Just wondering...

Who exactly has he hurt in hacking the FBI's files to look for UFO nonsense? OK, it is illegal, but did he have any kind of malicious intent?

The way I see it, the US are just interested in punishing someone who's made them look like a bunch of incompetents. The effect of which is that they now look both incompetent and like bullies. Also yes, our extradition laws are so one sided, it's just crazy.

Votes

Mine goes to whichever party changes the treaty.

How come the Judicial Review is limited to a week?

Everybody else gets 3 months.

Looks to me like Johnson is hoping it all goes away. I have news for you Alan. This is going to haunt you for a long time to come.

@Richard81

So it's okay if I break into your house and have a look around, as long as I don't damage anything?

Let me know your address and I'll come round one night and watch your wife whilst she's sleeping.

I don't understand this whole thing at all, really. He broke into Pentagon computers - what does he expect?

You know what?

I've had just about enough of this guy.

Suicidal is a psychological state of mind, not a verb, so his mother cannot claim that he should not go through this due to the fact he stupidly infiltrated a lax security system. If someone's door is open, it doesn't give you the right to wander in.

As somebody very technical, who enjoys reading the register, we should forget this guy's asperger's syndrome, not because I don't believe he had it at the time, but because the fact is this whole thing seems like a massive over-reaction. We should base being against the extradition on that, not on some illness that he likely did not have at the time when he was knowingly entering systems.

He was old enough to know better, and that's all I have to say.

I fear this will end badly

Johnson is obviously a weak or vindictive man, perhaps both.

go and fry

stop feeling sorry for him, he knew what he was doing and knew the consequences of messing with the U.S governments stuff. yes, they were poorly protected but that's really not the point.

he cannot play any 'looking for aliens' or 'oooo i'm too poorly to go to prison' excuses now.

see you later gary, you had your fun and knew exactly what the outcome would be..

Please!

look, he didn't just hack in and look for UFO material, that's just a bullshit excuse trotted out by his family at every opportunity. He hacked in, trashed some stuff and left a message saying how great a hacker he was. That's a bit different.

Also, what exactly has the "lopsided" nature of the extradition treaty have to do with this case? So what if the standards of evidence that have to be presented are not exactly the same, when THE GUY ADMITS HE IS GUILTY??? Again, a smokescreen used by those who want him to be let off with a slap on the wrist and a warning not to do it again.

before you do the crime

think about the crime.

he gained access to a computer system to which he has no business being in therefore appropriate punishment to be dished out.

His intent is irrelevant, so is what he was looking for.

Hacking a computer is as illegal as its always been.

I for one am sick of hearing about him.

Failure all round

McKinnon should sack his lawyers. This has lasted 8 years. The Americans were offering a plea bargain of 3-4 years jail if he plead guilty. No wonder he's suicidal. But as for the claims about his mental state (1) he had a demanding full-time job as a systems administrator before he was arrested, he's not some idiot savant incapable of understanding his actions, and (2) most people would be depressed at the prospect of years in jail - suicide rates in US jails are 5 times the overall US rate - but you can't let people off on those grounds or the jails would be empty.

A side thought: what are the odds of David Cameron altering the extradition agreement? Zero. The Tory front bench love the USA even more than Labour do.

First they came

With apologies to Martin Niemöller

First they came for the paedophiles, and I did not speak out because I was not a paedophile;

Then they came for the terrorists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a terrorist;

Then they came for the copyright infringers, and I did not speak out - because I was not a copyright infringer;

Then they came for the tall photographers, and I did not speak out - because I was not a tall photographer;

Then they came for the autistic children, and I did not speak out - because I was not an autistic child;

Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Americans must act

It is not the UK's fault to sort this guy out. At first I was in his favour because he is British and was clearly a little obsessive.

On the other hand the UK can't do a damn thing. The Iraq war is what allowed the Americans to put extradition on Gary, however if the Iraq war ever turns out to be linked to the Bush Administration, Gary *MIGHT* have a leg to stand on. Otherwise, this is what Britain agreed to and as Gary was a systems admin *for a living(!)* , he really should have understood the implications of what he was doing, regardless of whether it was wrong or right.

Of what authority is Gary on UFO's anyway that even if it were true, he should be the one to tell us all?! Although he has no authority on the subject, maybe he should have realised that even if he did discover "the truth", who would believe him?

Aspergers!!!!!!!!!

Oh look, it's this story again.

Just ship him out, play to the sympathies of the US court, then he can come home.

Just stop blaming Aspergers for him committing a crime, and stop trying to say the crime he committed wasn't that bad anyway. That's not how the law works.

@ AC 12:38

"So it's okay if I break into your house and have a look around, as long as I don't damage anything?"

A fairer question is, "Is it okay if you walk into my house because I left the door open, have a look round, and don't damage anything".

Because that's all McKinnon really did.

His big mistake was entering a house where those who should have locked the door are more concerned with punishing someone for their own failures than admitting their fault.

Imagine you're walking home tonight and see an ISP's road-side cabinet unlocked and open. Interested in IT you take a peek inside. Is it fair that you are then dragged into court to face years of imprisonment because the ISP claims billion pound damages for having to change locks on all cabinets, changing all passwords on customer accounts, re-install software and replace broadband links across the UK ? No, that's taking the piss.

Stop right now

As other's above have said, we cannot live under this lop-sided treaty.

There's enough law in the UK (and EU) to prosecute him for computer misuse and for him to serve a sentence in the UK, regardless of exactly where the computers were located. Shipping him off to the USA just because the USAians ask for it, cannot be a good thing for any of us.

Needless to say this wouldn't apply in the scenario where UK forces had picked him up, and shipped him off to some CIA terror camp in Algeria via extraordinary rendition from where he was shuffled around for 5 years and finally ended up in Gitmo. Because obviously that would be entirely justified.

So let's hope everyone can string this out till after the next election and the incoming Home Secretary can stick two fingers up to the USA.

An Asperger's sufferer writes

"Asperger's does not stop you differentiating right from wrong."

Umm... yes, it does.

@AC 12:38 GMT - justice delayed is justice denied

I agree that you don't "understand this thing at all really".

"So it's okay if I break into your house and have a look around, as long as I don't damage anything?"

I agree that this isn't OK, and this would be a worse kind of offence than poking around in an unsecured PC with nothing of importance on it. That said, even the more serious offence you suggest in comparison probably would not justify extradition, especially if appropriate justice could be done more quickly without extradition being required.

"I don't understand this whole thing at all, really. He broke into Pentagon computers - what does he expect?"

A Pentagon or NASA computer used for highly sensitive purposes, or one used to play games in the visitor canteen ? The evidence available from both sides strongly implies something closer to the latter than the former, which makes the location of the computer irrelevant.

The point is that extradition should only ever be used for serious crimes. It should never be used for minor offences. This is because the process of taking someone away from their home and trying them in a foreign land by people with a different culture thousands of miles away from friends and family, disproportionately harms the suspect processed in this heavy handed manner.

What Gary did was wrong. But it justifies at best a non custodial sentence. Without the mitigating factors clearly evident, it would justify at worst a very short period inside in order to teach him a lesson. Dragging on extradition proceedings for a substantial fraction of Gary's life prevents him from learning from his wrongdoing and getting on with a life in which he can carry out a responsible job and pay taxes.

This is a clear case of justice delayed being justice denied.

door open

except the "door" wasnt left open. He just picked some weak locks. So , now is it of if i come into your house if i find your locks easy to pick?

If he was clever enough to know how to hack , then he is clever enough to know the consequences.

If he gets off, then its just another message to potential deviants that you can get away with wrong doing.

Its time people were properly punished, so others get a message of what will happen to them if they do it.

and if they are of diminished capacity , it sends a message to the carers/parents that they need to also take responsibility.

If i knew my son was of diminished capacity, i certainly wouldn't let him loose on a computer without observation

seeing as i am ranting, i am also sick of the "sorry judge, i kicked the crap out of this guy, but i was off my face on drugs" defense. Why arent these people being then convicted of 2 crimes??? They have just confessed to both openly. No, instead, they get a reduced/probationary sentence because they were not in control of their actions.

i'm sure they same excuse wouldnt work in the case of "sorry judge, i mowed down 5 people in my car, but i was langers drunk at the time"

if only i was a frog

So when did...

...a 43-year-old become a "young man"?

..."Don't hold me accountable, I have Asperger's" become a get-out-of-jail free card?

...different judicial standerds in the US and the UK become relevant in a case where the defendant has made a full confession?

..."I was looking for flying saucers" become a rationalization for Web site defacement?

I must have missed the memo.

@Various

He broke into military computers and probably expected that if caught he'd be tried in the UK- where he was when he broke a law. As opposed to the USA.

If I was in the UK and managed to somehow intercept (for example) bank details from someone's satellite internet connection but that person was across the Channel in France (satellite comms have a helluva wide footprint) then you'd surely expect me to be tried in the UK for, amongst other things, nicking bank details. You'd not expect me to be pulled off to France- no only was I not in France when I committed the crime but the UK has laws that cover exactly this sort of thing.

If I discovered that I could read/hear/intercept a Norwegian military pager network (pagers frequently send messages as cleartext) then again would you expect me to be charged in the UK or in Norway? Once again, I'd be punished in the UK.

If I had a sniper rifle and used it to shoot someone in the Republic of Ireland while I was standing in Northern Ireland, I'd probably be tried in Northern Ireland.

So why is someone who committed what is a crime in the UK, while in the UK, being sent to the 'states for punishment? Not only that, but no evidence apart from his confession has, AFAIK, been produced by the US to support this extradition. We're relying on the liars behind the Iraq invasion and the confession of someone with mental problems.

I don't think anyone's arguing for him to not be punished, I think they're just wanting his punishment to be fair.

This is so funny!

Here they want to bring him to court but countries like Israel still pat Israeli boys on the back for hacking with no jail term and no court to visit.

The evidence is clear now who is the greater human.

HMMM

He's off to see the wizard, the wonderful wizard of Oz,

Because, because, because.....

He's a hacker twat!!!