The end of this countries world standing, Pending extradition of Garry McKinnon Options

[GMR]

Quite simply it's because we don't deal effectively with our miscreants that we resent "johny foreigner" passing severe sentence over our own.
Maybe if we had a penal system akin to the rest of the world the criminal element may be less inclined to kick up a fuss over extradition.

The trouble is we are too subservient to America. If they treated us the same then I don't think we would mind so much.

They say we are running out of space to house our prisoners; what about underwater? It wouldn't cost us anything and we will be killing two birds with one stone

[lordtup]

The trouble is we are too subservient to America. If they treated us the same then I don't think we would mind so much.

They say we are running out of space to house our prisoners; what about underwater? It wouldn't cost us anything and we will be killing two birds with one stone

I assume we are talking about a purpose built undersea development as opposed to just chucking them overboard,but there again......

[GMR]

I assume we are talking about a purpose built undersea development as opposed to just chucking them overboard,but there again......

Really!!! You would go as far as that? A 'built undersea development"? You are a generous person. My idea wouldn't have cost the taxi payer anything other than the men to take them to the sea front. My idea would have also taught them a valuable lesson

[Andy]

Also; the crime was committed in this country and he should be tried here.

Surely the crime was committed in the US. If he'd hacked into an American bank and stolen $50m then the crime, ie the actual theft would have occurred in the US. The same principle is applied in this case as it's the US rules he's infringed when hacking into an American based system.

[Guest_Newbury Expat_*]

Surely the crime was committed in the US. If he'd hacked into an American bank and stolen $50m then the crime, ie the actual theft would have occurred in the US. The same principle is applied in this case as it's the US rules he's infringed when hacking into an American based system.

Cyber crime is a tough one for the courts (see the current argument between Wikipedia and the National Gallery).

This case is, on the face of it, a crime committed against NASA and hence common sense would dictate American proceedings. However, as he was entering in from a UK computer the waters are muddied somewhat - my own legal knowledge falls far short of knowing what should happen to him.

Bear in mind this fella has Aspergers and this should be considered wherever a trial takes place.

I disagree that he wouldn't get a fair trial over here (in the US) but I also think theat the US are pushing their weight in extradicting him as they know they have a chance to. If this hacker is North Korean, they wouldn't even bother.

As for the prisons, they are just as crowded here. The governer of my current state (Arnie) is in the process of signing a deal to send a whol load of inmates to Michigan or some such place due to massive overcrowding. Not sure where he would go on trial and every state has its own laws which would dicate what could happen to him.

[GMR]

Surely the crime was committed in the US. If he'd hacked into an American bank and stolen $50m then the crime, ie the actual theft would have occurred in the US. The same principle is applied in this case as it's the US rules he's infringed when hacking into an American based system.

American pedophiles who hack into or go into a British site are prosecuted in America. The same as if a British pedophile hacks into an American web site is prosecuted over here. The rules were changed at the request of the Americans. We don't get the same privileges therefore it is not an even playing field.

[Instigator]

I believe he should be punished, but not under American law.

If he connected to the systems of a world superpower as easily as he says, I find it more worrying that they were not secure to this type of attack. makes you wonder what somebody with real intent could do.

[GMR]

I believe he should be punished, but not under American law.

If he connected to the systems of a world superpower as easily as he says, I find it more worrying that they were not secure to this type of attack. makes you wonder what somebody with real intent could do.

I agree he should be punished; there is no doubt about that. But not by the Americans. The crime was committed in this country.

[Guest_Newbury Expat_*]

I agree he should be punished; there is no doubt about that. But not by the Americans. The crime was committed in this country.

Playing devil's advocate here but if I hacked into your bank account from my computer here and took your money, you'd be perfectly fine with the Californians prosecuting me? And as such if I struck a deal with them to say I won't do it again and they say okay, then that would be end of story?

I think there is as much relevance as to where the person/body is you commit a crime against, as to where the crime was committed. But then again that's just a point of view, I don't know the legal statutes.

Just want to make sure we're not saying that he should be prosecuted in the UK because we don't want the 'yanks' to put away one of 'ours'. Got to be consistent right? Works both ways?

Either way, I think any prosecution is ultimately undermined by the fact that he has a mental illness and this should require some form of treatment rather than a stint in clink (US or UK style).

[Strafin]

makes you wonder what somebody with real intent could do.

He had intent. We only have his word that he didn't want to do anything more sinister - and he's a criminal!

[GMR]

Playing devil's advocate here but if I hacked into your bank account from my computer here and took your money, you'd be perfectly fine with the Californians prosecuting me? And as such if I struck a deal with them to say I won't do it again and they say okay, then that would be end of story?

I think there is as much relevance as to where the person/body is you commit a crime against, as to where the crime was committed. But then again that's just a point of view, I don't know the legal statutes.

Just want to make sure we're not saying that he should be prosecuted in the UK because we don't want the 'yanks' to put away one of 'ours'. Got to be consistent right? Works both ways?

Either way, I think any prosecution is ultimately undermined by the fact that he has a mental illness and this should require some form of treatment rather than a stint in clink (US or UK style).

Well; I think this is more about a show trial - in America - than about justice.

As I said in another post the crime was committed in this country so therefore it he should be prosecuted in this country. I gave a few examples in another post why the Americans would do the same if things were reversed.

[Strafin]

I gave a few examples in another post why the Americans would do the same if things were reversed.

Nothing valid or concrete though to be fair, in fact not actual examples at all.

[GMR]

Nothing valid or concrete though to be fair, in fact not actual examples at all.

Actually they are valid; when an American pedophile accessed a British web site and was caught he was prosecuted in America. That is both valid and concrete. There was also a case many years ago where somebody stole money from a bank account using the computer; the stealer was in America and accessed a British web site. Again valid and concrete. This man had committed a crime and and he should be prosecuted in the country he is at. Even the lawyers who are defending the hacker are saying that he should be prosecuted in this country.

However, the Americans do have a right to extradite him to America if the British won't prosecute... but why are they not prosecuting him, that is the question? Because they struck a deal with the Americans; basically they - the British - are letting his crime go; which is against British law.

[Strafin]

Actually they are valid; when an American pedophile accessed a British web site and was caught he was prosecuted in America. That is both valid and concrete. There was also a case many years ago where somebody stole money from a bank account using the computer; the stealer was in America and accessed a British web site. Again valid and concrete. This man had committed a crime and and he should be prosecuted in the country he is at. Even the lawyers who are defending the hacker are saying that he should be prosecuted in this country.

However, the Americans do have a right to extradite him to America if the British won't prosecute... but why are they not prosecuting him, that is the question? Because they struck a deal with the Americans; basically they - the British - are letting his crime go; which is against British law.

Sorry but that's not valid, no names, dates, case references, ar any source, it's at best hearsay. Good question though about why aren't we prosecuting.

[Iommi]

Sorry but that's not valid, no names, dates, case references, ar any source, it's at best hearsay. Good question though about why aren't we prosecuting.

I don't think GMR is quite right. In our legal system, there's a concept of 'in the public interest'.

[GMR]

Sorry but that's not valid, no names, dates, case references, ar any source, it's at best hearsay. Good question though about why aren't we prosecuting.

When I read things I don't keep a record - which would be impossible - to prove a point later on down the line. Because I haven't kept a record it doesn't make it not valid. It is valid because it is true, whether you believe it or not. I am sure if you researched it yourself you would come up with those facts.

[GMR]

I don't think GMR is quite right. In our legal system, there's a concept of 'in the public interest'.

Good point; but in this case it has nothing to do with the "public interest" but the American interest. So we are forsaking our interest for the American one.

Just a matter of interest; why isn't it in public interest, in your opinion? Other lesser crimes have been prosecuted.

[Iommi]

Just a matter of interest; why isn't it in public interest, in your opinion? Other lesser crimes have been prosecuted.

I never said, or thought, it was or wasn't. I don't know enough about the case to form an opinion.

[GMR]

I never said, or thought, it was or wasn't. I don't know enough about the case to form an opinion.

Everybody should be playing on a level playing field, this decision is political, nothing else. To suck up to the yanks and to show our 'special relationship' this hacker is being used a pawn; sadly is it a one way game.

[Iommi]

Everybody should be playing on a level playing field, this decision is political, nothing else. To suck up to the yanks and to show our 'special relationship' this hacker is being used a pawn; sadly it is a one way game.

You might be right, but I understand (after doing a very quick swat) that he has even appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, but that has been rejected.