Hacker not to be extradited

Jonny7

It what seems like a sudden case of common sense May has decided not to extradite McKinnon - and apparently will be some sort of bar forum to decide such cases in future

Too late for others though who have been extradited

Good call on this particular case

KyussBishop

Good news indeed, quite glad to hear it, though it wasn't decided on grounds relating to the actual case, but on the high risk that McKinnon would commit suicide.

Still, a good result but for the wrong reasons, is still a good result; hope whatever punishment he receives within the UK now will be balanced.

yoyo

Was delighted to hear the postive outcome. As somebody who suffers with Asperger's Syndrome I can only imagine how Gary must have felt. Great to see common sense won in this case.

Nick

Grudaire

The Yanks seem to have blown the whole thing out of proportion. This case really annoyed me, so I'm absolutely delighted that he doesn't have to go to America.

How the hell would they have treated the "biggest military computer hack of all time"?

Eggy Baby!

If he did not have Aspergers, would he have been extradited?

Grudaire

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

If he did not have Aspergers, would he have been extradited?

That's not the reason he wasn't extridited. They have been very clear that it is the documented suicide diagnosis that is the cause.

I think it's a combination that saved him from the US's clutches:

• He's British (and is of british background)
• He has Asbergers
• He is at risk of suicide
• His mother has run a good campaign to save him
• His crime isn't exactly heneous!

On top of this the Yanks have not given a very good reason to extridite him (which they don't have to under the law).

spank_inferno

So if I commit an act of cyber-terrorism against a US asset I will not face extradition if I am deemed a suicide risk?

That seems a bit soft doesn't it?

Surely if someone is a suicide risk they are placed in an environment & supervised so this would be next to impossible?

Grudaire

spank_inferno wrote: »

So if I commit an act of cyber-terrorism against a US asset I will not face extradition if I am deemed a suicide risk?

Who said anything about terrorism!?

spank_inferno wrote: »

Surely if someone is a suicide risk they are placed in an environment & supervised so this would be next to impossible?

Ah yes, straight from the scarecrow textbook of phsycology!

spank_inferno

Cliste wrote: »

Who said anything about terrorism!?!

I did....
I wouldn't be the only one to see the below as terrorist attack.
Especially considering the time he performed the (alleged) crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon#Alleged_crime

McKinnon is accused of hacking into 97 United States military and NASA computers over a 13-month period between February 2001 and March 2002, at his girlfriend's aunt's house in London, using the name 'Solo'.

The US authorities claim he deleted critical files from operating systems, which shut down the US Army’s Military District of Washington network of 2,000 computers for 24 hours.
McKinnon also posted a notice on the military's website: "Your security is crap".
After the September 11 attacks, he deleted weapons logs at the Earle Naval Weapons Station, rendering its network of 300 computers inoperable and paralyzing munitions supply deliveries for the US Navy's Atlantic Fleet. McKinnon is also accused of copying data, account files and passwords onto his own computer. US authorities claim the cost of tracking and correcting the problems he caused was over $700,000.

While not admitting that it constituted evidence of destruction, McKinnon did admit leaving a threat on one computer:

US foreign policy is akin to Government-sponsored terrorism these days … It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand down on September 11 last year … I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels …

US authorities claim that McKinnon is trying to downplay his own actions. A senior military officer at the Pentagon told The Sunday Telegraph: "US policy is to fight these attacks as strongly as possible. As a result of Mr McKinnon's actions, we suffered serious damage. This was not some harmless incident. He did very serious and deliberate damage to military and Nasa computers and left silly and anti-America messages. All the evidence was that someone was staging a very serious attack on US computer systems."

The extradition treaty the US & UK have looks like a bag of balls though (not requiring adequate evidence), thats quite shocking.

However if the UK DPP seek to bring charges against him in a UK court, I'm sure he would have no problem answering them.

JustinDee

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

If he did not have Aspergers, would he have been extradited?

I would say so. He broke into some serious and high-security risk networks. Not exactly cracking into a home wifi.

I'd imagine the US Attorney General will appeal.

Grudaire

spank_inferno wrote: »

I did....
I wouldn't be the only one to see the below as terrorist attack.
Especially considering the time he performed the (alleged) crimes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon#Alleged_crime

Not to be picky or anything but even the yanks don't really define what he did as terrorism. I dislike the bandying around of words completely incorrectly:

the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives


Taliban, IRA, UVF = terrorists

spank_inferno wrote: »

The extradition treaty the US & UK have looks like a bag of balls though (not requiring adequate evidence), thats quite shocking.

This is undoubtetly true!

Jonny7

spank_inferno wrote: »

So if I commit an act of cyber-terrorism against a US asset I will not face extradition if I am deemed a suicide risk?

That seems a bit soft doesn't it?

Surely if someone is a suicide risk they are placed in an environment & supervised so this would be next to impossible?

Yeah but this case was some kid with aspergers hacking a system trying to find picture of UFO's - it genuinely wasn't any more malicious that that, and we all know it.

Unfortunately, due to the severity of what that system stands for, the US would have virtyually no scope for consideration and almost definitely prosecute him to the full extent.

The US will raise issue with the non-extradition, but only because it has to be seen to be doing so, privately I doubt they will pursue this - it was the right thing to do.

spank_inferno

Jonny7 wrote: »

Yeah but this case was some kid with aspergers hacking a system trying to find picture of UFO's - it genuinely wasn't any more malicious that that, and we all know it.

Unfortunately, due to the severity of what that system stands for, the US would have virtyually no scope for consideration and almost definitely prosecute him to the full extent.

The US will raise issue with the non-extradition, but only because it has to be seen to be doing so, privately I doubt they will pursue this - it was the right thing to do.

The US may drop it alright, I guess it depends on whether the UK DPP will persue charges or not.
Though after so many years perhaps they will not.

For the record, he was a 36 year old systems administrator when the alleged crimes took place.

PopePalpatine

I wonder if the guy who set up TVShack is also going to get the same leniency re: extradition...

Grudaire

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I wonder if the guy who set up TVShack is also going to get the same leniency re: extradition...

Thats a funny one alright.

Legally did he actually commit a crime in America? Surely he should be tried in the UK?

ButtimersLaw

yoyo wrote: »

Was delighted to hear the postive outcome. As somebody who suffers with Asperger's Syndrome I can only imagine how Gary must have felt. Great to see common sense won in this case.

Nick

I have always felt uneasy with the practice and principle of a country extraditing its citizens for crimes committed in their own country, to stand trial in another country for those offences.

Having said that, as an Asperger's sufferer you'll know that that fact alone doesn't absolve you of all, or any, responsibility for your decisions or actions.

I can imagine anyone whom the USA is trying to extradite, for what are quite serious offences, must feel pretty dreadful, and don't imagine having or not having Asperger's adds or detracts from that.

The majority of adults with Asperger's live entirely normal lives, and are as aware as everyone else of the difference between right and wrong.

Son Of A Vidic

Shocking that this case has dragged on for so long. But it's good to see some cop on prevailing for once.

mitosis

The USA should prosecute the sh** out of him through the UK courts. Even civil action. He caused millions of dollars damage to something belonging to someone else. While I agree extradition would not be appropriate, that he is not should not mean he is exempt from punishment.

Grudaire

mitosis wrote: »

The USA should prosecute the sh** out of him through the UK courts. Even civil action. He caused millions of dollars damage to something belonging to someone else.

Even the Yanks never claimed it to be a million dollars damage tbf

15. The appellant’s conduct was alleged to be intentional and calculated to influence the US Government by intimidation and coercion. It damaged computers by impairing their integrity, availability and operation of programmes, systems, information and data, rendering them unreliable. The cost of repair was alleged to total over $700,000.

See: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldjudgmt/jd080730/mckinn-1.htm

mitosis

I stand corrected on the monetary cost. Nonetheless I believe he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Grudaire

mitosis wrote: »

I stand corrected on the monetary cost. Nonetheless I believe he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Good for you, you'd fit in well in the US Attorneys Office :rolleyes:

yoyo

ButtimersLaw wrote: »

I have always felt uneasy with the practice and principle of a country extraditing its citizens for crimes committed in their own country, to stand trial in another country for those offences.

Having said that, as an Asperger's sufferer you'll know that that fact alone doesn't absolve you of all, or any, responsibility for your decisions or actions.

I can imagine anyone whom the USA is trying to extradite, for what are quite serious offences, must feel pretty dreadful, and don't imagine having or not having Asperger's adds or detracts from that.

The majority of adults with Asperger's live entirely normal lives, and are as aware as everyone else of the difference between right and wrong.

I agree 100% with what your saying, and I do think he should be punished for doing the hacking. I don't agree with him, however, being extradited to a foreign country where he will be on his own and be thrown into a prison where they probably have no concern for persons disabilities at all.
As someone who has AS I would not be able to emigrate abroad alone or be that far from family or friends. It's not easy for us to just put our heads down and get on with things, he would have found prison in the US unimaginably stressful.
I think trying him in the UK would be fair enough, I don't believe he should get away scott free just because of the AS. But you must remember, AS is high functioning Autism and attached to that are traits commonly found with autism, poor social skills, stress, anxiety etc. Not an easy thing to live with I must admit and you could imagine that burden on you in a US prison. Some of those shows on Nat Geo showing the inside of US prisons, not nice :P .

Nick

ButtimersLaw

Cliste wrote: »

Good for you, you'd fit in well in the US Attorneys Office :rolleyes:

I am not sure what it is you are suggesting here.

Are you suggesting (a) that there should be no consequences for anyone who commits a crime or (b) that the US Attorney's office is corrupt and consequently incapable.

If the latter, what do you suggest apart from rolley eyes?

yore

Cliste wrote: »

That's not the reason he wasn't extridited. They have been very clear that it is the documented suicide diagnosis that is the cause.

.....Seems like a precedent that might make difficult the extradition of people suspected of planning suicide terrorist attacks.........

VinLieger

mitosis wrote: »

I stand corrected on the monetary cost. Nonetheless I believe he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

Harsh, real harsh, do you know or have you ever met someone with aspergers?
This was a dude who fully believed he was looking for pictures of UFOs, how can you argue he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law like you or i would be when chances are he doesnt completely understand the severity of what hes done.
Also instead of prosecuting him maybe a good idea would be to show him some fake pictures "swear" him to secrecy and then give him a job to show them how to make the place more secure

mitosis

VinLieger wrote: »

Harsh, real harsh, do you know or have you ever met someone with aspergers?
This was a dude who fully believed he was looking for pictures of UFOs, how can you argue he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law like you or i would be when chances are he doesnt completely understand the severity of what hes done.
Also instead of prosecuting him maybe a good idea would be to show him some fake pictures "swear" him to secrecy and then give him a job to show them how to make the place more secure

Aspergers is not the reason he's not being extradited. You seem to suggest, though, that it should be a get out of jail free card. That they should reward criminal behaviour? If he has no concept or right/wrong, no understanding of degree, why do you want him working in Govt security?

JustinDee

VinLieger wrote: »

Also instead of prosecuting him maybe a good idea would be to show him some fake pictures "swear" him to secrecy and then give him a job to show them how to make the place more secure

He's either in control or not. To give him a high-security government job is hardly the role befitting someone apparently ill. This isn't Hollywood, BBC Three or the UK's Liberal Democrat party we're discussing here.

Grudaire

Not sure if this is good or not:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20730627

Basically they're not going to prosecute him in the UK due to a low chance of conviction. There's still an arrest warrent out for him so he can't travel!

I wonder if it is because the US didn't give enough evidence or details to the UK, or is it an issue with the legislation.

It's still great that he wasn't sent over to America for triall. Just look at how they are treating Bradley Wiggans - a US citizen and soldier to get an idea of what they are capable of doing without actually convicting. Woop for freedom :pac:

ArmaniJeanss

Cliste wrote: »

It's still great that he wasn't sent over to America for triall. Just look at how they are treating Bradley Wiggans - a US citizen and soldier

Forcing him to cycle through France at high speed for 20 days running?

Grudaire

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Forcing him to cycle through France at high speed for 20 days running?

Sh*t....

The other one - Manning