Hacker loses extradition appeal

Originally posted by h3akalee
reply to post by mr-lizard

 

Me too but it's not going to happen is it ?

I feel sorry for the him but he is hardly a fall guy. If he was snooping around computer's that allowed him access to your bank account detail's would you feel so sorry for him.

I know it was not a banking computer that was just a example but he was poking his nose in and was found out.

Another what if for you.

What if he was never found out ? What would he be upto today ?

Take care.

Regards
Lee

[edit on 31-7-2009 by h3akalee]

I remember many a year ago when I used to portscan entire subnets just to find open wingates. More than once I saw the text "If you access this port illegally, you are breaking the law" or words to that effect.

That was a port scanner. Take your pick at which ones are out there today. You can even write your own with practically no skills.

Had I hit the wrong system I could have been in his place. And this was when I was about 18.

If you do not want people to access your PC, then LOCK THE THING UP. Secure it. That is the bottom line, nothing to do with his actions. If they were properly secure, you would not even have the ability to KNOW they were accessible.

I mean the only people who leave bedroom windows open when they're in the bed having outrageous sex, are kinky freaks who want you to look but will tell you off for peeking.

reply to post by phoenix103


Exactly, now what would hapen if the UK asked for the extradition of an american citizen, if they done the exact same thing?

Would the american authorities extradite him orher, there is a 20% chance they would refuse, just the same as that time they refused to send pilots over, to give evidence during any friendly fire incidents inquiries.

So it should work both ways.

I just find it absoultely disgusting, that he is being extradited, when he done this in 2002/2003, and the Act was introduced in 2005. He should not have been put up for exradition inthe first place.



[edit on 1-8-2009 by Laurauk]

reply to post by THELONIO


The "laws" are not bad, but the penalties that come with them.

You are saying that hacking into NASA and US Navy networks should not have a punishment?

If I hacked into your computer, a scientist, and looked at schematics for your latest invention that the entire world will use, would you just say "Oh, I know you are sorry", or what some sort of punishment? Regardless if he says he told people about them or not.

Laws are not there for it to allow or leave any incentive for one to commit the same crime, with a few exceptions (speeding tickets for example, but even those can turn real bad).

DON'T DO THE CRIME IF YOU CAN'T DO THE TIME!

reply to post by FritosBBQTwist



Then he should be tried and imprisoned in the UK no in the USA. Simple, I amsick and tired of the UK acting like a state of the US. It is about time weinthe uk told our mps we have had enugh of this.

In fact I have written to my MP. Imforming him of this. I certainly hope alotof other people in the UK are doing the exact same thing.

Originally posted by Laurauk
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist

 

Then he should be tried and imprisoned in the UK no in the USA. Simple, I amsick and tired of the UK acting like a state of the US. It is about time weinthe uk told our mps we have had enugh of this.

In fact I have written to my MP. Imforming him of this. I certainly hope alotof other people in the UK are doing the exact same thing.

The crime was committed to the U.S

I already said this and will say it again.

What if I lived in a country with no real law, and I started hacking into the U.S files.

If they know I am not going to be punished by my own country, then more than likely they would want to extradite whomever it is.

Now, I will break it down even more for you.

Country A (USA).
Country B (My imaginary country with no system that will punish me).

Country B hacks into Country A.
Would Country A really do nothing since the crime was committed in Country B?

Nope. They will go after him. ESPECIALLY because it is from another nation.

reply to post by FritosBBQTwist

What if I lived in a country with no real law, and I started hacking into the U.S files.

If they know I am not going to be punished by my own country, then more than likely they would want to extradite whomever it is.

Your analogy breaks down immediately, Fritos, as it is based on a false premise: Gary would be punished by his own country.

You are still missing the point: the extradition process is about hauling this guy over the coals because he exposed US incompetence - military & NASA computer networks without so much as password protection.

According to US law an application for extradition can only pertain to crimes that are of sufficient seriousness. In a case like this the seriousness is measured in terms of monetary loss. When the indictment was made - lo and behold - they charged him with doing thousands of dollars worth of damage, when all he had done was open files on computers with no passwords.

The reality is he is facing trumped-up charges. He could be prosecuted in Britain in a manner fitting the crime and without a politicized backdrop to the case. A country whose judicial system has been on a pretty sound footing since 1215 AD I might add.

Home Secretary Alan Johnson has said he would be breaking the law if he blocked hacker Gary McKinnon's extradition.

But writing in the Sunday Times, Mr Johnson said: "It would be unlawful for the home secretary to intervene."

He said after a court rules there is enough evidence, a home secretary can prevent an extradition only in very specific circumstances, none of which applied in Mr McKinnon's case.

The home secretary also denied that extradition law was wrong, arguing that it was appropriate for "an age where crime is increasingly indifferent to national borders".

As far as Iam concerned Ala n Johnson is as bad as Jaqui smith, thier both in kahoots with the US Authorities, they both can go to hell for all I care.

BBC SOURCE

reply to post by pause4thought


No one knows the official charge.

More than likely though,

The UK will give a light one
The US will give a heavy one

Since the crime was committed to the U.S, don't you think it is their jurisdiction?

It seems you only want him to be tried in the UK because you know the punishment will not be bad at all.

I am not defending whatever charge he obtains, but only defending the fact that the U.S should, and does, have the right to hand out such charges.

What they will hand out though will be over the top (I can just imagine...), but back to my previous statements in my last posts, don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Even if it is ludicrous and unfair.

This man is screwed and the only way out is to have an actual rebuilding of the judicial system regarding penalties.

We need to rescue this guy. He is on our side. Without people like him we wouldn't know half of what we do.

reply to post by pause4thought

Totally agree...He has showed how lax US cyber security is and they want to make an example of him for the embarrasment it has caused them.
Just think if an amateur like this guy can do it and remember... he said that there were hackers from all over the world viewing top secret US stuff then any Cyber Enemies of the US probably have accessed all their secrets,the US governmental departments must be red faced.He committed the crime in the UK and this is where he should be tried.

Originally posted by Grayelf2009
We need to rescue this guy. He is on our side. Without people like him we wouldn't know half of what we do.

"we"

"our"

?

reply to post by FritosBBQTwist

No one knows the official charge.

Not so my friend. I even linked to the document itself in this post on page 2.

It seems you only want him to be tried in the UK because you know the punishment will not be bad at all.

I can see how what we have been saying could be misinterpreted this way. But I have to repeat: it is simply a proportionate prosecution that most people are seeking in his case. As I said above:

"He could be prosecuted in Britain in a manner fitting the crime and without a politicized backdrop to the case."

Is that really a lot to ask? For a guy who's already gone through 7 years of hell, knowing the US authorities were bent on pushing for a punishment that would make a public example of him? Namely, who are seeking to put him behind bars for decades? A guy with Asbergers' to boot? Do you really wish to be associated with such a malicious prosecution?

Justice is simply not being served via extradition in this case. Extradition is reserved for truly serious crimes, which is why the prosecutors have cooked up the claim he caused costly damage to computers - whereas in reality he just looked. Lesser crimes are not covered by the extradition treaty, so according to the law he is entitled to be tried in the UK. If this was simply a matter of justice the US authorities would accept a UK trial.

In this case the extradition itself = injustice.

reply to post by FritosBBQTwist


i think that the us authorities are showing unsporting arrogance, i would like to see a real hacker destroy their systems completly, or have the actions of gary mckinnon made them aware of their system weakness's and plug that hole, it is sad and stupid that they pursue this to these levels, and yes the laws are rubbish, after all isnt their an enticement law, i mean if you leave the door open?
you work it out

i have to say, after watching those interviews , sad to say he probably is getting locked up for speaking out like this.. that interviews are like an interview with the typical evil genius who tells all his plans and actions to his enemy as he thinks nothing will happen ..

he more of less admits everything, time and dates, even admiting to things they woudl never have known about.

asparagus disease is just an excuse here, in all interviews/videos ive seen of him he displays nothing like any sort of illness, he is a very intelligent man who knew EXACTLY what he was doing ... and also , the crims did sadly happen in the usa ...as thats where the compramised computers are,.

now, please dont take this as me being someone who is anti mkinnon, im quite the opposite ... but dam, this dude has been stupid and probably ruined every chance of defence by going public about everything BEFORE the trial.

very sad

reply to post by boaby_phet


I know what you're saying. But in fact the way he was so unguarded about the whole thing during the interviews is itself evidence of his condition. Asbergers' syndrome leads to a person being unaware of the social consequences of his/her actions - it is referred to in the literature as 'lack of social awareness'.

(I happen to have some professional background in this area. This inability to foresee the social consequences of your actions is in fact the very essence of the condition: something in the makeup of the person means he/she doesn't naturally pick up on the rules of social interaction, meaning they are very prone to 'putting their foot in it' without being aware of it. A very common example is where the person perfectly innocently makes an inappropriate personal remark about another person.)

Many people with Asbergers are of above average intelligence. In this case both Gary's obvious keen intelligence and his weakness in foreseeing the consequences of his actions have combined to get him into VERY deep water.

His motives were laudable, but the way the prosecution is handling the run-up to the case neither that nor his condition are being allowed for.