Sign in / up

back to article Cameron asks Obama for McKinnon compromise

Supporters of Gary McKinnon have praised the Prime Minister for raising the Pentagon hacker's long-running extradition case during a meeting with President Barack Obama on Monday. Speaking after the meeting, David Cameron said he hoped "a way through" can be found in the case, The Guardian reports. McKinnon, who suffers from …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

    1. Rolf Howarth
      Reply Icon
      Flame

      Of course he should be punished

      The question isn't WHETHER he should be punished, but what a suitable level of punishment is. He's not a murderer, he's not a rapist, he's not a terrorist, he's not a child molester.

      The typical sentence for a first hacking offence in this country is a suspended sentence, or maybe a few months in jail in aggravated circumstances - not 99 years in a penitentiary in a foreign country!! THAT"S the reason why people are so up in arms about this case, don't you get it??

      He's a British citizen who committed an offence in the UK, so he has a right to be tried as such.

      7 0
      1. Tigra 07
        Reply Icon

        Rolf Howarth

        "He's a British citizen who committed an offence in the UK, so he has a right to be tried as such."

        Yes he does, but him and his mother are launching appeals firstly that he should be tried in the UK, and secondly that any punishment should be in the UK

        Notice how it's ANY punishment and not THE punishment, they're still using his disability as an excuse to get tried in this country for the sole reason any sentence he MIGHT get will be mediocre

        Personal note, Russia would have someone assassinated for the same crime so 100 years in prison is nothing compared to Communist punishments

        If i was stupid enough to attack another country i would be expecting a long sentence

        0 2
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          In the UK

          I have a problem with the idea that he committed a crime in the UK. How do you stand on the legal position regaring the Lockerbie bombing?

          Yes I'm well aware that the crimes are on totally different scales, but it's a useful parallel in so far as the bomb was placed on the plane in one country and exploded over another. That is to say the damage was actually done in scotland even though the bombers actions were actually carried out elsewhere. After much legal discussion it was decided that the suspect should be tried under Scottish law, but not in Scotland.

          In this case McKinnon did something in England which allegedly caused damage in the US, so if the Lockerbie case sets any precedent at all he should be tried under US law. I have no problem with that, nor do I have any problem with his being tried in England under US law,

          And yes it is England and not "the UK" we do not have a single legal system in the UK. Scottish law differs from English law,

          0 2
          1. Rolf Howarth
            Reply Icon

            Lockerbie

            One could certainly make a case that the Lockerbie bombers should have been tried in Germany, yes.

            With the internet you have to VERY careful about letting laws in one country apply to actions you commit while in another. Let's suppose you're sitting at your desk at work in the UK and decide to forward a funny pornographic email to your best mate from college, only he's currentlly working on an oil rig in Saudi Arabia. Are you saying you'd like to be treated as if you committed the offence in Saudi Arabia?

            2 0
  2. myhandle
    Thumb Down

    Flip side

    I'd like to see the US estimate the cost of securing their systems had Mckinnon not been involved at all. In addition, I'd like to see the cost that would have been estimated if they had simply left their systems the way they were and North Korea or Iran hacked into their systems.

    These were the early days of hacking, there's was not the criminal intent that hacking these days tends to have and what he did then can best be looked as doing them a favour. He he hadn't done that back then, then the risk to their systems would have greatly increased with all passing time.

    1 0
  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Do the crime, do the time ?

    Whilst I have to agree with Sarah this is an argument that has raged, on and off regarding McKinnon. On a personal level I think he is probably guilty, aspies generally have an enhanced understanding of rules, regulations and routine in particular, and the defence that he didn't really understand what he was doing is to say the least weak. On another level I suspect that the punishment he may get will be disproportionate to the offence.

    I do wonder if he has considered the benefits of just turning himself in to the Feds. I mean at the end of the day in the last few years he hasn't been able to work, and has suffered all sorts of stress to do with these legal proceedings.

    If he just hands himself in there are many benefits. His problems detailed above are negated. On the down side his life may well be uncomfortable for a year or two, and he will probably never suffer from constipation again. With any luck he may get incarcerated somewhere warm, and lets face it with the weather in the UK that has got to be a major plus. When he gets out he will be a major 'cause célèbre', can write a few books, and do lectures.

    Has anybody read the book 'Mr Nice' ? Howard Marks did alright out of his probably equally unfair incarceration by the US of A. So a few years of suffering and after that pretty well set up for life as a writer and raconteur. Big bonus. Read the book Marks sleeps with a whole load of women.

    I guess the summary of this is 'Sad Loner Geek' rehabilitated to 'Respectable Cool Author who gets on far better with girls', oh yes and has a bit of an income as well. Big bonus to my way of thinking, anyways, simples. Didn’t even mention apron strings……..

    0 3
    1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)
      Reply Icon

      Re: Do the crime, do the time ?

      I doubt very much that the apparently socially inept McKinnon would magically transform into a charismatic rogue a la Marks, who was a charismatic rogue before he got banged up. It's a hell of a stretch to make. You seem to be essentially suggesting a spell in chokey would sort his Asperger's out a treat, which is absurd.

      Also, you should know my feelings by now about any combination of the phrase 'do the crime, do the time'. If you don't, why don't you come here and I'll whisper them to you. No, no, closer than that. Reeeeeaaaaaally close.

      5 1
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Ma'am Dominatrix Moderator

        Hmm yes sorry about the 'Do the crime .....' etc. I couldn't really think of a better title. Should I be in the vicinity of vulture towers (which is very unlikely) by all means shout in my ear, and I will get you a drink. Just noticed I seem to have sparked a few more as well… whoops.

        In my defence I haven’t really followed up the title along the more stereotypical lines. Again proffering my two pennies, presupposing he is guilty which really is a matter for judicial opinion (mind I think if he got to the US of A this would be taken as read) his sentence should be minimal, fined £20 … couple of hours community service (again as has been pointed out this would almost certainly not be the case if the good ole boys get hold of him).

        Whilst again I agree with you Sarah the suggestion that McKinnon would emerge as a charismatic rogue is probably a little far fetched. I suspect that he may indeed emerge a more rounded individual. My understanding is that people who suffer with Aspergers tend to thrive in environments with clear routine. Once he had overcome the initial shock ‘a spell in chokey’ probably wouldn’t be as much of a problem as his mother, and lawyers are suggesting.

        As a minimum he would emerge without all the stresses he now faces. He might just come out of the experience with a better understanding of life. Just on the basis of his Celeb status he could probably get a job as some sort of security consultant. His public persona would no longer be of a complete geek that believes there is an area 51 etc. All of this would be a heck of a lot better than spending another 7 years unemployed and in fear of the consequences of being extradited.

        0 2
      2. Andus McCoatover
        Reply Icon
        Unhappy

        Do the time?

        [Quote] Sarah: "You seem to be essentially suggesting a spell in chokey would sort his Asperger's out a treat, which is absurd." [End Quote]

        Oh, really? So I suppose calling American jails "Correction Centers/Facilities" seems a bit absurd, too. Especially when the 'correction' can take 99 years. That'll cure his Aspergers syndrome a treat!

        Phrase "Arbeit macht frei" springs to mind....

        Oh, give over, Sarah.

        0 0
  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    He did the crime

    Sorry he did the crime now it's time to do his time like every other criminal.

    0 5
    1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)
      Reply Icon

      Re: He did the crime

      I will choke you.

      2 0
      1. Sarah Bee (Written by Reg staff)
        Reply Icon

        Re: Re: He did the crime

        And then, yes, I will do the time.

        3 0
        1. Andrew the Invertebrate
          Reply Icon

          You'll be fine Sarah

          with the right lawyer it wouldn't hard to make a case for temporary insanity or maybe self defense against persistant mental abuse

          1 0
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Joke

            Platitudes

            The use of platitudes should be a capital offence. Mind given my misdemeanour above, lets make that 3 strikes ........

            0 0
  5. stanj52

    Sarah did the crime

    I bet Sarah will have finished her "time" before McKinnon even starts his. You'll probably only get 14 days because of overcrowding.

    1 0
  6. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Go

    let's see what we can agree on.

    McKinnon admitted he did it.

    The CPS did not consider his crime serious enough to proceed with.

    Despite this the US DoJ have persisted.

    The damages the Pentagon *claim* McKinnon's actions have caused are *suspiciously* high. NB US corporations and the federal government have done this before. See "The Hacker Crackdown" and "Out of the inner circle."

    The Pentagon systems security was grossly inadequate, but this is *not* a defense.

    However the Pentagon staffs gross negligence means they are *partly* responsible for any damage caused. If you ignore things you *know* to be wrong and don't report them to anyone and stuff happens whose fault is it?

    The burden of proof to obtain an extradition is *grossly* disproportionate between the UK and the US on this treaty.

    The treaty should be re-negotiated or torn up until an EU wide one is agreed.

    Arguing with the Moderatrix when she hasn't been fitted with a bite mask and her hands are still free is a *bad* idea.

    Otherwise game on.

    2 0
    1. Andrew the Invertebrate
      Reply Icon

      It's all the CPS's fault

      If they'd gone ahead and prosecuted, either McKinnon would never have set foot in jail or finished his sentence by now. Also flying him over to the USA to face trial for the same charges would no longer be an option. So if the CPS would reopen the case set a trail date and get on with it, it could all be over by Christmas.

      1 0
  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Is Sarah losing it ?

    Bad day Sarah? Maybe you could do Gary's time for him? ;)

    0 0
  8. bluest.one
    Stop

    Trusting or Negligent?

    Is the $800K figure subject to any scrutiny by the UK courts before they accept this figure? You know - to make sure it isn't being falsely inflated by the US authorities in order to simply get their hands on someone they want?

    We all know the figure of damages is bogus and that in such matters the US authorities figure the damages to be the cost of putting their house in order, rather than simply covering what was damaged/destroyed.

    Surely the UK courts should examine the validity of the US's claims before accepting them on faith.

    2 0
  9. Thomas 18
    FAIL

    traditions eh?

    "One of the traditions we have is that the President doesn't get involved in decisions around prosecutions, extradition matters"

    Except when it comes to Russian spies.

    2 0
  10. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Happy

    @bluest.one

    "Surely the UK courts should examine the validity of the US's claims before accepting them on faith."

    I think you'll find that's one of the *issues* with this treaty.

    UK courts take US evidence at *face* value.

    US courts don't.

    You may *think* it's grossly out of proportion BS just to get extradition as an option, but UK courts have to take it as *true*.

    0 0
  11. http://www.theregister.co.uk
    FAIL

    Cameron the "diplomat"

    Holding my nose firmly I voted for the hung parliament as the least worst option. What I did not vote for was diplomatic fudge where firm political action is required.

    Repeal this one-sided extradition treaty as a high priority.

    2 0
  12. mego
    FAIL

    Huh.

    The leader of the "free world" can't intercede on behalf of a mentally handicapped individual? Crikey, next he'll be saying there are Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq!!!

    1 0

  13. This post has been deleted by its author

  14. Paul 135
    Big Brother

    Obama = hypocrite

    "One of the traditions we have is that the President doesn't get involved in decisions around prosecutions, extradition matters," Obama said

    So why has he already acted as judge, jury and executioner towards BP after the Transocean oil spill?

    1 0
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Purlease!

      You already know the answer to that one. Obama was advised to go after BP for one simple reason. The US government had encouraged oil companies to start dangerous deep water drilling in this area against the judgement of many industry safety experts. The reason they did this was the same as the reason that the US suddenly became keen on renewable energy. They want to reduce their reliance on oil from the middle east and will do so by any means.

      Of course had Obama not gone after BP the victims of the spill may have gone after the US government for compensation instead. No matter what you think of BP they were only drilling there because US.gov wanted them to and as such Obama and his bitches have to take some of the blame.

      There are those who say that Obama went after BP because the rig was operated by a US company and that he didn't want a US company to take a kicking. I'd be more inclined to say that it was more likely that he knew the company concerned were too small to be able to afford the sums concerned.

      One thing is for sure, however, it's going to be very difficult for US.gov to use reducing their reliance on arab oil as a justification for authorising any more drilling in dangerous areas. Indeed I'll be the average US voter is now totally against any form of offshore drilling.

      0 0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like