Britain Blocks Hacker's US Extradition on Human Rights Grounds

TeletubbiesGolfGun

New member
Sep 7, 2012
187
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?
reminds me of this kid all grown up:



while good on him, i think they do have a point where playing the mental/emotional disorder card is kind of...a cop out, not that he doesn't, just saying it's tough to judge.

still, glad he will be tried in the UK and not here.
 

maninahat

New member
Nov 8, 2007
4,397
0
0
BlackStar42 said:
Wait...the government made a correct decision?! And it only took them TWO YEARS!
I don't know. Judging from the photograph, he looks like an evil genius. 60 years in prison might have been the only way to assure the freedom of all mankind.
 

Jhooud

Someone's Dad
Nov 29, 2011
224
0
0
Sylveria said:
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?
Fascinating idea! A Modest Proposal [http://emotionalliteracyeducation.com/classic_books_online/mdprp10.htm], as it were.
 

Tiamattt

New member
Jul 15, 2011
557
0
0
thebobmaster said:
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.
While that does sound like a massive pain in the ass, it really doesn't sound all that much worse then someone sitting around for 10 years after his alleged crime before someone finally figures out whether not to put him on trial, which I sure will just add on to the waiting time. Least with the trial there's a possibility of his being declared not guilty thus avoiding all the needless waiting.
 

SonicWaffle

New member
Oct 14, 2009
3,019
0
0
j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
The irony of the Conservative Home Secretary relying on Human Rights legislature to stop someone from being extradited is incredible.

If only the Chancellor had the same respect for Employee Rights. Then this government might actually do something positive.
Ahahaha, no, that would be silly. Employee rights are for poor people, similar to welfare in that regard, and the NHS/education (what with those dirty poor people being unable to afford to get such things privately) so naturally we need to cut those. Remember, we're all in this together!

OT: Fucking finally. It's just sad that it took such extremes as potential suicide for our government to rule that handing over one of our citizens just because the US demanded it would be a very bad thing. I wonder if it will set any kind of precedent or if we'll just roll over next time this happens?
 

chadachada123

New member
Jan 17, 2011
2,310
0
0
It's funny: I actually support extradition SOLELY when it is crimes committed against other people and not crimes committed against a government, especially victimless crimes like this one.

Which makes this ruling good news in my book.

Extradition is not something that should be done just because the other country says so, and should, in my opinion, only be used in strong cases like murder, not for something stupid like hacking some computers *from another country.*
 

Eternal_Lament

New member
Sep 23, 2010
559
0
0
I'm confused, the guy hacks into the Pentagon, and because he MAY kill himself if extradited due to his disorder that extradition is denied, and the main response is "Good, the government finally made the right decision"? How is this a good thing?

Perhaps I'm just too ignorant on the history of this, but I don't see why him avoiding extradition is supposed to be a good thing, especially considering the argument used to deny it. I don't foresee good things coming out of this precedent. Can someone clear this for me?
 

cerebus23

New member
May 16, 2010
1,275
0
0
Considering we can hold people without cause for any reason with trial anymore at the whim of government, good call britian.
 

Dreiko_v1legacy

New member
Aug 28, 2008
4,696
0
0
Don't mentally ill people already not go to jail due to their mental illness? Aren't they sent to mental health institutions? I don't see what this guy is complaining about.


As for weather he's to blame for those PCs going down or not, that's something we can't really know one way or the other. What we can know is that hacking the US military seems as less of a wrong than hosting pirated content or websites, since I remember someone of British origin actually being extradited to the US on those grounds.


I guess there's no money being lost when people hack the military and take down thousands of machines in the process while looking for ET.
 

Pilkingtube

Edible
Mar 24, 2010
481
0
0
Eternal_Lament said:
I'm confused, the guy hacks into the Pentagon, and because he MAY kill himself if extradited due to his disorder that extradition is denied, and the main response is "Good, the government finally made the right decision"? How is this a good thing?

Perhaps I'm just too ignorant on the history of this, but I don't see why him avoiding extradition is supposed to be a good thing, especially considering the argument used to deny it. I don't foresee good things coming out of this precedent. Can someone clear this for me?
Because extradition in this country is a case-by-case thing not a precedent thing, we don't like shipping our citizens out to foreign countries if we can help it, and certainly don't like setting up rules to streamline it.

Also, many people in the rest of the world look at the American prison system as a kind of horror story that you scare children with at night. A normal non-American would have problems in such a harsh system, let alone somebody with a form of autism AND depression.

People didn't want to see him shipped off because we viewed it as a death sentence sending him to the US for what was a misguided, but not malicious action. The problem the UK in specific has with it is how unfair the extradition process is, the US can get basically anybody they want from the UK for pretty much no reason, but the US hardly ever accepts an extradition request because of the 4th Amendment or something.
 

Notsomuch

New member
Apr 22, 2009
239
0
0
The US prison system is broken. People go in and come out Drug addicts and even bigger Criminals than before. Military prisons are inhuman and suspects, Bradly Manning for example, have been tortured and humiliated while being held without trial for years. Never mind if it's one of the various for profit prisons. The court system is skewed by profit incentive, partisan politics and racial bias. All countries should deny extradition requests from the US until they promise to begin upholding their own laws on the subject of basic human rights and liberties.
 

Elate

New member
Nov 21, 2010
584
0
0
Dreiko said:
Don't mentally ill people already not go to jail due to their mental illness? Aren't they sent to mental health institutions? I don't see what this guy is complaining about.


As for weather he's to blame for those PCs going down or not, that's something we can't really know one way or the other. What we can know is that hacking the US military seems as less of a wrong than hosting pirated content or websites, since I remember someone of British origin actually being extradited to the US on those grounds.


I guess there's no money being lost when people hack the military and take down thousands of machines in the process while looking for ET.
Richard O'Dwyer, went to my university, I don't believe he has been yet. Basically he setup a site 'linking' to pirated content. The thing about that is the US has no grounds to prosecute him. Under UK law he did nothing illegal, the server wasn't on US soil, and they're trying to get him extradited under the pretense of it being a .com domain, which is horse crap, because that domain does not solely belong to America in this day and age.

As far as I understand, the order has been approved that he can be, but he is obviously going against it every step. Frankly I don't think he should be. Though it does annoy me that people fighting for his case are trying to make him out to be completely innocent, which he blatantly is not, he setup a site that obviously linked to pirated material, we just don't have the laws to cope with that, and apparently we would rather extradite our own citizen for crimes committed in a completely different country, than write new laws or terms.
 

Ilikemilkshake

New member
Jun 7, 2010
1,982
0
0
Eternal_Lament said:
I'm confused, the guy hacks into the Pentagon, and because he MAY kill himself if extradited due to his disorder that extradition is denied, and the main response is "Good, the government finally made the right decision"? How is this a good thing?

Perhaps I'm just too ignorant on the history of this, but I don't see why him avoiding extradition is supposed to be a good thing, especially considering the argument used to deny it. I don't foresee good things coming out of this precedent. Can someone clear this for me?
Because in the past half a decade there's been growing resentment in the UK towards our government for bending over and taking it every time the US comes calling.

This guy could have done just about anything short of murder and people would be happy the government finally grew some balls and said no.

Have a quick read of these article, it pretty much sums up most peoples opinions regarding the matter:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/27/uk-us-extradition-treaty-unfair
 

Eternal_Lament

New member
Sep 23, 2010
559
0
0
Pilkingtube said:
But that doesn't really make sense in this case. True, it's unlikely the guy meant harm to the degree that may have happened, but that still doesn't address the issue that he did indeed hack the system with intent. I can appreciate that a country doesn't want to send off one of their own, but I'm not fond of a situation where one has immunity from the country they directly attacked/hacked. The argument that his disorder should be taken into account worries me, because this could have drastic implications for any possibility of him standing trial in Britain. I guess all of this just rubs me the wrong way the same that extraditing him would rub those in Britain the wrong way.

captcha: up or down. Up! Wait, no, down! Damn, why do I always go up?
 

Kopikatsu

New member
May 27, 2010
4,924
0
0
This actually is one case where the defendant should be extradited to the US, because his crime involves the US rather heavily.

We have suicide watch in our prisons. Just stick him in a straight jacket and he'll be fine.
 

zerocrossing87

New member
Sep 20, 2012
1
0
0
This is great news!

If they had extradited that poor guy I would have been completely disgusted, I have extensive knowledge of what people who suffer illnesses such as aspergers syndrome have to deal with because I too have suffered with it.

As difficult as it may be for some to understand, you cannot expect people with these disorders to think and function in a "normal" manner. Gary McKinnon should in no way be held accountable for what was essentially a innocent, curiosity filled mind in search of information regarding UFO's, there was never any intention to cause harm and if the websites he hacked where deemed so apparently sensitive why where they not better protected?

Whoever was responsible for this attempt at extraditing this poor individual should be ashamed of themselves! This whole fiasco only serves to prove and lament the fact that way to many people are still blissfully ignorant when it comes to knowledge about such illnesses.

Im glad everything was resolved and that it all turned out well in the end.
 

MortisLegio

New member
Nov 5, 2008
1,258
0
0
Put him on trial in the UK. Is this really such a big deal? So long is there a trial somewhere I don't think anyone will care.
 

Imperioratorex Caprae

Henchgoat Emperor
May 15, 2010
5,499
0
0
Put him to work as a security analyst for his sentence. No prison time, just "house arrest". Its not like it hasn't happened before in the US.
 

Eternal_Lament

New member
Sep 23, 2010
559
0
0
Ilikemilkshake said:
Eternal_Lament said:
I'm confused, the guy hacks into the Pentagon, and because he MAY kill himself if extradited due to his disorder that extradition is denied, and the main response is "Good, the government finally made the right decision"? How is this a good thing?

Perhaps I'm just too ignorant on the history of this, but I don't see why him avoiding extradition is supposed to be a good thing, especially considering the argument used to deny it. I don't foresee good things coming out of this precedent. Can someone clear this for me?
Because in the past half a decade there's been growing resentment in the UK towards our government for bending over and taking it every time the US comes calling.

This guy could have done just about anything short of murder and people would be happy the government finally grew some balls and said no.

Have a quick read of these article, it pretty much sums up most peoples opinions regarding the matter:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/27/uk-us-extradition-treaty-unfair
So this is less a "That guy is totally innocent, leave him be!" and more "Hooray! Take that US!"? If so then I guess I see what the attitude is all about, I just think the attitude is rather bizarre. Then again I'm not British so chances are I won't really understand the sentiment.