Pentagon hacker Gary McKinnon has won breathing space in his long-running fight against extradition, with news on Wednesday that judges have granted a further judicial review. This time it is to consider whether the Home Secretary was right to disregard medical evidence that he might harm himself or even commit suicide if …
I guess a question here is how much trouble did McKinnon go to in order to get this information.
By the sounds of things these US servers were not adequately protected when connected to the internet.
If someone like McKinnon got access then how do the US authorities know that no-one else did (and that McKinnon was responsible for the damage).
It seems to me that the people that failed to protect the US systems should be the ones hauled before a jury, after all you don't leave your front door unlocked and expect to prosecute anyone who happens to come across it and then enters your property.
Another side of the coin is the one-sided nature of the extradition treaty, which just seems wrong. I can understand that the Americans want justice, but I wonder if they just want a scapegoat.
I really do wonder if Labour are dragging things out til the election so that they are not blamed by the US for not extraditing McKinnon, or by the British public for allowing it.
After eight years, the music may finally be stopping
Is it not just Labour has not the courage to tell the Americans to get stuffed and either drop charges or have him tried in the UK but they do not want to risk sending him to the US and getting a long sentence or even worse committing suicide. So they drag it out until after the election then it is the Conservative's problem.
Harm or suicide?
I am completely against the extradition of Gary McKinnon, not least because of the imbalance between the US and UK requirements to do so.
However, I do find it odd that it should be reconsidered because of "medical evidence that he might harm himself or even commit suicide if extradited to the US."
Surely anybody (unless suffering a sever disability) *might* harm themself or commit suicide if they have the physical capabilities to do so.
Perhaps the report means *significant likelihood"?
I hope the new appeal works though
My wife has aspergers (she refuses to call herself an "aspie"). One of the symptoms is an inability to cope with even small amounts of stress. They become unpredictable when faced with unfamiliar and highly stressful situations, and can either turn their stress outwards and become violent and angry, or turn it inwards and harm themselves. She has done the former more than the latter but I have found her smacking herself around the head a couple of times in situation where mist of us would be able to cope quite easily.
Another symptom of Asperger's is the inability of a subject to recognise certain obsessive traits, or indeed to temper their actions when they are obsessing about subjects. Asperger's doesnt come on late in life, He has always had it and that is probably what drove him to commit the alleged crime. He didnt realise that his actions were irresponsible and continued to do things after "normal" folk would have stopped.
I am very familiar with this as it appears a relative of mine has now started down this road. he has Asperger's and regularly does stuff like this (though not on an international or illegal scale) He hacks his dad's wifi router whenever he gets kicked off the internet for looking at dodgy sites and generally doesnt realise he is being a bit of an idiot. His siblings on the other hand are completely different.
Exactly - the worst thing that can happen to a government in power is the McKinnon gets extradited then tops himself. I can imagine the headlines.
Hence labour push it to beyond the election.
It's almost like Zimabwe here.
Oh wait ...
Daily Mail headline MCKINNON REPRIVED
Earthquake in Haiti, no brits harmed.
Do the Crime, Do the Time
Im completely FOR the extradition of him.
I don't care what "medical grounds" he conjure's up as an excuse or what crap you have about him having "Suffered enough".
Did the Crime, now Do the Time.
He is a criminal, a hacker who could have caused severe issues and it does not matter if the US did not protect themselves sufficiently.
If a guy walks past your kid with a knife and slashes his face, should you be brought before the Judge to answer for "not protecting your kid" even though you were standing next to him at the time ?, should the guy not be punished because it took 8 years to get his case to trial due to legal mumbo-jumbo ?, did he "suffer enough" ?
Indeed, he's confessed so why isn't he prosecuted?
He's confessed to breaking the UK Computer Misuse Act, he did it here, UK law applies here. Prosecutors should not be able to juridication shop like this, just because the US law will be more favorable to them. So why hasn't he been prosecuted???
To me it's almost treasonous, that the penalty for UK law, as decided by UK Parliament is NOT being applied, because the prosecutors would prefer to seek prosecution abroad under some other legal regimen. They want US law to trump UK law, so they refuse to prosecute here, in order to extradite him to some legal process they prefer.
It's Jurisdiction shopping, pure and simple. It's the most blatant case of it, and the Home Secretary refuses to stop it.
"I don't care what "medical grounds" he conjure's up as an excuse"
The defence are using medical grounds as the government have ensured there are no other grounds on which they can appeal.
"Did the Crime, now Do the Time."
Please. Capitalised as well. How drole.
"He is a criminal,"
Hasn't been to trial yet, so no.
"a hacker who could have caused"
I dare say you have knives in your kitchen, you could have caused someone an injury with them but it doesn't however make you guilty of doing so does it? Get a grip.
As for slasher the knife and your goat - You do know he didn't actually HACK the server using a knife don't you? You can distnguish that all crimes are not equal I take it. He is not accused of any violence, involving goats or otherwise.
That example is patently ridulous. There's a 'slight' difference between violently attacking someone scarring them for life and having a rummage around somewhere you're not supposed to be. It's precisely this kind of paranoid, overdramatised wailing that's dragged this nonsense on for so long.
If he took something that didn't belong to him, that's theft. Breaking and entering when there's literally nothinig to stop him walking in, that's called trespassing. None of which warrants this kind of attention.
Extradition? Terrorism? Everyone promoting his extradition needs to get their f**king heads read and get some kind of realistic perspective on what actually happened here.
But in your hypothetical stabbing incident, if the parent and child were holiday-makers in a foreign country, would you expect the perpetrator to be extradited to the home country of the holiday-makers for prosecution or face prosecution in the country where the crime took place ?
Which is the whole problem with this case, the crime took place in the UK, has been admitted to in the UK and the UK have applicable laws, therefore he should be tried for the crime in the UK. The US don't want to do this as every time they've tried so far the case has collapsed due to a lack of evidence.
Re: Did the Crime, now Do the Time.
I knew it would only be a (short) matter of time before someone used that very expression, and complete with bizarre capitalisation. Well done.
As much as I'd like to argue the case of appropriate punishment, reasonable considerations, dubious use of more dubious treaties and drawing analogies that at least have some vague resemblance to the case in question, I suspect that my attempts would fall on deaf ears. So I'll settle for saying "shut up and go away". Thank you.
"If a guy walks past your kid with a knife and slashes his face..."
True, but if I'm plod and you've just brought your kid into the station for the 83 time with a slashed face I would be inclined to think your parenting skills might be at the root of the problem....
Do the Crime, Do the time elsewhere?
Its always easy to compare an ambiguous and complex 'crime' to an easy one where there is a clear victim and most people would find it morally reprehensible - do you really believe that computer hacking can be compared to slashing a child's face with a knife?
People are fighting the extradition of Mckinnon not the punishment or trial as you seem to believe. There is a big difference, Mckinnon will be tried in the UK if he successfully fights the extradition not just let free.
Extradition of a UK citizen should only be done for the most serious of crimes - anybody imprisoned in the US would lose most contact with their family and friends who would rarely be able to visit them due to financial and cost reasons.
You sir, are an ignorant, inconsiderate imbecile.
This is one of those times I am glad I am not a Neurotypical, I would be ashamed to be a Neurotypical after reading your post.
Wow, I don't think I've ever seen 25 'thumbs-down' votes to a post. You must feel pretty stupid. You won't, of course, but you should.
A better analogy would be that he found an unlocked Rolls Royce parked on the street and got in and sat behind the wheel imagining what it would be like to drive it. If it helps you can imaging him making "broom-broom beep-beep" noises.
OK, he did wrong and has admitted it, but what seems to now be happening is that he is being effectively prosecuted for steeling the car and running rampage with it through a shopping mall mowing down dozens of innocent shoppers.
The car owner should have locked the car, and Gary should not have got in (and should probably be punished for that offense) but the rest seems to just be all sorts of stupid stuff tacked on to make a point.
And I was the 30th.
It's only slightly tempered by El Reg's system saying "We're sorry you didn't like this post", like it is about to take it personally or something...
<sob!> <sob!> I've just upset a computer! <sob!>
[I guess the sad computer (can we call the server Marvin, then?) didn't bother to read the post itself or it would have registered my opinion with something like "Yeah, we thought it was drivel too..."]
Oh god please don't start that here
Look, he's a terrorist. He was prosecuted* under terrorist legislation, therefore he's a terrorist. Just like Iceland, journalist photographers and that bloke at the back of the Labour Party conference some years back. They're all a menace to society.
* Yes, I know the difference between prosecuted and convicted. Sadly our DNA-gathering overlords aren't quite so enlightened.
Don't hold your breath
Don't bet on a new Home Secretary, of whatever political persuasion, being any different. There's something about the job that turns everyone who gets it into a raving right wing totalitarian extremist. I always thought that no-one could be worse than Michael Howard - he's now fondly remembered as a pinko liberal. If Mother Theresa had been made Home Secretary then within hours she'd have pulled on the jackboots and starting to round up anyone guilty of 'wearing clothing that may conceal a terrorist weapon' , 'possessing equipment of potential use to a terrorist (e.g. a mobile phone)', or 'being in possession of an un-english name'.
Apart from that, good luck to him. The offence was committed in the UK, therefore he should answer to a British judge (and, hopefully, jury).
Re: Do the Crime, Do the Time
If one more person employs the phrase 'If you can't do the time don't do the crime' or variations thereof, I myself will do time.
Pull a new smug rhyming phrase out of your arse to summarise your wearisome opinion, ruminants.
If you're naughty...
...don't get caught-ee.
That is all.
Did some hacking....best get packing
Vote for Labour = power to neighbour
I'll say it up front...Mandelson's a %$%$
Live in Britain ...get shat on by a bunch of brown-nosing, hypocritcal, labour bas&&&ds (sorry, this one doen't ryhme)
Nick the stuff and you're up the duff?
This is getting silly
If Gary McKinnon is as ill as his defence team claim I can't imagine that all this messing around is going to help his mental state any more than a trip to the States would.
you should have stopped at '..mental state'. The rest of that sentence just shows your complete lack of empathy.
There's no doubt that 'waiting to hear' is pretty stressful - but it certainly isn't as stressful as hearing the answer you absolutely don't want to hear.
Go buy yourself a heart, and then stab it.
I would like to know...
How much money his "defence team" has trousered in this prolonged game. Lets face it, if he'd just pleaded guilty he'd be out of gaol by now and back in the UK and presumably a lot better off mentally...
"better off mentally"
That would depend on who he shared his cell and the communal areas with with, surely? Would also depend on where he served the sentence -- back when he was accused he could have quite easily been left to rot in Guantanamo bay, being an evil terrorist and all that.
As for those suggesting he "do the time" -- are you seriously suggesting that 10 years in a maximum security prison full of murderers and people who want to abuse you is the correct punishment for trespassing?
I imagine there will be a lot of people replying to you. Yes he committed a crime, he's admitted to it and the UK decided not to prosecute.
The main issue people have is that the extradition treaty is completely one sided and that the value of damages the US have conjured up don't appear to have any evidence to back them up.
Also, it appears the US are including in the damages the cost of tightening up security. This is akin to charging a burglar the cost of fitting new locks on all your doors because you never bothered locking them in the first place.
Yes, I'd be pissed off if somebody walked into my house and nicked stuff because I left the front door unlocked. I do know that I'd be mightily pissed off with myself for being so fucking stupid in the first place.
I agree with JMB, it does appear that the Labour Government is appearing to act in line with the extradition treaty, but are giving allowing this to drag on until it's somebody else problem. This does of course rely on the fact that the Labour Government aren't so naive that they think they'll stay in power.
"This is akin to charging a burglar the cost of fitting new locks on all your doors because you never bothered locking them in the first place."
Well, more like what happens here in my apartment block in Oulu.
Somehow, by a dint of Finnish ingenuity, every residents key opens the front door, washing place, store, bike shed* etc. But, only mine (and the missus') opens the door to our apartment.
* The bike shed is opened by a residents key. The bikes aren't, natch. Wouldn't that be a closer corollary to McKinnon's predicament?
Problem is, if I lose my key, I have to fork out several hundred €'s to have every lock in the building changed. Abloy keys (the newer ones, anyway) cannot be made from another - no locksmith will do it. Landlord is the only one who can provide a replacement - only on presenting the old one - broken or worn out. Like the US demanding McKinnon to fix the locks on their doors they themselves left under the mat?
Oh, Sarah - don't go to the gym. No pain, no ga..etc...bleagh! Hate it, too.
FAQ UK-US extradition treaty
Removed the need to show that the person committed the crime:
"If this order is approved, the United States will no longer be required to supply prima facie evidence to accompany extradition requests that it makes to the United States. By contrast, when we make extradition requests to the United States we shall need to submit sufficient evidence to establish "probable cause""
Permitted surprise witnesses:
"the advice we had from the US that the requirement to show a prima facie case could in some cases undermine the chances of the case ultimately succeeding at trial, if for example an inability to rely on hearsay evidence in the extradition request exposed a prosecution witness before the trial."
US couldn't believe how much of a lapdog Labour had become:
"But perhaps the most disturbing part of the Standard's Las Vegas transcript is when the Department of Justice man describes how Britain decided to reinterpret the law to help out its American friends with the Norris case. As we have heard, price-fixing was not an offence at the time in Britain. Happily, however, conspiracy to defraud was. So, said Hammond, "the UK Government looked at the information we provided in support of the extradition, and said: 'You know what? That looks like conspiracy to defraud to us'."
Jacqui Smith says jurisdiction shopping by prosecutors is OK with her, just as long as she can lock up more brits:
"In December 2007, the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, referred to “inaccurate claims in the press” that she was about to introduce an additional statutory bar to extradition called “’forum’ which could prevent extradition where a case could be tried in the UK”, adding that the key issue was to ensure that offences were dealt with in the place where they could be most effectively prosecuted,"
It's a New Labour lapdog treaty.
Yup, I haven't seen the evidence (I mean the evidence *this* side of the atlantic, not some mumbo-jumbo concocted by US officials seeking a scapegoat), so can't really comment on how much time he should do, but there's no doubt that if he damaged computer systems - even ones wide open - he should be punished for it. If I'm an amployee at an organisation and have been given all the passwords I'm in a similar position to Gary - it's also easy for me to mess stuff up by malicious hacking. I suppose I can equally blame the person who have me the password and say it was all their fault?
Criminal damage is criminal damage in my view, but where I disagree is over the extradition: if the UK can't get convictions for this, they need to brighten up and improve their act instead of 'subcontracting' the prosecution to the US.
Nobody has seen the evidence
"Yup, I haven't seen the evidence (I mean the evidence *this* side of the atlantic, not some mumbo-jumbo concocted by US officials seeking a scapegoat),"
That's the most shocking thing, the treaty pushed by Blunkett removed the need to show the prima facie evidence. He wanted to the US to sign it and thus show how close UK and US were, but they added (quite sensibly in my view) the requirement that US citizens could not be extradited without sight of the evidence.
What the US provides the UK is evidence relating to the crime, and the identity of the person they are accusing. what's missing is the prima facie evidence that this person committed that crime.
Imagine I'd accused you of stabbing Dan in Florida. I provide evidence that stabbing is a serious crime, and hence under the extradition treaty. I provide evidence of your identity. But I don't provide evidence that YOU did THAT crime, and so you cannot challenge that evidence to prevent extradition. The prima facie evidence requirement was removed.
So you are extradited to face trial in the US, you lose your job, because your job does not travel with you, you can't pay your mortgage, and lose your house, your wife leaves you because she needs to eat, and even if you prove your innocence, your life is destroyed.
They were so keen to prove what a lapdog they were, Brits were expendable.
And the Home Secretary should protect Brits from misuse of this treaty, but Alan Johnson, Labour Home Secretary, would rather talk up the crime in Parliament to influence the prosecution to make it more serious than the Magistrates matter it is under UK law. Thus justifying his own unsustainable position.
"If I'm an amployee at an organisation and have been given all the passwords I'm in a similar position to Gary"
No you're not. You're in a trusted position and exploiting that means you'll get the hammer. Trying a door handle and having a peek inside when the door turns out to be unlocked is a far smaller crime than having the key and then going for a rummage in places you have no obvious, work-related reason to access. Stealing something from an unlocked room will even land you a smaller sentence than stealing something from a locked room for which you have the key.
At least that's how it is here in the civilized world. Can't speak for GB or US where the laws obviously differ a bit from ours.
Absolutely spot on. This is why it's a travesty that this wasn't sorted out years ago when he pleaded guilty under UK law.
As for Mr "Do The Crime, Do The Time" above... YES, if only he'd been *allowed* to do the time for the crime he confessed to commiting none of this would even be an issue. The fact is that another government in another legal jurisdiction wants him to do *their* time instead for a crime that doesn't exist as such in this country.
And that's before we get to the can of worms that is the effect of his Aspergers on a) his Mens Rea and b) his ability to properly respond to a criminal charge.
JimC, it ain't necessarily so, as there's also a huge difference in the type of facility he'd be sent to under US law rather than here in the UK. In terms of time served, you're probably right but my understanding is that, over there, he'd be doing time in Max rather than probably an open prison or something here.
Medical evidence? WTF?
Why the hell is so much of the argument about medical evidence and not about the far more serious aspect of the US punishing people in the UK for what they do. So he looked on some poorly protected computers and inadvertently humiliated some important people in the process, who have rightly been shown up to be incompetent fools unable to manage their own security.
The law has become so twisted that UK citizens are no longer protected from the abuses of power of other countries as well as our own Police State. Which is just wonderful.
Plus we have yet another example of how newly added anti-terror laws are being abused to reach out and punish someone very evidently who has nothing to do with terrorism. But now the laws are in place, they can use the laws for all sorts of abuses of power. This war on terror(tm) seems ever more like a sales pitch for a global Police State.
This case isn't just about one hacker, its showing us all we are now ever more vulnerable to the abuses of power of other countries as well as our own Police State.
So now thanks to this case, we have to watch one more very drawn out public (metaphorical) flogging, to make a point against us all. (Yes don't dare look into a US computer. Yes we get it, next lesson in obedient compliance please). So much for true justice. So much for fairness. So much for freedom. So much for liberty. So much for privacy. So much for dignity. But hey, we can now all at least, sleep quietly at night, safe in the knowledge the terrorists are not going to terrorize us. Sadly we can't say the same for the terrorizing we are all suffering at the hands of our own Police State and now it seems, any other Police State that wishes to reach out and punish us to make a point. :(
Just keep him in the UK
it´ll save the Americans a whole lot of embaresment. Just think about it.
Flash back a couple of years....
"Dude, we got hacked because we didnt change the passwords."
"Damn, what do we tell the general?"
"Tell him something about a superhacker."
Years later the general tells McKinnon
"Now hack the chinese!"
"I cant, they changed the default passwords."
We could say no
What would the US do if we said no and kept him in the UK?
They're not going to bomb us or implement sanctions against us. We're their partner in two wars.
Don't bet on it ...
How many former 'allies' have the US turned on in the past?
Let's see - do the names Hussein, Noriega and bin Laden ring any bells?
I understand that all of these had (at some stage) received support from US-based 'agencies' in the past! Why should lapdogs Blair & Brown and their NuLab cohorts be any different. The rest of the population would just be 'colateral damage'!
He did the US Govt a very big favour
Were it not for his actions which I understand did little if any damage other than to the self pride of good ole Uncle Sam, the Chinese would have done it instead & made a hell of a lot more mess.
So if there is a 'special relationship' then he needs to be extradited to the US, thanked most sincerely & sent back (or is it de-extradited?) with a fairly large cheque.
Ship the dud off to the U.S.
Time for Gary to face the music and 30+ years in a U.S. prison for his crimes like any other criminal. Gary like his fanbois is in complete denial and always whinning. Man-up Gary. You did the crime now do the time.
Govt report card logs UK hacking conviction success rate
"The number of successful prosecutions under the Computer Misuse Act came in a written parliamentary answer .... The answer - published in Hansard here - gives a break-down by year and seriousness of offence."
"Section One, the *LEAST* *SERIOUS* category, includes simple unauthorised access to a computer while Section three offences cover the creation of computer viruses and (more recently) the instigation of denial of service attacks that impair the operation of computers. Section Two offences cover unauthorised modification (computer hacking) as a part of some other crime."
So just to be clear, the UK law, the law as created by the Parliament of MPs YOU elected, the Parliament that covers the UK, decided that category 1 offences are the LEAST serious and the sort of thing Magistrates deal with.
So yes, he should do HIS COMMUNITY SERVICE for 30 days as is normal in these cases under the law of the land.
If Alan Johnson or Jacqui Smith or David Blunket wish to live under some other law of some other land, they can f*** off to America, and the UK would be better for them leaving.
There have been 122 stories to date on the Reg mentioning McKinnon. I will have moderated comments on most of them. Pity me. And remember that your chances of fresh insight at this point are slim to the point of you should probably just fuck it off and go to the pub about now.
Feeling a bit frazzled? Maybe you should take your own advice and clock out early.
Hey, it's friday! When did that happen?
God Love You, Sarah Bee
You have no idea how wonderful you make my (and others', surely!) day to know you are out there.
A pint, as you well deserve it. It is Friday, after all. :)
Re: God Love You, Sarah Bee
I'll take it.
Joys of GMT+8
I don't even *read* McKinnon stories until I'm in the pub. And it's approaching closing time. And I'm getting the hurry up from SWMBO (late tonight).
Ms Bee, I sincerely hope they pay you enough to put up with our crap.
- Review Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
- MEN WANTED to satisfy town full of yearning BRAZILIAN HOTNESS
- +Comment 'Stop dissing Google or quit': OK, I quit, says Code Club co-founder
- Nokia: Read our Maps, Samsung – we're HERE for the Gear
- Ofcom will not probe lesbian lizard snog in new Dr Who series