back to article US govt's final bid to extradite Lauri Love kicked into touch

The US government has had its final shot at arguing for the extradition of accused hacker Lauri Love snuffed out by the High Court in London, England. The court this morning refused to certify an appeal on a point of law raised by the Crown Prosecution Service, which acted on behalf of US authorities, following its quashing of …

Silver badge

Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

But...

" Fifteen years of terrible public policy in which British hackers were left open to the vindictive instincts of US prosecutors has now been brought to an end."

Don't fucking hack the American Government EVEN if their passwords are set to Password1

It IS a crime and you are NOT being clever

40
15
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

Must say I agree with non-extraditing..

But.. when you do something wrong, there are consequences.. whether the consequences of being put through the hell this has caused him is enough? I know one thing, I doubt he'll do it again.

26
0
Silver badge

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

Yeah, in his case I believe he has already paid enough, especially considering the entire "hacking" accusation is down to shit-poor security on behalf of a Nation whose can assume to be a target of far more malicious (and competent) attackers

However that statement from the idiots milking his bandwagon is just soooo wrong

16
7
Anonymous Coward

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

But Aspergers......

(I'm slightly trolling. A medical condition may be taken into account during sentencing, it is not a defence to committing a crime).

10
8

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

Yeah, in his case I believe he has already paid enough

Not really, a trial in itself is a very stressful event (even in the UK), Mr Love will find himself under extreme stress due to any court case in the UK even without the whole US thing. This does not mean he shouldn't stand trial. The adage "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime" is very true, if he knew that what he was doing was wrong and could have ended with him serving time then he has naturally accepted that he will do time if caught.

Mental health issues are not a get out of jail free card, Mr Love should serve trial in the UK, if his mental health deteriorates to such an extent that it puts him at risk of suicide then sure, that should be taken into account and he should be sectioned which is probably a lot worse than a bit of time in the clink.

19
0
Silver badge

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

Don't fucking hack the American Government EVEN if their passwords are set to Password1

It IS a crime and you are NOT being clever

Whether it is a crime or not will be decided by a British court applying British law. Brexiting from the (presumed) universal jurisdiction of the US Federal Government is the one form I approve of.

Yes, Love very probably is a criminal so with this foreign meddling out of the way we can hopefully proceed with an appropriate prosecution.

19
0
Silver badge

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

"A medical condition may be taken into account during sentencing, it is not a defence to committing a crime"

Yes it is. Search for automatism.

6
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

@David Webb: "...a trial in itself is a very stressful event..."

He could plead guilty and save himself the stress. Especially as he's already admitted to most of the offences. The UK doesn't officially allow plea-bargains, but I imagine the prosecutor and judge would look kindly on an admission of guilt.

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

It can be. Insanity is a good example - look at the M'Naghten Rules....

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

@David Webb "Mental health issues are not a get out of jail free card,

Actually, sometimes they are in the UK. A good example is Tania Clarence. She murdered her 3 children and was sectioned for less than a year for it because they were disabled and that was tough for her to cope with, apparently.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

The UK doesn't officially allow plea-bargains, but I imagine the prosecutor and judge would look kindly on an admission of guilt.

They don't have any leaway in that matter. If its his first offence he gets an automatic 1/3rd off, and if he pleads guilty at his first appearance, then its another 1/3rd off any tariff. He'd have to be looking at a basic term of more than 6 years in order not to walk out of court with a suspended sentence.

5
0

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

'if he knew what he was doing was wrong'

It is inconvenient that we live in an upside down world - where those who are fighting injustice are seen as having done 'wrong' and those who perpetuate the injustice and persecute a talented man to his death go unpunished - and where people post in comment sections without knowledge of either the case or of morality.

4
3

Re: Good reasons not to extradite aplenty

"A medical condition may be taken into account."

Sorry, Aspergers is not a medical condition. It is a (lifelong) personality type.

1
0
Silver badge

Wishful thinking

Fifteen years of terrible public policy in which British hackers were left open to the vindictive instincts of US prosecutors has now been brought to an end.

Sorry, but this is wishful thinking. Yes, the current route has been closed down, perhaps justifiably. What are the odds that the American prosecutors simply accept that decision and go away rather than lobby their domestic bodies and try to persuade our parliament into passing legislation exporting the hackers via another means?

18
0
Silver badge
Joke

Re: Wishful thinking

Johnson, Fox and the rest of the rabble will sell the rights to have such legislation put to Parliament in order to gain 'better' trading conditions

12
6
Silver badge
Black Helicopters

Re: Wishful thinking

I doubt it will end there. He'll never be able to travel to the US, ever. And it's likely that if he moves to another country they'll try again there.

That's assuming that they're not already on the phone to Theresa May, politely* suggesting** that some sort of forced rendition take place as soon as possible if they want any chance of a post-Brexit trade deal.

* by which I mean "in a threatening manner".

** by which I mean "or else".

14
4
Silver badge

Re: Wishful thinking

I doubt it will end there. He'll never be able to travel to the US, ever. And it's likely that if he moves to another country they'll try again there.

In effect, he's confined to the UK. He can't even holiday somewhere unless it has a non-extradition treaty with America and unless he can be sure his flight won't be diverted enroute. As soon as he sets foot in a different country, the Americans can try again, as you suggest, and I'd imagine they probably will.

While that is undoubtedly very limiting, particularly these days, I'd imagine its a lot less limiting than a cell for 90 years.

5
0
Silver badge
Black Helicopters

Re: Wishful thinking

He should be grateful he hasn't fallen out with the Russians. They don't care where you are.

9
0
Silver badge

Re: Wishful thinking

Make no mistake, neither side cares where you are. It's only that forceful action of any kind would be obviously rather high profile and unavoidably cause certain image problems for said party, that the self-proclaimed "good guys" in the US would (still) somewhat be caring about whereas Russia decidedly less so.

6
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Wishful thinking

If he so much as goes on holiday to any other country he will be arrested on entry.

For the rest of his life he will be 'on the run' as far as the US is concerned, even if he's prosecuted in the UK.

1
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

Re: Wishful thinking

Essentially he has been sentenced to confinement in the UK.

The US (UK, et al) all track PAX manifests be they air or sea. The best way is to take a fishing boat to the channel islands the pop over to France. Using non-standard land travel is the best way to avoid detection on the EU and staying at hostels, etc.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

"There is now very little prospect of any British hacker ever finding themselves in the same position as Lauri Love or Gary McKinnon.

This does not solve the problem, it only kicks it down the line at they can be stopped at any airport anywhere in the world, incarcerated and extradited by the judiciary there. Failing that, they can be bundled in a car on the streets of let's say Rome and shipped somewhere extraterritorial like Guantanamo or Diego Garcia.

So his idea that this somehow stops Team America World Police is somewhat misplaced.

26
2
Silver badge

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

Um, really ? So if you're wanted by the US and you go to, say, Germany, the US can call up the Germans and have them arrest you on their behalf ?

I don't think it works that way. To be arrested on international soil, you have to have an Interpol warrant issued with your name on it. That will certainly have you arrested in any country friendly to international justice.

Otherwise, to be arrested in a given country, you have to have violated a local law. I doubt very much that any policeman of any country is going to go arrest someone because some other country requested it.

6
5
Boffin

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

Interpol has nothing to do with extradition. "INTERPOL's role is to assist the national police forces in identifying and locating these persons with a view to their arrest and extradition or similar lawful action. " https://www.interpol.int/INTERPOL-expertise/Notices

Extradition treaties can be bilateral between two countries, or multilateral. In the case of US and Germany, the Agreement on extradition, with explanatory note, Signed at Washington June 25, 2003,

Entered into force February 1, 2010 would apply. https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/273494.pdf page 138

5
0
Silver badge

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

@Pascal Monett

Um, really ? So if you're wanted by the US and you go to, say, Germany, the US can call up the Germans and have them arrest you on their behalf ?

I don't think it works that way.

On 1 July 2013, president Evo Morales of Bolivia, who had been attending a conference of gas-exporting countries in Russia, appeared predisposed to offer asylum to Edward Snowden during an interview with RT. The following day, the airplane Dassault Falcon 900 carrying him back to Bolivia from Russia took off from Vnukovo Airport, but was rerouted to Austria when France, Spain and Italy reportedly denied access to their airspace, allegedly due to suspicions that Snowden was on board.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

Pascal Monett,

Can I just mention the concept 'Real World' !!!

Do you really think what you wrote is an any way true ???

I am more than sure that 'effectively' that is exactly what happens.

Mr Trump (or some senior Representative) phones Mr X leader of Foreign country Y and asks very politely if they could detain 'Bad Guy' Z for very good and compelling reasons (to the US of A.).

What do you think the response will be if you say 'NO!', so Mr X requests further information and kicks it to someones Desk.

At this point as the debate continues the US of A makes the odd mention of how much trade it does with Country Y and how it would be unfortunate if future trade deals and tariffs should become a problem etc etc.

Calculations are made and suddenly 'Bad Guy' Z is now under investigation for suspected crimes in Country Y and/or the US of A. etc etc.

It is now in the hands of the legal people (Judges & Courts etc :) ) and the govt will allow the end result to be determined by the fair and impartial legal system (which at no point will be advised of the result that would be most favoured by Mr. Y and the Govt.)

At this point usually the US of A wins by virtue of overwhelming forces.

It just so happens that there is a lack of support for Trump and his 'Bouncy Castle full of Clowns' because of his prior actions which have been seen to make the world political stage much more unstable.

In reality China, Russia and US of A 'throw' their weight around to get what they want.

US of A may be more subtle or quiet about it but they are still a Superpower (Economic & Military) and countries are influenced.

That is the 'Real World'. :)

4
3
Silver badge

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

...except America. America is exceptional. If you don't do what America wants, expect some problems...

4
0
Silver badge
Trollface

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

Do you think they would go as far as sailing a gunboat up a river to menace a city?

Oh, sorry, that was then and this is now. We've given that sort of thing up. That and no working gunboats.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

"Um, really ? So if you're wanted by the US and you go to, say, Germany, the US can call up the Germans and have them arrest you on their behalf ?"

Of course not, they don't bother asking the government of another country for permission, they just go ahead and kidnap them. For example.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

They will issue an interpol red notice, just wait and watch.

0
0
Silver badge

@ Florida1920

"the grounding of his plane was a violation of international law"

So basically you acknowledge that I am right about the law.

And I acknowledge that it is entirely possible that the US totally flouts international law when it suits itself to. Which we all know already.

My point is, the law does not acknowledge the right of any country to have anyone arrested in another country simply on request.

Your example does not contradict that.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: "stopped at any airport [..] and extradited by the judiciary there"

@AC. Do you seriously think even the Jaffa is going sod around with international trade over a relatively unimportant hacker? How much do you think Lauri Love is worth to the US to get their revenge for his hacking?

1
0

So the situation is: Neither Lauri nor Gary McKinnon can leave England, Wales or Northern Ireland atm because there is an Interpol arrest warrant out for them. They could be arrested and extradition proceedings could start again. And in some countries there is the prospect of extraordinary rendition.

So for Gary unfortunately this seems to be permanent because the CPS (crown prosecution service) said they could not prosecute him in this country, which is one reason he never won in court. Also the statue of limitations has expired for him, but the US indictments won't expire.

For Lauri, we are asking to tried on the charges in this country. At that point, acquitted or charged, double jeopardy will come into force and he cannot be tried again for these 'crimes'. So we have a good chance of this happening. The CPS didn't say they couldn't prosecute - which is one reason we won, and related to the attempted appeal lodged on behalf of the US - and the judgment instructed this to be dealt with.

Also, point was about us having set a strong precedent which stops future extradition requests in favour of a prosecution here which wouldn't leave any future defendants in this position so the point stands.

And we are not going to any airport until we've finished this.

0
1

How is jurisdiction actually determined where a crime is committed in one country, and has effects in another?

This isn't a new concept (e.g. an archer several thousand years ago could fire an arrow across a border in peacetime, killing a victim on the other side) so presumably there is precedent?

8
0
Silver badge

Um, I'm pretty sure that, a hundred years ago, that situation would have ended in a war.

7
0

Jurisdiction

Well, when it's a U.S. citizen committing the crime, the U.S. think they should try them. https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2018/03/20/us-border-patrol-agent-on-trial-in-cross-border-killing-of-mexican-teen.html

2
0

Pedant alert

No no no! An archer might loose or shoot an arrow...

5
0
Silver badge

"Um, I'm pretty sure that, a hundred years ago, that situation would have ended in a war."

Um, I'm really trying not to be rude here, but I'm pretty sure that you're confusing the concepts of "pretext" and "cause". The consequences of the existence of any given spark wholly and exclusively depend on whether it lands on dry gunpowder or wet sand.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

My advice to Mr Love is to not go to any hacking conventions in America or indeed travel anywhere outside the country.

I also do wonder if the outcome would have been different if he was called Mr Hate, you can have our hate but you're not having our love.

12
0
Anonymous Coward

if he was called Mr Hate

... he could always get a job at the Daily Mail.

10
2
Silver badge

This is ghasting my flabber

a point of law raised by the Crown Prosecution Service, which acted on behalf of US authorities

Is this the way it's done with all extradition requests or is it something special for our special friends across the pond because of our special relationship?

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Is this the way that it is done?

Yes because it only works one way. The Americans will never extradite one of their own to Blighty.

I'd suggest trying to extradite Zuck but ....

15
0

That seems to be how it works in general. In another recent high-profile extradition case, the Belgian prosecutors were acting for the Spanish state against Puigdemont.

4
0

Re: This is ghasting my flabber

The Executive Power of a country acts under treaty when extradition is requested. Thus, the lawyers for the country responding to the request for extradition represent the Requesting Power.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Is this the way that it is done?

False.

If you bother to do even the most basic research, you will find that the US Government has never denied a request from the British government to extradite a US citizen for crimes committed against British interests while on US soil, and that there have been several extraditions of US citizens to Britain who committed crimes outside of the US and subsequently returned to the US.

However, you will would also find that the British government has never requested extradition of a US citizen for a crime committed on US soil against a British interest.

You can't blame the US if Britain never asks.

4
4
Silver badge

Re: This is ghasting my flabber

"Is this the way it's done with all extradition requests or is it something special for our special friends across the pond because of our special relationship?"

I'm sure the US embassy has a number of lawyers on staff, but it's unlikely they've take the relevant exams to be allowed to work in UK courts. So yes, they need locals to do the actual representation in a UK court but can act as advisers on the legal team. It's no surprise that the CPS are the prosecutors in the case and will be effectively acting as a law firm under the instructions of the client.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Is this the way that it is done?

Quote: "...a US citizen for crimes committed against British interests while on US soil..."

Given how vocal the Americans are about being very, very tough on ANYONE supporting terrorists and how they will do anything to see the supporters brought to justice, I wonder when they will start sending members of NorAid over to the UK for prosecution? After all, the IRA themselves said on many occasions they were (are?) a Terrorist organisation and there were a lot of Americans funding terrorist acts in Ireland during the Troubles...

4
0

computer misuse offences should be tried where the hacker was at the time.

It may be appropriate to drag people thousands of miles away in relation to terrorism offences or murders carried out where they're to be extradited to. But justice is not served by doing this for alleged crimes where the individual alleged to have carried out these crimes has no other connection with the place where they were alleged to have occurred. The UK courts should first of all decide whether the accuser has enough evidence to prosecute the case locally, refuse extradition if not, and whether they're making up the claimed damages based on the cost of making secure systems which should have been made secure before the alleged offence occurred. The treaty we have with the US seems to be very one sided and needs to be torn up and renegotiated.

13
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: computer misuse offences should be tried where the hacker was at the time.

"Come to my country - we have no laws against hacking computers in other countries, so you will never face charges!" - Dictator Joe, recruiting for his National Hacking Team.

8
1

Re: computer misuse offences should be tried where the hacker was at the time.

Until Brexit is finalized, the UK is still part of the EU and is subject to the US-EU agreement on extradition.

1
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018