Gary McKinnon Loses Extradition Appeal 380
G0rAk writes "The BBC is reporting that hacker Gary McKinnon has lost his High Court appeal against extradition to the United States. The fight is not yet over yet: 'We will certainly be applying for this court to certify a point of law of public importance and to grant leave.' said his lawyer, referring to alleged threats by US authorities. One New Jersey prosecutor apparently has stated that that 'he would fry,' a statement that would be among issues raised when they take they appeal to the House of Lords."
Interesting comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:yet (Score:3, Insightful)
6 years ago i would of agreed with the court (Score:2, Insightful)
now iam not so sure,
while watching the Guantanamo debacle continue alongside CIA secret prisons and torture openly embraced by the country that seeks to convict Mr Mckinnon i would be worried about my Human Rights too, is such a thing as a "fair trial" even possible in USA anymore ?
Wow... (Score:3, Insightful)
Am I the only one... (Score:5, Insightful)
AFAIK, Gary McKinnon is a british citizen (check Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] for this). Why does the UK allow one of its citizen to be extradited to the USA? Why is he not judged and sentenced in the UK?
Does anyone think, for just a millisecond, that the USA would do the same? Extradite one of its own citizen to be tried in the UK?
Where on earth is the outrage? How come a sovereign country, like the UK, is extraditing one of its own citizen -- regardless of his crimes -- to another country to be tried there? This is ridiculous! Can anyone answer that question?
Re:Interesting comparison (Score:3, Insightful)
Just fricking typical of what passes for "diplomacy" out of the states these days. They should just make him do a stint hacking for the government to pay for some of the (grossly overinflated) damage bills.
to extradite or not to extradite (Score:3, Insightful)
But, what did they do? The govenments made a deal, where the USA 'promised' they wouldn't actually deal out the capital punishment to that citizen. That was *before* any sentence on guilt or lack thereof was made. Actually, this should anger americans as much, because this means their government arbitrarily decided to NOT treat a person who (alledgely) commited crimes on USA soil according to their own law, and that that EU-person got an illegal advantage which no ordinary US citizen gets.
For me, however, the anger comes at the fact they *did* extradite him to the USA, clearly in violation of the rules and laws of that country and the EU. If the USA wanted him so badly, they could abolish the death penalty. speaking of which, if I'm not mistaken, some more progressive non-bible-belt states in the USA already have forbidden such practises, as any civilised society would do. Or does it ultimately remain a federal decision? Maybe some US slashdotters can fill me in on this.
The moral of the story... (Score:5, Insightful)
For a smart guy, he's rather stupid.
End justifying the means? (Score:3, Insightful)
So by that rationale, if I can kick in your front door to get into your house, is it your fault for not having a better door lock/frame?
No Surprise Really (Score:5, Insightful)
The CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) have even stated that there is insufficient evidence to go ahead with a prosecution, but as soon as the US steps in (using some very murky agreement related to terrorism the last I looked) the seas (or should I say, the legs) part. If there are grounds for deportation then fine, but sadly, if this guy had sneezed he would have been on the next plane if the US asked.
As a British person I find all this humiliating to see, and quite frankly, treacherous now. I'm not having a go at the US or Americans here. This is a British problem, and one related to standing up for itself, self respect and knowing what its own self interests are. The US are merely looking out for theirs.
Curiosity Killed Gary (Score:5, Insightful)
He's never said that he didn't do what he's accused of, and he's always said that he only did it out of curiosity. He didn't even steal anything, let alone national secrets. It's really a shame that he didn't pick a target somewhere within Europe to satisfy his curiosity. They would have been a little more lenient and his subsequent time in prison could actually be bearable. After all, why should he go to prison? He's already very sorry that he did such a thing, he's beginning to fall ill because of the immense stress and feeling of impending doom of getting extradited, and prison is not only about punishment, it's about rehabilitation.
Re:to extradite or not to extradite (Score:3, Insightful)
Which I'm happy to believe but hardly professional behaviour by an official though is it?
Re:to extradite or not to extradite (Score:5, Insightful)
Asshats, one and all.
Re:to extradite or not to extradite (Score:1, Insightful)
Security consultant (Score:4, Insightful)
Wikipedia says The US estimates claim the costs of tracking and correcting the problems he allegedly caused were around 700,000 USD. It then goes on to say that he hacked the government websites with a Perl script, and found default passwords on their "secure" network. Good think McKinnon found them before China did. (Or did he?)
Maybe they should treat him as a $700K security consultant.
Re:to extradite or not to extradite (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:New Jersey (Score:4, Insightful)
In this case, there was no manufactured evidence. Gary admitted the crimes, but tried to justify them with the age old crap of "curiosity". Curiosity with disregard for others is a pale excuse even for a minor, and no excuse for a grown adult like Gary. He didn't click a link on a web site thinking it was going to take him to Slashdot, only to be tricked into breaking into NASA's (and other government agencies') computers. He intentionally broke into their computers, knowing full well that it was illegal in both the U.S. and Britain, and weak security does not excuse that. He is guilty, and he has admitted that.
That said, the penalties in the U.S. for intentional unauthorized access where no damage was done are ridiculously harsh. At his age, the proposed punishment is a life sentence for relatively minor law violations. While I think extradition would otherwise be reasonable is this case, I also think the statements made by the New Jersey prosecutor indicate an absurdity of justice which are enough in my mind to allow him to be punished at home. Perhaps something along the lines of 180 days in the local jail and a few tens of thousands of pounds in fines -- enough to hurt and discourage him, but not so much as to ruin his life.
Re:Interesting comparison (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess you're okay with police officers and judges jesting in a similar matter. This are Serious Court and this is Serious Business, instead we have the "good guys" acting like kids on a playground.
Re:Interesting comparison (Score:3, Insightful)
If the stuff you saw on the news... (Score:1, Insightful)
Thanks for playing, too bad there's not a -1 Naive Liberal.
Re:No Surprise Really (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Am I the only one... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Am I the only one... (Score:1, Insightful)
Ummm... he's a U.S. CITIZEN. He was extradited to the UK instead of to the US; that was the point the GP was making.
Re:The moral of the story... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Interesting comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking later, solicitor Jeffrey Anderson said alleged threats by US authorities, including one from New Jersey prosecutors that Mr McKinnon "would fry", would be among issues raised.
Let's Pretend This Is Your House (Score:5, Insightful)
I think his punishment should be working until he's paid back every penny of the expense of cleaning up his little intrusions. If it were in my hands, he'd be making restitution and not serving time in the traditional sense.
2 cents,
QueenB
Re:Interesting comparison (Score:1, Insightful)
The fact is was so ridiculously easy to penetrate such systems is of course deeply embarassing to the US government, as is the fact that he was definitely NOT the only one doing it. He reports that running netstat on the systems showed unauthorised connections from all over the world, some of whom were almost certainly actual spies and saboteurs as opposed to stoned conspiracy theorists. Not for the first time, they're looking to punish one relatively harmless hacker extremely harshly because they were easy to catch and they need a scapegoat.
Re:Am I the only one... (Score:1, Insightful)
the original post was all 'the US wouldn't extradite etc etc'.
then the idiot above tried to prove that wrong with an example of a guy who was extradited by germany.
point is, he was wrong. it's not a big deal. don't get all pissy about it.
Re:New Jersey (Score:5, Insightful)
On those grounds alone the request should be refused as all such requests should be, until a balanced treaty is in place (and ratified).
let the book be thrown (Score:5, Insightful)
America will throw the book at McKinnon because they are embarassed of their lax security practises on such high profile systems. They will make an example of McKinnon because he used little more than a brute force 2-line PERL script to bombard many desktops with obvious passwords (e.g., "password" or "" [blank]).
America is even more ashamed of this security breach because the many same systems were infiltrated by Mathew Bevan [bbc.co.uk] using the exact same tactics over 10 years prior. That's right - these government and military and NASA computers have had no password policy after 10 years and 2 break-ins. Adding the number 1 to the end of these passwords would have stopped McKinnon dead in his tracks.
McKinnon is not a sophisticated programmer or cracker. He simply challenged seemingly high security systems with very low-tech kludgey scripts to see what would happen. He got lucky, then he got audacious, and then he got careless.
Get ready for another Mitnick-scale high profile court case on this one. McKinnon won't fry, but he won't see the sun for quite some time.
about barbarism (Score:3, Insightful)
-adjective
1. without civilizing influences; uncivilized; primitive: barbaric invaders.
2. of, like, or befitting barbarians: a barbaric empire; barbaric practices.
3. Marked by crudeness or lack of restraint in taste, style, or manner.
Ofcourse, you are right that this 'proves' nothing, unless one is of the opinion, that killing another human being while one has the equal option of not killing him, while it's impossibly to prevent that innocent lives will be killed as well, is basically an action of state-sponsored revenge, and thus it's an action which exhibits a primitive influence, as well as marked by crudeness.
You, however, can be of the opinion that the government sponsored killings of humans is an act of civilisation. Feel free to do so.
Re:Interesting comparison (Score:4, Insightful)
The US govt doesn't stand up for it's citizens.. how'd you like a cop to threaten to "f'n kill you" witha drawn weapon when you were stopped for a simple speeding ticket. It's the same thing here, Only the UK takes it's people seriously. There's no law on any books that would allow a prosecutor to even ask a court for a person to "fry" for computer tresspass.. being as this was an offical agent, under press conference, JEST is not an option.. he was threatening illegal execution of the prisoner. period. American cops and prosecutors are in need of a harsh lesson in professionalism. They have the law on their side, there's no need for idle, illegal threats.
Re:New Jersey (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, you all seem to be forgetting that the individual was convicted of a crime. "Boo-hoo" if some tough words made the convict soil his pants -- maybe he should have thought about that before he hacked the computers.
Re:New Jersey (Score:2, Insightful)
"You left your door unlocked. I can't help it that I walked around your house while your weren't home. I was just curious."
Yeah? It's still breaking and entering. And if you took anything, it's robbery.
If that doesn't get you, how about... "She wore the mini-skirt your honor. Then she got drunk right in front of me. It couldn't be rape! After all, she was asking for it!"
It's a bit of an extreme example but crime is crime. Victims don't ask for it, no matter how stupidly they act.
Re:Curiosity Killed Gary (Score:5, Insightful)
He doesn't appear that bright - just a very standard computer guy with some Windows admin skills. The punishment here will not fit the crime and a man's life will be wasted because of this. It's insane and I feel very sorry for him. If they cared so much about the contents of these computers why did they not secure them?
And, as you say quite rightly, punishment should not be purely vindictive there must be an element of rehabilitation as well.
Re:Interesting comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Why, you kidnapped and tortured that Canadian guy for no apparent reason, kidnapped (and probably tortured) quite a handful of other guys in Europe, some of whom did not do anything unlawful, you run a "the law does not apply here" concentration camp on soil that you rent from your arch enemy communist country from which you can not otherwise import even cigars, bombed the crap out of and pretty well destroyed a country which did nothing to draw your mighty anger, you fight a war in an other against a regimee that you put into power, funded and armed to the teeth, declared that your soldiers can not be held responsible for whatever warcrimes they commit and last but not least, as a matter of fact, you (alone in the developed world) do actually off quite a lot of your people.
So, there's some reason behind that sentiment in Europe; even if it is stereotyping, like many stereotypes, it is not entirely baseless.
Not much of a jump at all... (Score:3, Insightful)
Also note that you can become one of these detainees, and have your constitutional rights as a citizen thrown out the door without anything more than an unsubstantiated accusation of terrorism.
There are no checks and balances left in place to stop blatant abuse of this situation so that anyone can be at risk, and I suspect that you'd hear a lot more about this if there weren't "gag orders" and such to keep people quiet.
With these kinds of things going on, just how far from a police state do you think we are? The current administration is trampling under foot the Constitution of the United States and people are happily pacified by their televisions and video consoles.