backtop


Print 55 comment(s) - last by masher2.. on Aug 3 at 3:31 PM


  (Source: Wired's Threat Level)
Hacker cites human rights concerns over possible military treatment, unfair plea bargain

UK Hacker Gary McKinnon is set for extradition to the United States, after a last-resort appellate committee at the UK’s House of Lords denied his attempts to appeal Wednesday. He is now taking his case to the European Court on Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.

McKinnon is wanted in the United States for allegedly hacking into Pentagon and military computers between 2001 and 2002, where it is claimed he was searching for evidence of a UFO cover-up by the U.S. government. As a byproduct of his escapades, U.S. authorities accuse McKinnon of tampering with military log files – some of which were used to assess the battle readiness of U.S. Navy ships – and deleting critical information which, in one case, knocked more than 2000 U.S. Army computers offline in Washington, DC.

In one case, McKinnon even left authorities a calling card in the form of a note, which read:

“US foreign policy is akin to government-sponsored terrorism these days ... It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand down on September 11 last year ... I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels...”

The Law Lords’ opinion of USA v. McKinnon notes that McKinnon “admitted responsibility” to his crimes with UK authorities after his arrest in 2002, and evidence mounting against him across the pond indicates that he has little chance of walking away with a not-guilty plea in the United States. To that end, U.S. authorities offered McKinnon a plea deal: if McKinnon plead guilty and came to the United States willingly, he’d endure a lenient, 6-12 month sentence at a minimum security prison in the U.S., followed by repatriation to the UK and most likely supervised or paroled release.

McKinnon has repeatedly turned down this offer, however, and instead spent the last six years fighting the U.S. government’s extradition request. The sentence he now faces is decidedly more severe: at least 8-10 years in a medium- or high-security U.S. prison, and have little opportunity for parole or repatriation to the UK.

In his defense, McKinnon said the U.S. plea-bargaining process – a technique foreign to UK courts – was a violation of his human rights: the only way to seek punishment in his own country, he argued, was to give in to the U.S. plea-bargain and surrender willingly – a process that would have him automatically admitting guilt and, according to his supporters, opting out of a fair trial.

McKinnon’s defense has also expressed fears of special-category, Guantanamo-style military treatment, should he be extradited to the United States.

His supporters note that the Law Lords’ opinion, agreed on unanimously by the court, was written by ex-Intelligence Services Commissioner Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Haywood, automatically slanting his opinion in favor a cultural “partnership” mentality with the U.S.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

What a wuss.
By mdogs444 on 8/1/2008 9:09:44 AM , Rating: 5
McKinnon’s defense has also expressed fears of special-category, Guantanamo-style military treatment, should he be extradited to the United State
What a moron. You think you're going to hack into the defense network of a super power, and they're going to smack you on the wrist and leave you in the UK?

This guy should be thrown in Gitmo to listen to the Barney "I love you, You love me" song 24/7/365 for a minimum of 15-20 years.

Lesson this guy learned: If you're afraid of how a country's military will treat you, don't hack into their defense network.

If you can't handle the heat, get your punk-A$$ out the kitchen.




RE: What a wuss.
By 306maxi on 8/1/2008 9:17:04 AM , Rating: 4
I tend to agree. He's done something wrong, he knew it was wrong, he knew the consequences and now he's crying because he's going to get what's coming to him? What a load of rubbish. You do the crime you do the time..... He knew he was taking on the military so he should have known he was going to get a military style trial and punishment.

Sucks to be you Mr McKinnon!


RE: What a wuss.
By 306maxi on 8/1/2008 9:19:07 AM , Rating: 2
I should point out that he probably won't even get that sort of treatment... he's just scared of the possibility.


RE: What a wuss.
By mdogs444 on 8/1/2008 9:22:54 AM , Rating: 3
No doubt. But a foreigner breaching the US National Defense Military network - regardless of the post intention, could be considered terrorism. I hope they try him as one.


RE: What a wuss.
By StevoLincolnite on 8/1/2008 9:32:50 AM , Rating: 2
Lets hope that some good came of this and whatever loop-hole he utilized has now been rectified in the Computer Network that U.S employs.

What makes me wonder is, if the U.S would have to remain true to there word and place him in a low-security prison? If that's the case, then he would have been better off going to the United States, do the little amount of time, then put up with 6 years of stress.


RE: What a wuss.
By martinrichards23 on 8/1/2008 9:51:36 AM , Rating: 1
He only used software that someone else made, he is no great hacker.

Indeed, many people hacked the networks just like he did.

Though he should obviously be punished, the fact is that its better to have someone like him bungle his way through and expose the vulnerability than Iran or North Korea.


RE: What a wuss.
By iNGEN on 8/3/2008 2:32:43 PM , Rating: 2
Can you think of a better reason he would be offered six months in a minimum security prison?


RE: What a wuss.
By johnsonx on 8/1/2008 11:11:19 AM , Rating: 2
I doubt he's legitimately scared of that possibility, because it really isn't a possibility. He's just using it as an excuse.


RE: What a wuss.
By czarchazm on 8/1/08, Rating: 0
RE: What a wuss.
By johnsonx on 8/1/2008 1:12:55 PM , Rating: 2
The only people who go to Gitmo are "enemy combantants", and while that definition is somewhat muddy these days, it definitely doesn't include English computer hackers. The little pud had nothing to fear if he had just accepted the original deal.


RE: What a wuss.
By foolsgambit11 on 8/1/2008 3:58:24 PM , Rating: 2
Of course, the Supreme Court just said, it doesn't matter that they're in GTMO, they still have their rights.


RE: What a wuss.
By SiN on 8/2/2008 9:20:39 AM , Rating: 1
just that they wont benifit from having them.


RE: What a wuss.
By Proteusza on 8/1/2008 9:37:07 AM , Rating: 4
Nah, the US military is just embarrassed that they got hacked by one guy who was obsessed with UFOs. If they cant keep one UK hacker out, how can they keep the terrorists and Chinese out?

Sure, he did wrong, but that doesnt mean he deserves to go to Gitmo.

Pity the "partnership" that the UK is so fond of is really one way, and the UK is on the receiving end, if you know what I mean. The UK wont be allowed to extradite US criminals over here.


RE: What a wuss.
By FITCamaro on 8/1/2008 9:57:29 AM , Rating: 3
And the government has never said they want to send him to Gitmo. They offered to send him to a minimum security prison for 6 months to a year. He decided to fight it. Now he'll likely wind up in a medium or max security prison for several years. And I'd wager those are worse than Gitmo. In Gitmo, I'll bet the inmates don't fight much amongst themselves. The same can't necessarily be said of a max security prison.

He'll be someone's b*tch inside a few hours.


RE: What a wuss.
By Suntan on 8/1/2008 10:53:02 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed, I’d rather be sent to Guantanamo where there are plenty of soldiers to assure that nobody gets out of line, than to a max prison.

It wouldn’t take very long for Mr. Freckle-Face there to squint at some 350lb guy and quickly learn that there are worse places in the world than military confinement.

-Suntan


RE: What a wuss.
By Ammohunt on 8/1/2008 1:33:50 PM , Rating: 2
he would also get culturally appropriate meals in gitmo like Jellied Eels, Bangers and mash and steamed tomatoes for breakfast(yuck).


RE: What a wuss.
By Noya on 8/1/2008 9:11:00 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I’d rather be sent to Guantanamo where there are plenty of soldiers


Cock meat sandwich?


RE: What a wuss.
By B3an on 8/1/2008 5:26:24 PM , Rating: 4
Apparently from reading a interview with him there was many other people from all over the world on these US networks, every hour, every day. They only caught him because he was stupid enough to download software using his real email.

He didn't agree to the short jail-time offer the US made as they said he brought down many systems, which apparently he didn't. Thats why he's been fighting it.

And it's funny, when you see this story on other non-US sites, most people agree that getting a lifetime in prison for merely looking around some US networks is wrong. Especially when so many others apparently do it.

Yet on here, a mainly US site. You get all the yanks saying things like "give him life and i hope he gets buttf**ked". These are the kinda people that think Iraq should be nuked.

And what is it with buttf**king in US prisons?


RE: What a wuss.
By Denigrate on 8/1/2008 5:46:42 PM , Rating: 1
They just call it buggering on your side of the pond, and it wouldn't be a "lifetime" in a US prison. If the idiot had taken the plea deal, he would be a free man. Of course, you can't fix stupid, so I suppose that someone mucking around with a "secure" network, and then goes and downloads a file with his own email addy, deserves whatever happens to them. Hope the guy never/has not done any breeding.


RE: What a wuss.
By akugami on 8/2/2008 2:14:20 PM , Rating: 2
There is a lot of anti-US sentiment in other parts of the world. Now, I don't know the full details of what happened when he accessed the US computers BUT I doubt you do either. Even if he did bring down US computers, which I'm not saying he did, it would be extremely stupid of him to admit to it outside of a court of law and against his best interest. Heck, Michael Vick said he didn't know about the dog fights at his house until he got into court. We all know how that went.

I know there has been rantings from some people in forums about a lifetime sentence and buttf**cking but the truth is that having known someone who did about 10 years, that doesn't go on much and only for those who consent. This is a guy who was a drug dealer and abuser. The popularity of the term is due to the fact that most of these people are criminals and they deserve punishment, a popular idea with many, and the fact that TV shows and movies perpetuate the huge burly cell mate who is going to make you his girlfriend bit.

As for the life in prison, most of us here aren't idiots however most people who come to DailyTech are likely from the US. Regardless, it is wrong for that guy to hack into computers, get caught and now try to escape from doing time. Hence all the jokes and stuff about throwing him into prison for life. 99% of the people do not realistically expect him to be thrown in prison for life without his day in court similar to Sean Connery in The Rock. Even Saddam Hussein got his day in court and no one believes his innocence. Anyone outside of the US who seriously believes the US will throw this guy into prison for the rest of his life is an idiot. If he had hacked into US government computers looking for information to sell to others, now we're talking lifetime imprisonment regardless of nationality.

For the record, I was not born in the US but I am a citizen. I see points of views outside of those who have lived solely as a US citizen and have never traveled abroad. I still think this guy should get his rear end in the slammer. If he was hacking into UK computers, he'd get much much more than a plea bargain for 6 months in a minimum security prison with all the evidence they have on him. If he was a US citizen hacking into US computers he'd get much more than 6 months in prison.

The sentence he was being offered was more than fair IMHO. He also had every right to defend himself in a court of law and either dispute the charges or at least say that his crimes were not as serious as those he was being charged with.

With a 6 month sentence in a minimum security prison, where you can basically do whatever you want outside of following a few basic rules, it was basically a slap on the wrist comparatively speaking. The reason he is going to get a heavier sentence of up to 10 years in a stiffer prison is because he refused the offer that was given in the plea bargain. I am someone who got caught doing something stupid in my youth that could have netted me up to two years in prison. They gave me a plea bargain, which I accepted, of 6 months probation and expunging my record if I didn't do anything else stupid and complete my court ordered 6 months of probation (it was non reporting, so you'd have to be an idiot to not complete it). Had I refused it, I likely would have done two years time in prison due to the evidence against me. I did have the option to refuse the plea bargain and fight the charges in court. This guy refused the plea bargain and he is now reaping what he sowed. I seriously do not see how his human rights were violated anywhere. He has always had the opportunity to come to the US to fight the charges. Which he knows he will lose because they caught him red handed. Whether it was his own stupidity that got him caught is irrelevant.

The EU courts will not stop the extradition because when he is sent to the US he still has a chance to argue his case in court. Again, with the amount of evidence on this idiot's rear end, fat chance of winning that one. He knows it, the world knows it, only anti-US people are arguing in his favor and booing the US in this case. I'd guarantee that if it was a US citizen hacking into UK (or pick almost any foreign nationality) computers most of you supporting this guy would have called for the beheading of the US hacker if he fought extradition to the UK. I do believe in extraditing US citizens to a foreign country if they committed similar crimes btw, so long as there is no death penalty in play.


RE: What a wuss.
By masher2 (blog) on 8/3/2008 3:31:55 PM , Rating: 2
> "And what is it with buttf**king in US prisons? "

Winston Churchill once famously said the British Navy ran on rum and sodomy....and the "love that dare not speak its name" was unusually common in British boarding schools.

In continental Europe, as one moves closer to the Mediterranean, the prevalence of pederasty tends to increase further.


RE: What a wuss.
By rippleyaliens on 8/1/2008 2:13:23 PM , Rating: 3
He should have took the deal.. 6mos in a Min Security Prison, = own bed, access to phone, lax guards. Possible weekend furlough. BEEN THERE done that. 3mos at work release. Very laid back. Then this guy goes home, with nothing on his record. Able to work, can possibly get a job at a computer security firm. (yah yah yah, he isnt that good, YET better than most)..
So he is risking being sent to Camp Leavenworth for 6-8 years, which let me tell you. that is a REAL federal prison. Military guards, lock down, very serious place to be. as a prisoner. And that is on the nice part. If he goes to a Max security prison -- that = 23hrs a day in your own cell. no outside contact at all. ALLLL THIS POSSIBILITIES to see if ET is phoneing home? Sometimes i wonder


RE: What a wuss.
By Kraenar on 8/1/2008 9:55:41 PM , Rating: 2
Let me ask you, when you say "Been There", do you mean a Minimum Security Prison, or Leavenworth? I doubt Leavenworth because it's a FORT not a camp, and it's only federal because it's part of the government. Fort Leavenworth houses soldiers who have broken laws. But you are still correct in saying it's a REAL Prison. It's basically a Penitentiary. To the best of my knowledge (I used to be a MP Correctional Officer (95c) for the Army. I now work for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. FBOP) civilians, terrorist or not, do not go to Leavenworth. Even terrorists go to and stay in the BOP. I've seen my fair share.

And I agree that he should have taken the deal. 6-12 months in a camp (minimum) is very easy time. Martha Stuart anyone? Everything rippleyaliens said plus no fences to bother with. Camp FED! He's just doing the old inmate on death row thing, trying and doing everything he can to find the one bleeding heart out there to save him.


RE: What a wuss.
By SiN on 8/2/2008 9:16:23 AM , Rating: 2
Or use your brain to out menouver their punishment for being caught using international laws. I'd opt for staying out of the US when it comes to jail.


RE: What a wuss.
By akugami on 8/2/2008 1:41:25 PM , Rating: 2
They did try to just give him a "smack on the wrist" and leave him in the UK. He'll be in a minimum security prison and likely do 6 months tops. It is a matter of national security for any country to keep their military computers free of illegal access, especially access by a non citizen. Likely they'd keep it as anonymous as possible too just to avoid attention.

For the military this is a slap on the wrist but they can't just let him not be punished. It would be the same if the country is China, the UK, France, Russia, etc. A country must protect its interest and letting someone hack into military computers is such a serious crime that the country in question must pursue this even if it takes 50 years before they send his rear end in prison. They already look bad having their computers hacked. They will look like incompetent idiots if they don't send a message to others that you can't illegally access our computers with impunity.

Bottom line, he had the right after being extradited to defend himself in a court of law. This idiot knew they had him red handed and that he was going to do time. Not federal pound me in the ___ time, not even close but he wanted to avoid doing any time at all. He had the right after being extradited to defend himself in a court of law.


RE: What a wuss.
By BruceLeet on 8/2/2008 3:52:37 PM , Rating: 1
Wow thats sick

If you think about it seriously, how long would you be able to take it? Your punishment of...
quote:
This guy should be thrown in Gitmo to listen to the Barney "I love you, You love me" song 24/7/365 for a minimum of 15-20 years.


That seriously is sick.


Just Plead Guilty
By IceBreakerG on 8/1/2008 9:24:18 AM , Rating: 5
From reading the article, this guy has spent the last 6 or so "years" trying to fight the extradition process. The plea bargain he was offered was 6-12 "months" (max), he gets parole, "and" he gets to go back home. Instead, he's spent almost 10 times that amount of time trying to get out of this, and his possible sentence is MUCH worse. This guy is a moron and deserves to go to trial with his "not guilty" plea. Then he'll see how much he's screwed up.

From experience (not criminal court, just traffic court), pleading guilty gets you a less severe punishment (all of my speeding tickets in 1 local city have been dismissed because I pleaded guilty). Now, I'm not comparing a federal crime to a minor traffic violation, but the terms are still similar. Plead guilty, get off easier. Plead not guilty, and when you are found guilty, you get your ass handed to you.

We can see that this guy would rather skip the minimum security prison and go to federal pound me in the ass prison. I don't know about you all, but I don't want to go to federal pound me in the ass prison. Ever.




RE: Just Plead Guilty
By FITCamaro on 8/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: Just Plead Guilty
By martinrichards23 on 8/1/2008 9:47:53 AM , Rating: 3
Oh dear god no, why oh why does someone have to bash the EU at any given opportunity?

This is a tech forum, lets keep on topic.


RE: Just Plead Guilty
By FITCamaro on 8/1/08, Rating: -1
RE: Just Plead Guilty
By Ammohunt on 8/1/2008 1:39:50 PM , Rating: 1
Becasue the EU is a joke?


RE: Just Plead Guilty
By B3an on 8/1/2008 5:13:41 PM , Rating: 3
The US is a joke. So is Guantanamo and your human rights.


RE: Just Plead Guilty
By MamiyaOtaru on 8/1/2008 8:31:04 PM , Rating: 2
NO U


RE: Just Plead Guilty
By KCjoker on 8/1/2008 5:35:55 PM , Rating: 1
People never take cheap shots at the USA on here. *sarcasm alert*


RE: Just Plead Guilty
By afkrotch on 8/1/2008 10:05:04 AM , Rating: 2
I don't see that happening. I'm hoping he gets thrown into Gitmo. Making an example is always a good thing.


What an idiot
By quickk on 8/1/2008 9:25:39 AM , Rating: 5
He should have just taken the deal and this whole business would have been done five years ago. Now he faces 10 years of jail time.




RE: What an idiot
By 325hhee on 8/1/2008 11:32:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
He is now taking his case to the European Court on Human Rights in Strasbourg, France.


quote:
In his defense, McKinnon said the U.S. plea-bargaining process – a technique foreign to UK courts – was a violation of his human rights: the only way to seek punishment in his own country, he argued, was to give in to the U.S. plea-bargain and surrender willingly


Hmm... kinda hypocritical, I shouldn't be trialed in the US, let me go to France and fight for my British rights...

This guy is an idiot in so many ways, he touted breaking to the Pentagon's computer, and now he feels his rights would be violated. MORON, you knowingly broke a law, you attacked a US Military institution, therefore you yourself are a terrorist. I hope they throw him in a maximum prison, so he can open up new orifices that he never new about, how's that for being violated


RE: What an idiot
By foolsgambit11 on 8/1/2008 4:03:01 PM , Rating: 2
You missed the point. He shouldn't go to the US, he feels, because the US process doesn't protect his human rights. His problem isn't that it's a non-British government, it's specifically with the US plea bargain system.

And of course, he only allegedly broke into a classified military system....


RE: What an idiot
By Heyga4Huk on 8/3/2008 3:10:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This guy is an idiot in so many ways, he touted breaking to the Pentagon's computer, and now he feels his rights would be violated. MORON, you knowingly broke a law, you attacked a US Military institution, therefore you yourself are a terrorist.


merriam-webster.com :

Main Entry:
ter·ror·ism Listen to the pronunciation of terrorism
Pronunciation:
\'ter-?r-?i-z?m\
Function:
noun
Date:
1795

: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Main Entry:
ter·ror Listen to the pronunciation of terror
Pronunciation:
\'ter-?r, 'te-r?r\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French terrour, from Latin terror, from terrere to frighten; akin to Greek trein to be afraid, flee, tremein to tremble — more at tremble
Date:
14th century

1: a state of intense fear2 a: one that inspires fear : scourge b: a frightening aspect <the terrors of invasion> c: a cause of anxiety : worry d: an appalling person or thing; especially : brat3: reign of terror4: violent or destructive acts (as bombing) committed by groups in order to intimidate a population or government into granting their demands <insurrection and revolutionary terror>

...After the commies the which hunt is on terrorists eh?


Concerned
By boogle on 8/1/08, Rating: 0
RE: Concerned
By MADAOO7 on 8/1/2008 1:46:24 PM , Rating: 2
You stole the words out of my mouth. The real story here is that our government isn't doing a good enough job protecting our defense network. Last week, we had pilots in a Minot Air Force Base, fall asleep with nukes in their cargo bay.

In August last year a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear warheads and flown from Minot Air Force Base to Barksdale Air Force Base in the southern state of Louisiana.

And in August 2006, four Air Force fusing devices for ballistic missile nuclear warheads were mistakenly shipped to Taiwan!

These are the real stories!


RE: Concerned
By PWNettle on 8/1/2008 3:28:52 PM , Rating: 1
I would imagine they've plugged whatever hole the dude used.

What I think is sad is that he wasn't extradicted immediately. Our supposed good allies holding up a blatantly guilty terrorist-like extra for years is pretty pathetic.


RE: Concerned
By foolsgambit11 on 8/1/2008 4:28:45 PM , Rating: 3
It's true, the military has gotten much better on the whole anti-hacking front in the last few years. They have a whole program they initiated a couple of years ago to educate every user of a DOD computer how to spot potential threats to DOD networks. Of course, there's only so much you can expect from a guy who can barely use PowerPoint, but it's a start. Their Information Security guys have also gotten better - but it's tough to control every access point in a system that sprawls across the entire world.

But the fact is that the government will probably never be able to move as fast as the enemy can in this field. It's all about mitigating risk, not eliminating it.

I'm also willing to bet that the 2000 computers knocked offline by this guy were NIPRNET terminals (that is, hooked up to the unclassified network that is connected to the internet). But I have no evidence to back that up. I just figure they'd say they were classified computers if they were, in order to maximize the severity of the crime.


This is why I hate the legal system
By FITCamaro on 8/1/2008 9:24:22 AM , Rating: 2
The guy was arrested 6 years ago and still hasn't even gone on trial.

And he should've taken the plea deal. I hope he winds up in federal "pound me in the ass" prison (to quote Office Space).




By bohhad on 8/1/2008 9:34:37 AM , Rating: 2
gary mckinnon, you are a bad, bad man :)


What a novel approach
By fishbits on 8/1/2008 11:18:45 AM , Rating: 2
More criminals should take this approach. "I refuse to be punished for my crimes because the punishment won't be to my liking, and I decided the victim doesn't get the protection of existing laws."

Just once I'd like to see one of these l33t h4xx0rz man-up when he gets caught. Hope he does do 10 in high-sec, and every week a copy of the turned down 6-12 month low-sec offer is delivered to him.




RE: What a novel approach
By Aloonatic on 8/1/2008 11:32:19 AM , Rating: 2
Seems to work for Islamic terrorists from time to time.

They argue that they cannot be deported from the UK because they could face the death penalty.

The US official that was reported to have said that he should fry could play into his hands, especially if he takes it to the European court.

You never know how those crazy guys are going to rule.

When it comes to law and order in the UK things are rather odd. It wouldn't surprise me that prisoners will soon be released because the simple act of being in prison is a breach of their human rights, or their cells aren't fit for them as theirs not enough power sockets to plug in their plasma TV, satellite TV decoder, xBox, playstation, blueRay player etc etc etc...


A question of jurisdiction
By foolsgambit11 on 8/1/2008 3:53:28 PM , Rating: 2
I know it doesn't work this way, but the facts of the case make me feel like the US shouldn't be the ones prosecuting him. He wasn't in the US, he was in Britain. So for that, the Brits should have jurisdiction.

But, then, I really don't think it should be any other government's jurisdiction to prosecute crimes which occur outside their territory, either.

I mean, let's say the situation was different. Let's say an American hacker infiltrated an Iranian military computer system and disrupted it's use for, what, a day? Do you think we'd hand him over to Iran? Do you think we'd prosecute? If we did, do you think we'd give him 10 years? Probably not.

But that's not how the world works. And maybe that's for the best.




RE: A question of jurisdiction
By mdogs444 on 8/1/2008 4:54:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I know it doesn't work this way, but the facts of the case make me feel like the US shouldn't be the ones prosecuting him. He wasn't in the US, he was in Britain. So for that, the Brits should have jurisdiction.

That' like saying if a terrorist got a hold of a ballistic missile and sent it to the US from a country in the middle east, that the US shouldn't be allowed to go after him because he didn't actually press the button in the US.


Fools
By Shortass on 8/1/2008 12:28:34 PM , Rating: 1
I enjoy how people are saying that he should simply 'accept punishment' instead of trying to fight it. Stop lying to yourselves, if any of you had broken the law in a slightly more significant way than a speeding ticket you would do everything in your power to minimize the sentence against you. Only a fool would not.




RE: Fools
By PitViper007 on 8/1/2008 1:03:21 PM , Rating: 2
The point is he HAD the chance to minimize his punishment. He turned it down. Now he faces a 10 year sentence in a max prison, with extradition looking likely, plus now he'll probably not be able to go home after. Not very smart I think.


Just Wish It Worked Both Ways
By kelmon on 8/1/2008 9:43:57 AM , Rating: 2
Generally I'm in favor of extraditing McKinnon to the US as long as suitable evidence has been presented and treatment would be acceptable under UK law for the crime. Plus, frankly, this guy just looks dodgy. However, this is tempered with the knowledge that when the UK seeks the extradition of a US citizen then the US doesn't want to know and therefore I don't see why we should have to play ball. The door needs to swing both ways.

Incidentally, is it required that before you perform a crime that there is a photograph that makes you look like the spawn of Satan?




By NT78stonewobble on 8/1/2008 10:34:23 AM , Rating: 2
Extradite the guy.

Don't wanna go to a US jail. Don't break the law in the US then (happened there IMO since the target computer was there).




What's been the hold up?
By Aloonatic on 8/1/2008 11:01:52 AM , Rating: 2
Old news is old....

I've been waiting for this story to "break" on DT for a while now and have been looking forward to the "let him fry" "hope he gets raped in prison" "send him to GITMO" ranting too.

Great to see that you've not let me down.

My 2p

He broke the law, made the pentagon look silly, was stupid not to take a plea-bargain (should have known that the UK has no balls after Blair signed the one way extradition treaty), seems pretty obvious that he isn't a danger to national security (but still broke the law), should be tried in the US and allowed to serve his sentence over here or at least most of it after a nice show trial to satisfy the American public, orange jump suit, shackles and all.

If he was American he would be in big trouble too I'm sure, but it wouldn't have been dragged out this long, which is only making it worse.

Is odd how some people over here think he should be allowed to walk because of the UFO angle and the one way extradition treaty.

Even though he wasn't much of a danger he still broke in. Just because someone brakes into your home and doesn't find what they want and it was probably not there and a stupid idea, they should still be punished.

There's was some interesting stuff on some of the interviews/reports about his solicitors offices being broken into and laptops being stolen from cars and such.




By Logica on 8/2/2008 8:02:39 PM , Rating: 1
Unlike the British law lords, the EU judges aren't biased. It is specifically stated that threatening a McKinnon by the US during the extradition would invalidate the whole process. Not quite sure what the law lords were smoking when they didn't deem what the US was doing to be regarded as threatening. I supposed they needed to stick a gun to his head. But wait, why don't the US do that? They operate extraordinary renditions anyway. Why waste all this time? Also, the British goverment is so inadept, they don't even know when the US is using UK air bases and facilities in doing this anyway. If the Russians can get away with killing a British citizen on British soil, the Americans might as well take a dig as well.




"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki