Autistic UK Hacker faces being shipped out to the US.
- Thread starter Lord George
- Start date
So, if a guy breaks into a bank and holds people at gun point, then decides to leave without any money he should get a very light sentence because he "could have, but didn't."? no. I don't think he should get the full 60 years (which is doubtful, 60 is the MAXIMUM sentence, not the minimum), but he still broke into the US government's computers (or the bank, in my hypothetical) and so, he needs to be punished, and not by the UK, because the UK has NOTHING to do with the case.sethzard said:
Plus:
1) He wouldn't go to a prison with rapists and murderers since this was a white collar crime, not a blue collar crime and
2) I don't know enough about him personally, but Asperger's doesn't always keep you from lying, so we don't know that he only wanted stuff on UFOs. Who really knows what he was after, except him?
But the US isn't in Europe, so it's slightly different, plus it's not like the guy murdered someone from America in the UK, he was in the UK and "attacked" the American government as a whole.MagnetoHydroDynamics said:
So, while I get what you are saying, it's slightly different scenarios.
post="18.128545.2881656"]
Plus:
1) He wouldn't go to a prison with rapists and murderers since this was a white collar crime, not a blue collar crime and
2) I don't know enough about him personally, but Asperger's doesn't always keep you from lying, so we don't know that he only wanted stuff on UFOs. Who really knows what he was after, except him?[/quote]
your example of the man carrying a gun is a bit extreme, that is the kind of person who needs to get professional help, he wasn't in any way originally seeking to cause harm or commit a major crime, he was just a conspiracy theorist that went a bit far.
So, if a guy breaks into a bank and holds people at gun point, then decides to leave without any money he should get a very light sentence because he "could have, but didn't."? no. I don't think he should get the full 60 years (which is doubtful, 60 is the MAXIMUM sentence, not the minimum), but he still broke into the US government's computers (or the bank, in my hypothetical) and so, he needs to be punished, and not by the UK, because the UK has NOTHING to do with the case.sethzard said:
Plus:
1) He wouldn't go to a prison with rapists and murderers since this was a white collar crime, not a blue collar crime and
2) I don't know enough about him personally, but Asperger's doesn't always keep you from lying, so we don't know that he only wanted stuff on UFOs. Who really knows what he was after, except him?[/quote]
your example of the man carrying a gun is a bit extreme, that is the kind of person who needs to get professional help, he wasn't in any way originally seeking to cause harm or commit a major crime, he was just a conspiracy theorist that went a bit far.
I think its ridiculous that they actually believe jailing this guy will do anything. Their is probably thousands of other people out there who can actually do what this guy did and they are worried about some fellow who searched for UFO's?
I don't know whether leniency is warranted in relation to Gary's diagnosed Asperger syndrome. I have no idea whether it falls under the jurisdiction of the Mental Health Act, or if America has a similar law. I am not a lawyer, or even that interested in law, so I don't think I'm qualified in any way to comment on that.
I am fairly sure though that the offence takes place on the soil of the area affected; essentially, the systems were affected in America, so the crime was committed in America. What I find strange is that the American authorities reported that the 2,000 computers that were hacked each had exactly $14,000 worth of damage done to them, leading up to a total of $700,000 in damages. Doesn't that look even slightly suspicious to anyone?
Rules are rules and laws are laws. If they are broken the consequences must be applied with no exceptions. However, I am with the group that agree the extradition treaty between the UK and the US is not fair in that it is favoured to the US. The thing is we need to change the law, not undermine it. We need to change the system, not break it.
I am fairly sure though that the offence takes place on the soil of the area affected; essentially, the systems were affected in America, so the crime was committed in America. What I find strange is that the American authorities reported that the 2,000 computers that were hacked each had exactly $14,000 worth of damage done to them, leading up to a total of $700,000 in damages. Doesn't that look even slightly suspicious to anyone?
Rules are rules and laws are laws. If they are broken the consequences must be applied with no exceptions. However, I am with the group that agree the extradition treaty between the UK and the US is not fair in that it is favoured to the US. The thing is we need to change the law, not undermine it. We need to change the system, not break it.
The American government would have given the same sentence to an American who had caused the same amount of damage or had the same potential to do the same.
Of course names will be omitted but An officer in the military here downloaded top-secret files onto his home laptop in order to work at home, he received 60 years
Top secret files are top secret for a good reason, because that information getting out could cost people their lives. I'll be the first to agree 60 years is a bit excessive and by no means defend my countries admittedly pathetic criminal justice system, but the fact of the matter is that he could have easily discovered information that if it had gotten out would have thousands of lives at stake.
Its a sad situation, yes he hacked into the systems for a benign reason, but you don't point a gun at the presidents head and laugh and walk away, you caused no damage but what you did could have had serious repercussions. His "mental disorder" of course garners all the sympathy my dark heart can scrounge up, but should have no weight on the case he should assuredly attend in the US. Hacking into the U.S. computers is not an easy thing otherwise people would be doing it left or right no matter how secure they may be there will be a hole and he found it willingly and knowingly regardless of his condition.
For those more simple minded, think about it this way what if he had discovered the location of nukes and lets consider he hadn't got caught but a year down the line he had bills that needed to be payed. That information would vault him to a life of luxury a position difficult to resist to anyone innocent prodding or not.
I hate the fact he has to go to jail for reasons that are at best comical, but pure and simple he broke a very serious law and the implications of what could have happened need to be realized. Further incursions must be deterred and a nice hefty 60 years in prison would stop quite a few would-be hackers in their tracks.
Of course names will be omitted but An officer in the military here downloaded top-secret files onto his home laptop in order to work at home, he received 60 years
Top secret files are top secret for a good reason, because that information getting out could cost people their lives. I'll be the first to agree 60 years is a bit excessive and by no means defend my countries admittedly pathetic criminal justice system, but the fact of the matter is that he could have easily discovered information that if it had gotten out would have thousands of lives at stake.
Its a sad situation, yes he hacked into the systems for a benign reason, but you don't point a gun at the presidents head and laugh and walk away, you caused no damage but what you did could have had serious repercussions. His "mental disorder" of course garners all the sympathy my dark heart can scrounge up, but should have no weight on the case he should assuredly attend in the US. Hacking into the U.S. computers is not an easy thing otherwise people would be doing it left or right no matter how secure they may be there will be a hole and he found it willingly and knowingly regardless of his condition.
For those more simple minded, think about it this way what if he had discovered the location of nukes and lets consider he hadn't got caught but a year down the line he had bills that needed to be payed. That information would vault him to a life of luxury a position difficult to resist to anyone innocent prodding or not.
I hate the fact he has to go to jail for reasons that are at best comical, but pure and simple he broke a very serious law and the implications of what could have happened need to be realized. Further incursions must be deterred and a nice hefty 60 years in prison would stop quite a few would-be hackers in their tracks.
So, on the internet, if you are governed by whatever law the server is...
Does that mean you give up your right to free speech and freedom of press etc when you are on an international server?
If a pirate sets up shop in a country that doesn't consider piracy illegal can anyone download from it with no respect for local laws?
If I start a country and host a huge forum with loads of people posting... then run a law through that says you have to pay $5 a day if you are member of my forum with a noncompliance fine of $10 and make it illegal to cancel your membership...
You can see how this is unfair, right?
But you'd be breaking my law on my soil... extradition please
Does that mean you give up your right to free speech and freedom of press etc when you are on an international server?
If a pirate sets up shop in a country that doesn't consider piracy illegal can anyone download from it with no respect for local laws?
If I start a country and host a huge forum with loads of people posting... then run a law through that says you have to pay $5 a day if you are member of my forum with a noncompliance fine of $10 and make it illegal to cancel your membership...
You can see how this is unfair, right?
But you'd be breaking my law on my soil... extradition please
You're confusing people who think he should be extradited with people who think he deserves 60 years in jail for it. Just because he is extradited does not automatically mean he will get 60 years in prison for what he did. For the record I think he should be extradited to America. He committed the crime against them ergo they have the right to judge him for his crime against them. I don't think he deserves 60 years in prison for what he did but he does have to face up to the those against which he committed the crimes.
A couple of things:
You brits are morons. Stop with the knee jerk "OMG, they iz gonna give the special guy 60 years in assrape town!" bullshit. 60 years(as it has been said a couple of times) is the maximum sentence. There isn't a court in america that's going to give full sentence to the doofus, it'll be about what he'd get in britain. Plus, he'd be going to a jail filled with ceos and tax cheats, not gangbangers and meth heads.
He broke the law in america as well as in britian, it doesn't matter where he was when he broke it, the rules are not negated because he was in the land of bad food and worse cars.And considering the law he broke here was a hell of a lot more severe than in britian, it stands to reason that we're the ones who would punish him.
To those of you who say they should hire him, and that this is just the federal government overreacting because they are embarrased, don't be stupid.The .gov actually does have a history of using criminals knowledge to catch other criminals or to stop more hacking, and you have no idea if they will or not while he's imprisoned.
You brits are morons. Stop with the knee jerk "OMG, they iz gonna give the special guy 60 years in assrape town!" bullshit. 60 years(as it has been said a couple of times) is the maximum sentence. There isn't a court in america that's going to give full sentence to the doofus, it'll be about what he'd get in britain. Plus, he'd be going to a jail filled with ceos and tax cheats, not gangbangers and meth heads.
He broke the law in america as well as in britian, it doesn't matter where he was when he broke it, the rules are not negated because he was in the land of bad food and worse cars.And considering the law he broke here was a hell of a lot more severe than in britian, it stands to reason that we're the ones who would punish him.
To those of you who say they should hire him, and that this is just the federal government overreacting because they are embarrased, don't be stupid.The .gov actually does have a history of using criminals knowledge to catch other criminals or to stop more hacking, and you have no idea if they will or not while he's imprisoned.
Yeah, cause I said stuff like that.
As far as I'm aware extradition follows the severity of the law. If he commited a more serious crime in britian, america would be told to sit and spin till the brits were done with him.
As far as I'm aware extradition follows the severity of the law. If he commited a more serious crime in britian, america would be told to sit and spin till the brits were done with him.
You're calling people from a different country morons because they may not know that much about our justice system? The same could be said of anyone than who doesn't know everything about every foreign justice system.UltraParanoia said:
Just because he broke a worse crime here doesn't mean he should be shipped here. Since it was a crime in both countries why not get both British and American attorneys to prosecute him. That way it is fair.
No, I'm calling them morons for failing to notice the "up to" in front of the 60 in the OP.And I'm pretty sure british law follows the same kind of track american law does, but I could be wrong.gof22 said:
That's exactly what it means. The crime he committed in britian is a minor offence, the one he committed in america is a federal crime, it does take precedence.gof22 said:
gof22 said:
That would never work, it would just devolve into an idiotic dick waving contest by the lawyers from both countries, they would never agree to anything.
We really need to have the original post edited to bold the facts.
1) HE IS NOT GOING TO GET 60 YEARS, that is the maximum sentence
2) Aspergers is not mental retardation. He's antisocial, not incapable of knowing right from wrong.
3.The US is requesting he be expedited and Britain can contest it and that can go to trial.
In any case, to answer the original question, yes the American government can -ask- for him to be extradited, and if the british refuse they have the -right- to take this case to a trial where each country will review the extradition treaty.
I'd ask for you all to take your patriotic peeing contest elsewhere and stop being immature kids "fighting the percieved man".
1) HE IS NOT GOING TO GET 60 YEARS, that is the maximum sentence
2) Aspergers is not mental retardation. He's antisocial, not incapable of knowing right from wrong.
3.The US is requesting he be expedited and Britain can contest it and that can go to trial.
In any case, to answer the original question, yes the American government can -ask- for him to be extradited, and if the british refuse they have the -right- to take this case to a trial where each country will review the extradition treaty.
I'd ask for you all to take your patriotic peeing contest elsewhere and stop being immature kids "fighting the percieved man".
You Europeans are retarded. He tampered with USA material and should have a trial on their terms. Hacking into government files is a serious offense.