Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm not sure how well this is being reported in the U.S. so I though I'd fill you all in. It's quite an interesting topic for debate.

Its about UK 'hacker' Gary McKinnon who in 2001 'hacked' into some US military and NASA computers apparently looking for Information on UFO's. I used inverted commas around the word hacked as what he did was figure out that the administrators would be too lazy to disable the guest accounts on their new windows NT servers and simply accessed them remotely using the guest credentials, so certainly not hacking in the traditional sense of the word. The US government claim the cost to undo the damage he caused was in the millions and stopped essential military services for days. This is all the immediate wake of 9/11.

Anyway for the last 8 years he has been fighting to face trial in the UK, despite the fact that the computers he broke into where based in the U.S. Interestingly the lawyers on both sides agree the crime took place in the U.S., the only people objecting are Garys family and various UK tabloids who now have one almighty stick to simultaneously bash the UK government and the U.S. with.

Since commingling the crime he has fully owned up to doing it and has also been diagnosed with a very mild form of autism called Asperger's Syndrome. This seems to be being used as a weapon by those fighting against the extradition. Despite this the condition has no affect on a suffer to tell right from wrong and is a very mild case of the syndrome (He was in his late 30's when diagnosed).

Allot of misinformation is being thrown around about the case there is talk of 60 year sentences. As far as I'm aware that is the maximum sentence he could receive. In all likelihood it has been stated he will serve 2-3 years minimum security. In fact had he not fought the extradition for so long he would be back home now having served his time.

Anyway there seems to be allot of Anti-Americanism in the reporting of this story in the UK, however I haven't heard what any American citizens thought and I was curious. I do however wonder what the reaction of the British public would be had an American broke into computers at the Ministry of Defense? I wonder if they would be so keen to defend his right to a trial on his home turf?

To be honest, it is being hugely inflated here.

People with Aspergers have a slight tendency towards depression, but they keep waving the term 'suicide' a lot. I somehow doubt that will happen.

The man in question broke into several American military computer networks, left offensive messages all over the place, and debilitated the servers. They go on about how he was 'just looking for UFO's' but to be honest, he did far more than that. That's just an attempt by the media to make him seem like a harmless nutter, rather than a potentially criminal one.

However, he's admitted his crime, and I don't believe he should extradited for it. There's no need. He should be prosecuted and banged up here. The laws under which the American government are attempting to extradite him were wheeled into place under small print by the Blair government after 9/11, in order to help catch terrorists. He is a British citizen and entitled to the right of a fair trial by his peers in the British court system, rather than an American one, be he criminal or not.

As things currently stand, Britain and America share a certain familiarity in our diplomatic relationship due to the fact we share a language, and share a certain amount of cultural history. However, we are an independant nation, and as such, I do not believe it is the right of the American Government to cart off minor British criminals. He has committed his crimes, admitted them, and as such, should stand trial for them here.

I think the crux of the matter is where were the crime committed? Given that the PCs hacked where in the US there is a very strong case for claiming the crimes to have been committed on American soil. In which case I personally have no objection to him being tried by the US justice system. They are one of our oldest allies and we have very similar legal systems. It's not like we are sending him off to Iran for trial!

I think this Harmless eccentric image is the result of a well constructed PR campaign to generate sympathy.

The fact is, the American government made him an offer-come with us quietly, and stand your case in a US court, and you'll spend a maximum of a year in jail here, and then be sent back to Britain for the remainder of your sentence. However, try to fight it, and we'll give you the maximum possible sentence and you'll spend it all in America. I do not believe that the American government should be in a position to deliver those kind of ultimatums to a British citizen. That is all.

Ketara wrote:The fact is, the American government made him an offer-come with us quietly, and stand your case in a US court, and you'll spend a maximum of a year in jail here, and then be sent back to Britain for the remainder of your sentence. However, try to fight it, and we'll give you the maximum possible sentence and you'll spend it all in America. I do not believe that the American government should be in a position to deliver those kind of ultimatums to a British citizen. That is all.

Really? I wasn't aware of that. I'll do some more research.

Ketara wrote:The fact is, the American government made him an offer-come with us quietly, and stand your case in a US court, and you'll spend a maximum of a year in jail here, and then be sent back to Britain for the remainder of your sentence. However, try to fight it, and we'll give you the maximum possible sentence and you'll spend it all in America. I do not believe that the American government should be in a position to deliver those kind of ultimatums to a British citizen. That is all.

Good to know they can 'offer' you the full sentence before trial, without the need for a guilty verdict or a judge to hand down sentencing.

Hopefully you meant that they would prosecute for the full possible sentence.

If I was the US govt I'd have been glad that he did what he did to find the loophole, then sue him to get damages. If the recording industry can hit people up for several million dollars for downloading a few songs, this guy would have no hope...

Is there no such thing as a plea bargain in Britain? They are fairly standard procedure and not underhanded or part of some vast conspiracy. This would have been behind closed doors between the lawyers of the case so how anyone would actually know what was said is highly questionable. We would only know about a plea bargain (the actual facts of one) if it was presented before the court in lieu of a trial. And they can't just give him the maximum sentence either, they would just recommend to the sentencing judge he get the maximum if found guilty. Assuming that any part of that plea bargain story is true it makes sense. The federal prosecutors would rather get the whole thing over with so offer him a deal to save everyone the time and trouble (especially if their case is uber-solid: it is a legal term). Of course if he wants to jerk everyone around they are going to put the screws to him, and hard.

He's really only screwing himself. He is guilty, all sides agree to it and if he had taken the agreement he would have gotten a year and probably served less than that, I'd say 6 months or less. Now it has been 8 years of legal fees and when he gets pinched (either prison time here or there) it is going to be longer than 6 moths to a year most likely and possibly with conditions (such as no access to computers). I think Dave Chappelle would call it "when keeping it real goes wrong".

Again, assuming any of it is true.

i found this on Wikipedia:

The US authorities claim he deleted critical files from operating systems, which shut down the US Army’s Military District of Washington network of 2,000 computers for 24 hours, as well as deleting US Navy Weapons logs, rendering a naval base's network of 300 computers inoperable after the September 11th terrorist attacks. They claim the cost of tracking and correcting the problems he caused was $700,000.[15]

McKinnon has denied causing any damage, arguing that he accessed open, unsecured machines, and disputes the financial loss claimed by the US as concocted in order to create a dollar amount justifying an extraditable offence. While it did not constitute evidence of destruction, he did admit leaving a diatribe on one computer:

"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.”

It was pretty carless and stupid to leave a way open for this guy to get through and romp around, but often some of the most obvious things get overlooked in many walks of life. He was a total horse's ass, though, for doing things that could have endangered lives or actually gotten people killed in the US. I say bring his butt over here to face the charges. At the time he did this, anything could have happened as a result of his action, but he had no idea or care what harm he could have caused.

Tell you what, they can have him when they allow us access to the Soldiers involved in Friendly Fire incidents for our inquests.....

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Tell you what, they can have him when they allow us access to the Soldiers involved in Friendly Fire incidents for our inquests.....

Yeah, because these are practically the same thing.

These two issues are so radically different in both legal terms and political ones that if you want to discuss it you should start a different thread. Unless of course the point is to derail this one.

One bit of rubbish that's been tossed around a bit by the media is the idea that the extradition treaty is a one way street and the US would never extradite anyone to the UK for trial. Just to nip this bit of misinformation in the bud right now:

Since 2004, 46 people have been sent from the UK to the US for trial, and 27 from US to UK

From the BBC's website.

Considering the population difference between the US and UK in fact it transpires that US most defiantly has been pulling it's weight in regards to the treaty.

Jail? Sounds like this guy needs a Hugbox.