Slashdot Mirror
Hacker McKinnon To Be Extradited To US
Vainglorious Coward writes "When UK hacker and Asperger's sufferer Gray McKinnon lost the judicial review of his case it seemed likely that he would be extradited to the US to face charges of hacking almost a hundred systems causing $700,000 worth of damage. Today the UK home secretary rejected his last-ditch attempt to avoid extradition adding that 'his extradition to the United States must proceed forthwith.' McKinnon's relatives are expressing concerns for his health, with his lawyer going so far as to claim that extradition would make the 43-year-old's death 'virtually certain.'"
...and Asperger's sufferer...
This has NOTHING to do with this issue.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
The crime took place on British soil. Why is he being extradited?
Or, if you want to take the view that the servers were on US soil, why have people posting to US servers been prosecuted in Britain for hate speech? You can't have it both ways.
If you don't live in the USA you hardly stand much a chance of getting fair trial if you are extradited. Firstly you need money for a private attorney if you want a real shot at a fair trial (public defenders are a joke most of the time; innocent people go to jail all the time - just look at he innocence project). And you are not allowed to work while you are awaiting trail in the USA further guaranteeing you getting screwed over. You are not familiar with the legal system - again another nail in the coffin of obtaining a fair trial. And consider that you don't know anyone to turn to for advice. And then you have to consider cultural factors - a jury in the USA is going to be less sympathetic to a foreigner.
Of course in this case its even worse - what he did would be a lesser crime in the UK. Why someone should subject to a foreign countries laws while doing something that is not in that foreign county amazes me. We don't give foreigners the vote so why should they be subject to our laws when not in our country. Let him be subject to British laws and let the British system deal with him (ie for his hacking).
He also has Asperger's Syndrome and this form of autism could really be a stress factor leading to suicude. A trial in a foreign country is no small deal. The whole thing stinks.
I have not read much on this case, from skimming his wikipedia page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon ...it seems he is a UK citizen, right? Why would the UK extradite a citizen to the US? If it were the other way around I think an extradition would be very unlikely.
I honestly don't understand why so many people think he shouldn't be extradited. The way most extradition treaties work is if you commit a crime in or against a country with which you have an extradition treaty, and if that crime is also a crime in your home country, then you are extradited. I think Britain has hacking laws, so this seems fairly clear cut. Why do so many people have a problem with extraditing him? Is it because you think hacking shouldn't be a crime, or what?
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
His name is Gary, not Gray. Stellar editing as always, slashdot staff.
Sturgeon was an optimist.
The article itself makes it clear in the very first sentence that his relatives expect him to commit suicide before he can be extradited. The slashdot summary would rather imply that the evil America would be killing him.
Sturgeon was an optimist.
I though there was a UN convention that prohibited extradition to countries that practice torture or won't give a person due process. Given the US recent track record on torture and the probability that he will be tried in a military court it should be fairly easy to get his extradition cancelled. But then again, the US and the UK are not all that much different and if closer together would probably become a single country. Maybe he should appeal to the EU court for the protection of Human Rights in Geneva and he probably will. This dude will be in prison for a very long time.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
That figure is the alleged cost of upgrading the security of these systems after the attack, not the result of any 'damage' that he may have caused. I'm not in any way condoning what he has done and Asperger's is no excuse but the desktops that he accessed were often Internet facing with blank or weak administrator passwords, seems to me like there should be some sysadmins on trial with him for gross negligence.
My analogy (no car sorry) would be that it's like a robbed bank having to spend $700,000 on a vault after realising that keeping the money in wooden boxes in the back yard is inadequate.
For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
People have an issue with this because if convicted in America he will face the rest of his life (however long or short it may be) languishing in a high security American prison. In the UK we do at least give the majority of our prisoners the chance of rehabilitation.
The above comment disregarding the fact that a US jury is almost certainly likely to be biased against a foreigner; his inability to qualify for any capable legal aid; and an unfamiliarity with the US legal system seems to me an excellent reason to allow him to be tried at home. I imagine that they're also looking to try him under a terrorism-related charge, which is patently not what he set out to achieve.
However, this is now boiling down to a deeper issue of a massive disparity between the number of people extradited from the UK to the USA and vice-versa. I daresay the bulk of this is due to the fact that we do in fact harbour more potential terrorists, but at least some part of it is due to a government that just rolls over and takes it up the arse.
PocketGamer.org - For the gamer on the go!
And I don't care if I lose karma over this, but that stinks to high heaven.
Oh, and the United States NEVER extradites its citizens. Big Bully Rules OK.
+1 Informative. While the UK-US extradition treaty is somewhat biased in favour of the US, this is precisely why is being extradited. He's never denied commiting the crime, and frankly given what has been revealled about the incompetence of the US agencies involved I'm surprised that they still want all that dirty laundry aired in what will almost certainly be a media circus.
The reason the waters are so muddy is because some of McKinnon's supporters have made Aspergers out to be something that it is not; a get out of jail free card of some kind. Contrary to what some of McKinnon's supporters might think, it does not in any way make it conceivable that McKinnon did not know right from wrong or understand the potential consequences of his actions. The only thing is does is mean that he has some legitimate medical and psychological requirements that the US must be able to meet before the extradition can proceed, and since those are pretty easy to meet then, barring intervention from the EU, it's a done deal.
Personally, I think McKinnon's defense team royally screwed up. Once he had admitted his guilt and the Asperger's diagnosis was made, they should have used that to press for a trial in the UK, against UK laws and sentencing guidelines, with any sentence also being served in the UK. Both sides could have said that justice had been done, and McKinnon would have got off with a slap on the wrist and at worst a short sentence in a minimum security prison with time off for good behaviour, and quite possibly at the weekends as well. All this would have been over years ago, and he'd have probably made a small fortune out of selling his story to the tabloids and publishing an auto-biography by now.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Yes, but it seems to be a one way street? Remember the US air force pilot that killed 20 people when cutting the cables of a cable car in Italy, some years ago?
Iirc they wanted him extradited to Italy, but that was a no go. He was tried in the US and the jury found him "not guilty".
--
"I'm surfin the dead zone
In the twilight, unknown"
He didn't "break in to a highly sensitive military computer network". He leaned against the door and found it opened. If he actually got into any sensitive areas, then the ones that belong into court are the incompetent idiots who couldn't even keep an amateur with two much time on his hands out of their networks.
The Home Office received 95 extradition requests from the US between 1 January 2004 and 31 July 2009; 47 of these have taken place, with 36 ongoing, five withdrawn by the US and seven refused by UK authorities. The UK has made 42 extradition requests to the US during the same period; 27 of these have taken place, with 12 ongoing, three withdrawn by the UK and none refused.
Shamelessly lifted from the Guardian, one of the UK's better papers, in a column written by Sir Alan West, a minister in the Home Office.
So out of the resolved, non-withdrawn requests, the USA's requests are granted 47/54 times, whilst the UK's are granted 27/27 times.
Can anyone find a US source to verify these numbers?
I honestly don't understand why so many people think he shouldn't be extradited. The way most extradition treaties work is if you commit a crime in or against a country with which you have an extradition treaty, and if that crime is also a crime in your home country, then you are extradited.
In German law, there are the following requirements:
1. It must be a crime according to German law. (Check)
2. It must happened in the country that asks for extradition. (Check. The hacking would be assumed to happen where it took effect, that is in the USA).
3. There must be a guarantee for a fair trial (Definitely not. He'll do time not for hacking, but for embarrassing the US military).
4. No cruel or unusual punishment (50 years for hacking would be considered both cruel and unusual).
5. No extradition if the extradition itself is worse than a reasonable punishment. (There is a strong argument for that)
Looks like very good reasons to not extradite. Of course in the UK there is this "special relationship" between Tony Blair and George Bush which overrides everything else.
Was he really looking for ufo stuff or just wanted to brag about about getting into US army systems.
Part of this has to be to so the army does not look that bad and he may even get a deal maybe 10-15 years just to keep this out of court.
Or did he just find a setup trap that was meant to be that easy to get into like the child porn traps that are out there.
Was the systems setup that was as no payed for it to be setup right and they wanted to hit what even hacker to foot the bill for it.
Isn't his death already virtually certain?
You may be disappointed in the results: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_extradition_treaties
I guess The Spanish Prisoner lied to us.
Yes, but it seems to be a one way street? Remember the US air force pilot that killed 20 people when cutting the cables of a cable car in Italy, some years ago?
Iirc they wanted him extradited to Italy, but that was a no go. He was tried in the US and the jury found him "not guilty".
Because the pilot's accident occurred during military exercises, and he was in Italy as a member of a NATO force at an Italian base, all arranged by treaty between the nations involved. Italy couldn't try them because of NATO treaties. It's the responsibility of their own military branch (in this case, the USMC) to do so. They were court martialed on charges of negligence and dereliction of duty and were found innocent. However, the pilot had to do six months and was kicked out of the Marines, not because of the accident itself... it was just that, an accident during military exercises. He was found guilty in a court martial because he destroyed evidence in the case.
Regardless, that's why he wasn't extradited. This young man did the things he's charged with completely of his own volition, and he's a civilian. And so he falls under his country's extradition treaties with the US. This isn't unusual. Most first world countries have extradition treaties with each other for criminal activities. This guy is no exception, and his lawyer will quickly discover that there's no exception for Aspergers.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Prisoner are not in prison to punish them, they are in there to keep other people safe from the prisoners. He can't be rehabilitated. His attorney is ruffly saying that because he has aspergers, he has no able to stop himself. He can not or will not stop doing things like this. Next time it may cost lives, maybe someone from the UK. If the UK is unable to protect its' people then the US should have the right to protect US people.
Now if his attorney is lied (doesn't the UK have laws that punish bending of the truth by attorneys) and the guy CAN stop himself, then the UK should have done something. But like someone above said, the UK would likely not give real prison time, just probation if that. In the UK it is not that big of a crime if no one got hurt.
I am not saying he needs life in prison, but he needs real help, and oddly he is not getting it in the UK. I know that many of the prison in the US have got some vary good real mental health systems in the last 10-20 years( a lot better then it use to be). I hope that they can help him learn stop himself.
Sorry, it's more like someone going into people's homes while they're out if they left a door unlocked. It's trespass, it's an invasion of privacy, but there are no grounds for claiming that the person caused massive damage just by entering or leaving a note on the table. And if it's a business, bank or government building, whoever was responsible for security should get in more trouble for the intrusion than the person who committed an act of trespass.
Ever heard of the Insanity defense? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense#Temporary_insanity]
Ever heard of Cruel and Unusual punishment - 50 years for hacking into a computer. (hint see the Eighth Amendment of the US constitution)
Do you also choose not to 'believe' in gravity or the electrostatic force? Perhaps the whole world is run by the tooth fairy?
I never know what to say when people just outright reject decades of scientific evidence. And if on Slashdot of all places people don't understand the scientific method or just flatly deny it then maybe humanity is in big doodoo.
The problem isn't with extradition. The problem is that extradition never seems to be equal even when a treaty is in place. The US will never so much as name, nevermind send the pilots that killed British soldiers in a 'friendly fire incident' to the inquests of those killed to establish what happened. Extradition shouldn't be necessary between supposed civilised and developed nations because we should have confidence in our own legal systems, as should those seeking punishment for crimes.
The problem people have with this is that it is an utter whitewash designed to lick firmly in the arse crack of the US government and president.
The funny thing about jurisdiction is that traditionally it is based on where the crime took place. Nowadays it seems to be a matter of convenience.
But where did the crime take place? Consider someone who stood inside France and shot an arrow into Germany. That arrow strikes a Kraut and kills them. Did the murder occur in France or in Germany?
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
Justice would mean him being tried in the UK, just like any other UK citizen. Now he is going to get 60 years in the for-profit American prison industry for guessing a few passwords. For an example of how people with Asperger's are treated there, see the Billy Cotrell case.
The US would sooner start a war than extradite one of their own to another country, even for war crimes. One-sided extradition treaties give the US legal jurisdiction over Europe but not vice versa. We Europeans are pussies. We've truly let ourselves become satellite states of the Empire of the United States of America.
I never understand how you can have extradition without financial support for the defendant - otherwise it's impossible to get a fair trial.
As the previous poster pointed out, how is this guy supposed to support himself if he makes bail? How the heck is he supposed to pay for health insurance?
If someone is already clinically depressed how are they going to survive in very hostile climate in a foreign country with absolutely no support system? What about if someone has a mortgage in their home country, how will they afford to keep on making payments? What about student loans and credit card debt?
If we are going to take the concept of extradition + a fair trial seriously I suggest:
1. Upon extradition you are given financial aid to pay for initial legal and cultural advice.
2. A grant to pay for health insurance
3. Help finding a job, housing etc with interim financial help.
If at the end of it you are found NOT guilty then you are given compensation for losing your career, home, credit rating, friends in your home country (ie having your whole life permanently f***ed up) and the opportunity to keep your current job in the new country.
Additionally if the UK is going to extradite mentally ill people then facilities have to be provided for proper mental health treatment and rehabilitation - not the current bs that is the US prison system. Also if this guy needs extra help because he is mentally ill then the US government should pay for friends and relatives to come and visit him on a regular basis.
Also a guarantee should be given that the person being extradited will not be raped or beaten up in prison.
It was a US Marine plane. A USMC EA-6B Prowler, BuNo 163045, from VMAQ-2 caused the Cavalese cable-car disaster on 3 February 1998, accidentally cutting the cables of a ski-lift in Italy during a low level flight in mountainous terrain and killing 20 civilians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavalese_cable-car_disaster
"Italian prosecutors wanted the four Marines to stand trial in Italy, but an Italian court recognized that NATO treaties gave jurisdiction to U.S. military courts. They stood trial, were found not guilty and the pilot and copilot were kicked out of the Marines. One served time in military prison.
The two men were court-martialed a second time for obstruction of justice and conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman, because they had destroyed a videotape recorded from the plane on the day of the accident. They were found guilty in May 1999; both were dismissed from the service and the pilot received a six month prison term. He was released after four and a half months for good behavior.
By February 1999, the victims' families had received $65,000 per victim as immediate help by the Italian government, which was reimbursed by the U.S. government. In May 1999, the U.S. Congress rejected a bill that would have set up a $40 million compensation fund for the victims. In December 1999, the Italian legislature approved a monetary compensation plan for the families ($1.9 million per victim). NATO treaties obliged the US government to pay 75% of this compensation, which it did."
So...Italy let them go, there were trials, one was found guilty of something, tossed in prison, career destroyed, felon, all that and the families got 1.965 million US each.
Don't know much about Central and South American prisons huh? Check out the third season of Prison Break for a "PG" fictionalization of them, there are a few documentaries floating around about them on channels like History and National Geographic.
Even the worst US prison is better than being down there.
And since this guy is going to a Federal Prison, it won't be too bad, minimum or medium security, probably one of the Federal Prison medical centers, like Rochester MN where he'll be treated by the staff of the Mayo Clinic on the Federal Government's dime.
How is he going to get a fair trial,he will not have a jury of his peers, they all live in the UK. Are we going to extradite them as well?
No we are not:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense. The Sixth Amendment
Juries must be drawn from a panel that is representative of the citizens of the district in which the crime was committed.
Individual jurors must be free of bias.
The jury of your peers isn't a mirror reflection of your own self-image.
It's a richer sampling of the community in which you have been charged with a crime.
To a geek, this passage should sound familiar:
When you're in the government's sights, your best friend would seem to be a jury, that lovable amalgam of ordinary Americans with a simple, if sometimes mistaken, sense of justice. Did nothing wrong? Don't worry, jurors will sniff out the truth. Cheated a bit? No problem -- prosecutors would rather cut a deal than risk their case before a fickle jury. And if you do end up at trial, there's a good chance that jurors will be so sympathetic, confused or hostile to the government that they'll disagree on a verdict or let you off the hook.
It almost never works out that way.
Why to Fear a Jury of Your Peers
I'm sorry, did you just compare a "secure" military network controlled by the most powerful nation in the world to a defenseless little old lady?
$ make available
The US is requesting extradition under a treaty that the UK has signed but not the US. It's yet another example of Tony Blair being Bush's lapdog that we've been saddled with.
If Obama really wanted to distance himself from bush's policies, he'd pardon McKinnon. This extradition is doing nothing but stirring up anti-American feelings in the UK whilst being ridiculed in the US.
"He tried to quench that 'thirst' by breaking in to a highly sensitive military computer network directly or indirectly depended on by many people in harms way every day. Sounds a hell of a lot like it SHOULD fall under terrorism laws."
Holy batcaves Batman. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot! Let's start with a definition of Terrorism:
terrorism - The calculated use of violence (or the threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious.
or, how about Terrorist:
terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells.
Now, please explain exactly how what he did is in ANY way associated with terrorism. No really. Some morons are modding you up as interesting and you are not even close to the mark here.
strike
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
somewhat biased in favour of the US
That is like saying, having your balls ripped of using a blunt knife is somewhat painful! The US allowed known IRA terrorists and fundraisers to stick around, but at the first opportunity we hand over some computer hacker, fuck that!
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
I do, to a large extent. Not so much dire cases of schizophrenia, for instance, but depression? Anxiety? Anger control? Asperger's? They are real conditions, but they are claimed to exist FAR more than they really do in a significant way.
All of those disorders exist in a smooth gradiation from severe psychological problem to simple personality trait, and in the majority of cases they're probably closer to the latter. When a geek is introverted, it may be a mild case of Asperger's, but that truly gives you no better or more useful diagnoses than 'smart and introverted' once did. It may indeed be more harmful, because such a diagnoses tends to remove one's personal accountability for correcting the condition... and mild cases of all those behaviors can often be corrected by simple personal growth and mindful behavior.
Obviously, those conditions exist, and in severe cases really do call for specialized treatment. However, the vast majority of self-proclaimed Asperger's sufferers have it in no significant degree, and I suspect they are using it as a sneaky egoboost ("Asperger's may be asocial, but they're really smart") or as an excuse ("you don't want me to talk at the meeting, I'm asperger's"). Both are harmful.
So anyone who might commit suicide, gets a "get out jail free" card from you. At what crime do you draw the line I wonder? If I killed you and then said "oh I am going to end it all" should I walk free?
I don't think the world can work as you seem to want it to work. Oh and if he was going to kill himself over the stress, why hasn't he killed himself yet, over the stress?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I've rarely seen the same straw man argument repeated so often. Nobody is saying what he did was legal, but rather that what he did was not serious enough to get extradited for. Trespassing without stealing or vandalising merits a slap on the wrist.
Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
Yep, America is also threatening Britain that they will cease intelligence sharing with us if we use evidence of CIA torture against a British citizen in a British court also.
There was a few years ago the case of a US A10 pilot who killed a British soldier and wounded 3 others, also blowing up 2 of our armoured vehicles in a friendly fire incident in Iraq. We did not want to put the pilot in trial but simply wanted to carry out an inquest to see why it happened and whether it was preventable. The US would not send the gun camera footage, they would not name the pilot or let us ask him questions about the incident. The gun camera footage was at least leaked in the end, but the US never to this day cooperated with the investigation.
If the US wont even allow us justice when we've been fighting alongside them as allies and they screw up, then why the hell should we even consider extraditing a British citizen over something so relatively minor? They kill our troops, they torture our citizens, and they want us to extradite someone who connected to a bunch of their machines that had blank and default passwords?
It really shows how little interest our government has in looking after our country when they support such a request.