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."
New Jersey (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Subtle difference, I know. But it's Jersey, whadda ya gonna do aboud id?
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: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).
Re: (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.
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: (Score:3, Interesting)
Frankly, he was a jerk to think that breaking into US military computers was a wise thing to do.
Ignorance of the law is no defence, he should face the full (custodial) penalty of the US over this offence. Perhaps that isn't the cool thing to say, but it's true.
Re: (Score:2)
We do... it's called the New Jersey Turnpike.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting comparison (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:2)
Also going to prove what a wonderful job "The Sopranos" has done for New Jersey's image... I'm going to start a campaign to get the motto "The Garden State" changed to "The Whacking State" or "Don't F**k With Us".
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, that's mostly North Jersey, but, unfortunately, that's the face Jersey shows to the world, so it's not surprising that they think all the state is like that.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Come, come... Surely, you do not honestly believe, there was such a threat thrown. The prosecutor's threat "to fry him" was, obviously in jest and no more death-threatening, than promises to "destroy competition" — made by sportsmen and businesses daily — are, for example.
Even if the prosecutor wanted, he would not be able to do it — although New Jersey has capital punishment on the books, it has not executed anyone since 1976 [deadlinethemovie.com]... An
Re: (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: (Score:3, Informative)
I agree with you in that the prosecutor should be dismissed When it comes to whether or not his statements should factor into the outcome of the deportation hearings, however, I beg to differ, and, at least in this country, so do the courts.
United States of America v. Cobb, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 587, 2001 SCC 19 [umontreal.ca]
The defendants were accused of running a telemarketing scam, making phone calls from Canada and bilking people in the US. In a media interview, the US prosecutor said to the defendants, "You're
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
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
Re: (Score:2)
Fairly standard recruiting practice I'm sure for certain branches of the goverment...
Agent 1: I like that kids skills, lets hire him.
Agent 2: Yeah he looks ok
Kid: Screw you, I refuse to work for a corrupt establisment!!
Agent 1: Hmmm what have we got on him?
Agent 2: Not much, a misdemeanor they can't even be bothered to prosecute in his own country...
Agent 1: Perfect, dig out that pad of extradition forms and lets draft his new "employment contract"
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 ?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Gimme a break. Do you really think that any court in America would give this punk the death penalty? This shows absolute ignorance of U.S. laws.
In the U.S. there are only two crimes for which you can get the death penalty: 1st Degree (pre-meditated) murder and treason. And treason has only been punished capitally a very few times in the entire
Re:6 years ago i would of agreed with the court (Score:4, Funny)
Re:6 years ago i would of agreed with the court (Score:4, Funny)
The US and Mexico fought over who would get Texas.
Santa Ana won the battle of the Alamo and the US got Texas.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sat TV, collage courses, gyms, all the comoforts of home. TBH it depends on the category of prisoner but a chap who sits next to me at work plays football against prison teams and says the one's he sees are pretty cushy. I'm sure others are less savoury and we're always being told how crowded they are so I guess the answer is mixed.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Except, that is, for the prisoners who'll live in cargo containers. [guardian.co.uk]
Re:6 years ago i would of agreed with the court (Score:5, Funny)
And you call this cushy. I'm supposed to live with fraudsters, ne-er-do-wells and malefactors who consider the easy charms of a '71 preferable to the more challenging '73?
You, sir, are worse than Hitler.
Re:6 years ago i would of agreed with the court (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think it does matter. The thing is that USA applies death penalty. That should be enough for any civilized country not to maintain an extradition treaty with such a country.
"And even in states that have capital punishment, in the vast majority of murder cases, prosecutors rarely go after the death penalty."
Just 1057 times in 2006 only.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
OT (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Asshats don't.
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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The non apathetic one's have already gone or are packing their bags. The others are either chavs, chav wannabees (shudder) or just too stupid to care.
Almost every night, when I catch the bus home there's a mad woman who shouts and swears and threatens any young girls/women, often driving them to tears. She then gets on the bus and does the same to the drivers, telling them how crap they are to be
Re: (Score:2)
The fact is, he committed a crime, and some portion of that crime took place on US soil. By convention, that allows for the US to extradite him, even if he never set foot here, himself.
That said, with the fucked up US prison system, I hope (for his sake) that he gets to stay in the UK.
Computer Misuse Act 1990 (Score:2, Informative)
I just typed "US Extradites"... into Google (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, not the UK. The USA extradites its citizens to Mexico instead.
Dog' the Bounty Hunter loses extradition battle [msn.com]
I agree, absolutely shocking (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder if the guy can appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, I hope they would cancel this scandalous extradition considering the terrible track record of the US justice system.
Note that before this case I believed that no country extradited its own citizens, because that's how it is here in France. Might have to do with brits being subjects, not citizens, I guess
Re:Am I the only one... (Score:5, Informative)
"A FORMER US marine who sparked an international manhunt after allegedly abducting a 12-year-old British girl he had befriended on the internet was extradited to the UK from Germany yesterday."
he was arrested in germany, not extradited from the US.
stupid, indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
While this is an extreme case, the UK is not all that concerned about a lot of things it should be. The policemen were acquitted....
They wern't "acquitted", since they were never even charged with an crime. AFAIK they wern't even arrested.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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 preven
Re:to extradite or not to extradite (Score:5, Informative)
Since in this case the crime is against the Department of Defense, it would be a federal crime, under federal jurisdiction.
However, hacking is not a capital offense under any jurisdiction, so far as I am aware. When the prosecutor said he would fry, it was a figure of speech.
That being said, if I were the U.K. I sure as hell wouldn't extradite one of my citizens to a country where due process and habeas corpus have recently been ruled to not apply to "enemy combatants," a designation which is applied to non-citizens solely at the discretion of the executive branch. Under our constitutional system of justice, he would not have anything to worry about as far as the death penalty -- but since he hacked the military, and the government could ignore the constitutional system of justice by uttering the magic words. . .
Well, that probably wouldn't happen. Probably.
Re: (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:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ever since then remaining silent was counted as an admission of guilt in terrorism cases.
Oh and we STILL don't have bins (translation for across the pond: trash cans) at train stations!
Re: (Score:2)
That's as ordinary as plea-bargaining. In the real word situations are not ideal, and a little of something is better than nothing.
Given the choice between never punishing a criminal or getting a lesser sentence, it makes perfect
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For what it's worth, Japan does too.
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 woul
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If there's one thing Jesus taught us, it's that bad people must be hung by the neck until they are dead. It was in his Sermon on the Gallows.
Re: (Score:2)
If anything, it would be a situation were life in prison was given and then some bizzar accident in prison took care of it. Jeffrey Dahmer found his fate in this way. A couple years after he was sentenced, he was beat to death by weight lifting bars in the show
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?
Re:End justifying the means? (Score:5, Funny)
I still don't get it . . . Maybe you could use a car analogy.
Re: (Score:2)
There, I think that does it
Re: (Score:2)
No, he's saying he found your key under the mat and let himself in to have a look around, believing you're hiding secret spaceship technology somewhere in your house that you're not sharing with the rest of the world. The man is a loon, pure and simple; I suspect the Brits will be more than happy to extradite him, simply to be rid of him.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially if you left your drivers license there.
It doesn't matter what kind of lock is on the door.
In your country, its ok for the owner of the house to shoot you. If you're in there.
Re: (Score:2)
If you can just wander in without force, it's not B&E
Only if they can prove you had intent to cause damage/trouble. Bizarrly, in theory, you can walk in to a strangers house and stand there quite legally. Better yet, if you hurt yourself in their house, you can sue them.
This is one area where I'm more of the American persuasion. If someone is in your house and you don't want them there, you should be entitled to use lots of force to get them out.
Go To Jail, Do not Pass Go (Score:2, Interesting)
Hmmm...
B.S. The guy is a hacker who purposely broke into a system he was not supposed to be in. He knew it. He knew it was improper and illegal.
It's no different that getting into bank accounts, credit card accounts, school records, etc.
If you excuse him, then no one can bitch and moan about hackers and vulnerabilities in Windows, OS X, Linux, or anything else.
If we are serious about computer security
How about Sony then? (Score:2)
Or is it one rule for Sony (remember their rootkit thing) and one rule for wacko people looking for UFOs?
Re: (Score:2)
2) Even if A were not true the change you propose would not come about. Sony would just lobby for specific rules to protect the same behavior in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
This case I believe is a disgrace.
This is crazy (Score:2)
He is both incompetant and a bit crazy (he was looking for UFO evidence...) Why go to all this trouble to lock him up?
Re: (Score:2)
"Why go to all this trouble to lock him up?"
There are some people who don't "get" this, so we step on a few to send a message.
If he were a burglar who just wanted to look around and fiddle with the premises, he'd still go down for breaking and entering.
Sad (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Also we have had extradition treaties for most of the history between the two countries. Just because the latest rendition happens to follow signs of the times is also irrelevant. We have given criminals to England and they have done the same for us in the pas
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, not in mothballs, just run down in numbers and has been since WW2. Modern warfare that the UK is ever likely to be involved in just doesn't need them. We're still keen on our nuclear subs (well, Blair/Brown are anyway). As our own head of the armed forces noted, the sort of wars that get fought these days are different and we need forces
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: (Score:3, Funny)
He's already very sorry that he did such a thing
Oh, well, why didn't anyone say so?! Case dismissed!
Re:Curiosity Killed Gary (Score:4, Informative)
Somehow, I believe something *more* than his human rights will be violated [hrw.org].
What I dont understand is why the UK does not understand that he commited whatever crimes he commited in the UK. As you said, there is surely some kind of political agenda before this... poor sucker. Of course I do not condone what he did, he indeed commited a crime but he should be judged and charged *where* he commited it, in the UK and not in whatever country wants who wants to charge it.
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.
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.
Why don't they just hire him? (Score:2)
Look at it this way Mr. Pentagon bureacrat: would you rather this British dork
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.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Not quite. The US Government is not embarrassed over this incident. Officials will throw the book at McKinnon because, unfortunately, that's how they handle these things. For a long time, the
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Someone who has a very high opinion of himself. Some might say he has an overactive ego. Regardless, he did some naughty things and much to his surprise, his kiddy skillz weren't enough to keep him out of trouble. He's been whining ever since.
Yeah, I think that might cover it.
Re:WTF?? (Score:4, Interesting)
As you could tell if you read the article.
Re:WTF?? (Score:4, Informative)
"I found a list of officers' names," he claims, "under the heading 'Non-Terrestrial Officers'."
"Non-Terrestrial Officers?" I say.
"Yeah, I looked it up," says Gary, "and it's nowhere. It doesn't mean little green men. What I think it means is not earth-based. I found a list of 'fleet-to-fleet transfers', and a list of ship names. I looked them up. They weren't US navy ships. What I saw made me believe they have some kind of spaceship, off-planet."
"The Americans have a secret spaceship?" I ask.
"That's what this trickle of evidence has led me to believe."
"Some kind of other Mir that nobody knows about?"
"I guess so," says Gary.
"What were the ship names?"
"I can't remember," says Gary. "I was smoking a lot of dope at the time. Not good for the intellect."
Re: (Score:2)
Look into this light:
|===(*)===|
Flash!
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Thanks,
MIB
Re: (Score:2)
Peoples imagination about things that are somewhat plausible make great covers for things that are real.