Britain Blocks Hacker's US Extradition on Human Rights Grounds

Karloff

New member
Oct 19, 2009
6,474
0
0
Britain Blocks Hacker's US Extradition on Human Rights Grounds



The man who allegedly hacked 97 government computers in his search for UFOs will not be extradited to the US.

Gary McKinnon, the British hacker [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/88918-Military-Hacker-Wins-Right-to-Appeal-Against-US-Extradition] who allegedly committed what has been described as the biggest military computer hack of all time, will not be extradited to the US for trial. His extradition was blocked by British Home Secretary Theresa May on human rights grounds.

"I have concluded that Mr McKinnon's extradition would give rise to such a high risk of him ending his life that a decision to extradite would be incompatible with Mr McKinnon's human rights," said the Home Secretary in her official statement. "It will now be for the director of public prosecutions to decide whether Mr McKinnon has a case to answer in a UK court," she added.

McKinnon had been accused of hacking 97 US government machines between February 1st, 2001 and March 19th, 2002. Damage resulting from his hack, according to US prosecutors, left 300 machines at the US Naval Weapons Station Earle, New Jersey, out of action just after the September 11th terror attacks. The same prosecutors also allege that the hacks brought down the US Army's Washington DC military district network - more than 2,000 machines - for 24 hours.

McKinnon has repeatedly denied causing damage, and claimed he was only seeking evidence that would prove the existence of UFOs. McKinnon suffers from depressive illness and Asperger's Syndrome, an autism spectrum disorder that, McKinnon's family claimed, made him particularly vulnerable to harm if he had been sent to a US prison. McKinnon faced up to 60 years imprisonment, if convicted in a US court. The diplomatic wrangling over his case has kept McKinnon in legal limbo for over a decade.

This decision will please British Prime Minister Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Clegg, both of whom have spoken in support of McKinnon. It will be less warmly welcomed by US officials. Former White House counsel and lawyer David Rivkin has described the situation as "deplorable." Speaking about the argument that a US prison was not the best place for someone as defenseless as McKinnon, Rivkin said "under that logic, anybody who claims some kind of physical or mental problem can commit crimes with immunity and get away with it."

Source: Guardian [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2012/oct/16/gary-mckinnon-extradition-decision-live]

Image: rt.com [http://rt.com/news/hacker-extradition-mental-health-371/]




Permalink
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Yes! Finally, that thing I was angry about has actually gone my way! Thank you Theresa May, for not pissing me off for once
 

GAunderrated

New member
Jul 9, 2012
998
0
0
Thyunda said:
Yes! Finally, that thing I was angry about has actually gone my way! Thank you Theresa May, for not pissing me off for once
agreed. This is refreshing news to actually see someone not get extradited for once and tried by their own government.
 

ramboondiea

New member
Oct 11, 2010
1,055
0
0
i was genuinely pleased when I heard about this story this morning, the extradition agreements between England and America or ridiculous and this case was a damn just a damn shame, I remember being really riled up when I first heard it, and now I hope this holds up and that him and his family can finally have some peace from this for a while.
 

Zombie_Moogle

New member
Dec 25, 2008
666
0
0
How many seconds after you read "UFO" did you start waiting to read insanity defense?
Not saying belief in UFO's is crazy, but this guy might be
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
GAunderrated said:
Thyunda said:
Yes! Finally, that thing I was angry about has actually gone my way! Thank you Theresa May, for not pissing me off for once
agreed. This is refreshing news to actually see someone not get extradited for once and tried by their own government.
It also represents a departure from the ridiculously pro-American policies Tony Blair made famous. Our agreement was a joke, and we all know the US would have protected its citizens against us, so I am genuinely pleased we're standing up for our own and doing things OUR way.

DVS BSTrD said:
What does that guy's face remind me of?
Benedict Cumberbatch
 

Tiamattt

New member
Jul 15, 2011
557
0
0
Not fond of the precedent this sets. "If I'm messed up enough I can commit whatever crimes I want in another country". At least make him stand trial first, they can sort out the terms of his imprisonment if he's found guilty. It's not like UK prisons would be all sunshine and rainbows, and I seriously doubt the US has absolutely no place to put prisoners with special needs.
 
Nov 28, 2007
10,686
0
0
Tiamattt said:
Not fond of the precedent this sets. "If I'm messed up enough I can commit whatever crimes I want in another country". At least make him stand trial first, they can sort out the terms of his imprisonment if he's found guilty. It's not like UK prisons would be all sunshine and rainbows, and I seriously doubt the US has absolutely no place to put prisoners with special needs.
Technically, the precedence this sets is "If it is deemed that being extradited would put the accused at risk for ending their life due to mental disorders and diagnosed depression, maybe extradition isn't such a good idea."

Well, there's also the fact that extraditions are done on a case-by-case basis, and don't rely on precedents.
 

scotth266

Wait when did I get a sub
Jan 10, 2009
5,202
0
0
Fine, try him in the UK then. So long as we're not mistakenly under the assumption that you can hack Pentagon computers and get off with absolutely no repercussions just because you have a disorder.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
Thyunda said:
GAunderrated said:
Thyunda said:
Yes! Finally, that thing I was angry about has actually gone my way! Thank you Theresa May, for not pissing me off for once
agreed. This is refreshing news to actually see someone not get extradited for once and tried by their own government.
It also represents a departure from the ridiculously pro-American policies Tony Blair made famous. Our agreement was a joke, and we all know the US would have protected its citizens against us, so I am genuinely pleased we're standing up for our own and doing things OUR way.
You were just repaying us for all the times Eisenhower bent over backwards to kiss Britain's ass.
Let's not start bringing the past into this otherwise a couple of Guardian contributors might start apologising for the Empire.
 

Sylveria

New member
Nov 15, 2009
1,285
0
0
Karloff said:
Rivkin said "under that logic, anybody who claims some kind of physical or mental problem can commit crimes with immunity and get away with it."
God forbid people with physical or mental problems who commit victim-less crimes get help, just toss them in prison where they can be preyed on. Heck, why waste time on prison. Just kill them all and let God sort them out, right?
 

Tiamattt

New member
Jul 15, 2011
557
0
0
thebobmaster said:
Tiamattt said:
Not fond of the precedent this sets. "If I'm messed up enough I can commit whatever crimes I want in another country". At least make him stand trial first, they can sort out the terms of his imprisonment if he's found guilty. It's not like UK prisons would be all sunshine and rainbows, and I seriously doubt the US has absolutely no place to put prisoners with special needs.
Technically, the precedence this sets is "If it is deemed that being extradited would put the accused at risk for ending their life due to mental disorders and diagnosed depression, maybe extradition isn't such a good idea."

Well, there's also the fact that extraditions are done on a case-by-case basis, and don't rely on precedents.
That's nice to hear at least, although it wouldn't surprise me to hear future cases of people trying to/avoiding extradition that way. I think I'm just annoyed after so many years after the fact he hasn't had stand trial in any court.(not counting the extradition hearings he no doubt had to go to)

scotth266 said:
Fine, try him in the UK then. So long as we're not mistakenly under the assumption that you can hack Pentagon computers and get off with absolutely no repercussions just because you have a disorder.
Or just this, he put it much better then I did that's for sure.
 

shadowstriker86

New member
Feb 12, 2009
2,159
0
0
Good for the UK, trying to extradite a guy for proving that the US shouldn't use norton to block hackers from getting into government computers is just plain stupid

*captcha "too salty", my thoughts on the flying dutchman from in and out
 

cidbahamut

New member
Mar 1, 2010
235
0
0
DVS BSTrD said:
What does that guy's face remind me of?

And did his hack really bring down the whole system, or was that just the army's panicked over reaction?
It would not surprise me in the slightest given how slap-dash my own office's network is. Gain access to the network, poke around on a few servers, turn off a couple DNS servers instead of logging off and suddenly you've got a very widespread network problem and a bunch of IT folks trying to figure out what the hell just happened and trying to fix things on their end before figuring out that they need to head over to the server farm to turn things back on by hand. I could easily see that scenario playing out and keeping the network fried for a full day.
 
Nov 28, 2007
10,686
0
0
Tiamattt said:
thebobmaster said:
Tiamattt said:
Not fond of the precedent this sets. "If I'm messed up enough I can commit whatever crimes I want in another country". At least make him stand trial first, they can sort out the terms of his imprisonment if he's found guilty. It's not like UK prisons would be all sunshine and rainbows, and I seriously doubt the US has absolutely no place to put prisoners with special needs.
Technically, the precedence this sets is "If it is deemed that being extradited would put the accused at risk for ending their life due to mental disorders and diagnosed depression, maybe extradition isn't such a good idea."

Well, there's also the fact that extraditions are done on a case-by-case basis, and don't rely on precedents.
That's nice to hear at least, although it wouldn't surprise me to hear future cases of people trying to/avoiding extradition that way. I think I'm just annoyed after so many years after the fact he hasn't had stand trial in any court.(not counting the extradition hearings he no doubt had to go to)

scotth266 said:
Fine, try him in the UK then. So long as we're not mistakenly under the assumption that you can hack Pentagon computers and get off with absolutely no repercussions just because you have a disorder.
Or just this, he put it much better then I did that's for sure.
I agree he should stand trial. But the point of extradition is to try them in the country the crime was committed. Holding a trial before the extradition would mess that up. On top of that, different countries have different penalties for the same crimes often, so he'd have to stand trial, be found guilty, and then wait who knows how long for them to decide which country he is going to be imprisoned in, then figure out a sentence based on that.
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,526
0
0
scotth266 said:
Fine, try him in the UK then. So long as we're not mistakenly under the assumption that you can hack Pentagon computers and get off with absolutely no repercussions just because you have a disorder.
Yeah, those UFO files could be used against America to steal freedom or something.

Maybe even copy the Big Mac secret sauce.


They should hire the guy if he managed to break into the fucking Pentagon.

Either that, or their system is fucking awful.