Slashdot Mirror


UK Hacker loses Extradition Case

SnakeOil Steve writes to tell us that Gary McKinnon, the alleged hacker who broke into Army, Air Force, Navy, and NASA systems, has just lost his extradition case. From the article: "'My intention was never to disrupt security. The fact that I logged on and there were no passwords means that there was no security,' McKinnon said, outside the hearing at London's Bow Street Magistrates Court. 'I was looking for UFOs.'"

3 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I really hope... by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 5, Informative

    How would Bush feel if someone tried to prosectue an American for saying that Iran's leadership was being foolish and that they are wrong - that's illegal in Iran - where's the extradition to Iran - you can't have it both ways

    Your understanding of International Law is woefully inadequate/misinformed. The US has extradition treaties with countries they determine are lawful, like the UK. The US does not consider Iran a country that would respect American Law, and therefore have not agreed to an extradition treaty with them. Yes, in fact you can have it both ways.

    If you'd checked, you'd know that in fact Iran has in the past issued warrants calling for the arrest of foreign citizens. Those warrants carry no weight outside of Iran and the countries (if any) that have extradition treaties with it.

    --
    by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
  2. Re:Ouch by AuMatar · · Score: 5, Informative

    The system was comprimised. You don't just reboot them- you need to reimage the system to make sure nothing was left behind by the intruder. For a military system, they probably did a forensic search to see what he had access to and what information may have been comprimised. That takes time.

    --
    I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  3. Bull by weierstrass · · Score: 5, Informative
    >That's why the UK is extraditing him -- they have a reciprocal extradition treaty.

    No, they have an almost unprecedented asymmetric extradition treaty.
    The Extradition Act 2003 is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom. Among its provisions, it removes the requirement on the US to provide prima facie evidence when requesting the extradition of people from the UK, but maintains the requirement on the UK to provide such evidence to the US in the reverse situation.
    (Wikipedia)

    This is the reason for the opposition to Gary's extradition, and that of the NatWest Three, and so on. The UK basically handed a huge chunk of sovereignty right over to the Americans, basically saying "If you want a British citizen, you can have him bound hand and foot."
    --
    my password really is 'stinkypants'