where anybody should have to suffer extradition to the USA. You just can't trust that country to protect someone's human rights."

 

Says someone who comes from country built on criminality. L0L

 

I bet if situations were reversed you'd be wnating justice as well.

 

The US has done more for human rights than the vast majority of countries in the world. That is a FACT.

[Meshugger]

Ultimately, this matters are defined by the laws of the host country.

 

For example, i do not think that the UK would extradite anyone if there's a possibility for the accused to face the death penalty.

[BruceVC]

"

There are few circumstance where anybody should have to suffer extradition to the USA. You just can't trust that country to protect someone's human rights."

 

 

I do think a suggestion that the USA doesn't respect human rights is an egregious and gross exaggeration.

 

We know that there have been incidents since 9\11 that include

• waterboarding as a technique to gain information
  
• certain prisoners, related to the War on Terror, being interrogated in countries that use totorture
  
• Cases where the human rights of prisoners were abused, Abu Ghraib comes to mind
  

But these exceptions were always condemned when exposed. This wasn't the official USA policy even though some departments in the USA did know about it. In times of war all countries do things that are questionable. It is not accurate to say now that the USA doesn't respect human rights or to suggest that someone like Gary Mckinnon human rights would be automatically abused.

Edited October 17, 2012 by BruceVC

[Zoraptor]

Waterboarding wasn't condemned, it was reclassified as an "enhanced interrogation technique", officially sanctioned and publicly condoned when it was revealed.

 

And that was for a technique that the US executed japanese soldiers for using in WW2.

[Hurlshort]

Anyone who thinks the terrorism charges would stick to this guy hasn't watched enough Law & Order.