Gary McKinnon not being extradited to US Page 2

  • Page

    of 12 First / Last

  • FFS 28 Aug 2008 14:10:42 650 posts
    Registered 6 years ago
    Having read the above news link, I am devastated for the guy.

    Some dickheads are going to ruin a person's life for what is a petty crime, swinging their 'Patriotic, terrorism-defending' dick around.

    3 months UK jail time would do the trick; or even just probation (first offence, yes?). Justice is about rehabilitation, not retribution. I'm quite sure he's already learned his lesson; even if a security network isn't secure, don't go poking around.

    In the now rather likely even that he does go to jail, I only hope that he gets respect for what he's done from other cons, and that maybe this diagnosis will get him safer diggs as it probably would in the UK.
  • Deleted user 28 August 2008 14:13:13
    respect right up the pooper maybe.

    Awesome.
  • Deleted user 28 August 2008 14:18:53
    He deserves to go to jail but not for as long as they seem to be suggesting.
  • MetalDog 28 Aug 2008 14:29:20 23,920 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    It's pretty disgusting behavior by our government and the States. If he's in a position to leg it, he probably should.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • ecu 28 Aug 2008 14:34:47 77,315 posts
    Seen 19 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    FFS wrote:
    In the now rather likely even that he does go to jail, I only hope that he gets respect for what he's done from other cons, and that maybe this diagnosis will get him safer diggs as it probably would in the UK.

    How would he get respect? I don't think American cons would be too kind to someone that breached US security and who the US think are terrorists. They'll fuck him up in prison over there.
  • heyyo 28 Aug 2008 14:41:28 14,369 posts
    Seen 3 weeks ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Ohhhh, poor man.
  • FFS 28 Aug 2008 16:19:53 650 posts
    Registered 6 years ago
    ecureuil wrote:
    FFS wrote:
    In the now rather likely even that he does go to jail, I only hope that he gets respect for what he's done from other cons, and that maybe this diagnosis will get him safer diggs as it probably would in the UK.

    How would he get respect? I don't think American cons would be too kind to someone that breached US security and who the US think are terrorists. They'll fuck him up in prison over there.
    Yeah but he didn't. He just trawled through and had a look. Seems pretty cool to me.

    Maybe I should have a go.

    /will be extradited in 2 years time
  • Eighthours 28 Aug 2008 16:24:24 709 posts
    Seen 3 days ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Hacking into all these computers is hardly a "petty crime". I certainly don't support the ludicrous 70 year sentences that are being suggested by the US prosecutors, but he certainly deserves some jail time. His excuse is laughable considering the amount of hacking that went on.
  • Deleted user 28 August 2008 16:42:23
    FFS wrote:
    ecureuil wrote:
    FFS wrote:
    In the now rather likely even that he does go to jail, I only hope that he gets respect for what he's done from other cons, and that maybe this diagnosis will get him safer diggs as it probably would in the UK.

    How would he get respect? I don't think American cons would be too kind to someone that breached US security and who the US think are terrorists. They'll fuck him up in prison over there.
    Yeah but he didn't. He just trawled through and had a look. Seems pretty cool to me.

    Maybe I should have a go.

    /will be extradited in 2 years time
    Amount of computer nerds in jail...
  • Khanivor 28 Aug 2008 16:54:56 41,261 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    FFS wrote:
    ]Yeah but he didn't. He just trawled through and had a look. Seems pretty cool to me.


    Because you should always believe the criminal's version of events.

    There's no way he'll get 70 years or go to Gitmo or any shite like that. Get real.

  • Shinji 28 Aug 2008 17:07:55 5,903 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Khanivor wrote:
    FFS wrote:
    ]Yeah but he didn't. He just trawled through and had a look. Seems pretty cool to me.


    Because you should always believe the criminal's version of events.

    There's no way he'll get 70 years or go to Gitmo or any shite like that. Get real.

    You don't know what. His lawyers are citing a worst-case scenario with the 70 year claim, but it's still a scenario - it's not a figure picked out of the air It's a much, much harsher penalty than he'd face had he done the same thing to the UK government's computer systems, which is probably why people feel uncomfortable with the whole situation.

    (Well, that and the glaring inequality and unfairness of our extradition treaties with the United States, but I don't think the details of that are widely enough known for it to be a major factor in peoples' response to this.)

    My own views on this particular case are ambivalent, but I don't think there's anything inherently anti-American in being negative about the present US administration's idea of justice, especially where "terrorist" cases are involved. Granted, the UK is as bad and has been worse in the recent past, but two wrongs don't make a right either.
  • Khanivor 28 Aug 2008 17:17:12 41,261 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I don't think so either, but the current administration cannot even get Bin Laden's driver sentenced to more than five years at a militray tribunal in Gitmo. What strings do you think they have to pull to get this sniveling clown sent to Federal prison for the rest of his life? His lawyers are using fear and anti-American sentiment to try and get him off. Court after court has looked at the evidence and told them to get bent. The House of Lords has told them this, and they are not exactly what you would call hard for punishing people either along terrorist or security laws right now.

    The fact that the UK has some of the weakest laws against cyber-crime in the western world makes no difference here. If he didn't want to suffer the penalties of the US system he shouldn't have hacked into US computers. Fucking Pentagon ones at that, FFS. You don't even need to be in the scene to have heard of Mitnick, so he's a dumb fool who got caught and is now costing the UK rather than US taxpayer money as he tries to avoid doing his time.

  • Khanivor 28 Aug 2008 17:22:29 41,261 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Is this the AS he has just been diagnosed with after all his legal options in this country have been exhausted? We know from a certain forumite how easy it is to gain this diagnosis if you search hard enough for it.

    Sorry, if he didn't want to face charges in the US of hacking into military computers - something I sure as shit wouldn't want to be facing - then he shouldn't have bloody well done it.
  • Shinji 28 Aug 2008 17:32:28 5,903 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I don't quite buy the Aspergers thing, which is why I'm so ambivalent on the whole case. It seems that it's only been mentioned in the past few weeks that he's got Aspergers, and I don't believe that he wouldn't have had psychiatric tests right from the outset of his extradition battle - nor do I believe that the Lords would so readily extradite someone with a mental illness to the USA. The whole Aspergers revelation feels like a bit of a flag-waving exercise to me at this point.
  • chopsen 28 Aug 2008 17:44:38 16,290 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    If he was Aspergers (and he could well be, who knows) I still fail to see the relevance. If they said he was delusional and was hacking in to stop the US government sending him messages that'd be something, but it's not as if Aspergers aren't responsible for their actions is it?
  • FFS 28 Aug 2008 17:58:30 650 posts
    Registered 6 years ago
    If you wanted to invent something to get off the hook, you could invent something much more elaborate than Asperger's. Given the fact that he was quite happy to spend the majority of the day on his PC, it doesn't sound implausible.

    Not that I think it really will affect things that much; I just think it came out as it's a high-profile case so he probably had a fir old bit of psycho-analysing.

    There's no reason to poo-poo it.
  • chopsen 28 Aug 2008 17:59:14 16,290 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    But even so, he would have insight in to the fact that he was breaking the law.
  • FFS 28 Aug 2008 18:00:57 650 posts
    Registered 6 years ago
    Exactly; I don't think thery're using it as a get-out clause.

    But on the flip-side, people with AS can be incredibly naive and so maybe he didn't think of the consequences.
  • Shinji 28 Aug 2008 18:26:19 5,903 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    No, while I think the Aspergers thing has been pulled out as a last-ditch effort (and may well be on shaky ground), I don't really think that it changes the facts of the case. Nobody's given any indication that he was in those computer systems for any reasons other than the ones he's given - the US hasn't suggested any alternative motive, for all their rhetoric. Hopefully that will go towards mitigating his sentence pretty significantly.
  • FFS 28 Aug 2008 18:28:10 650 posts
    Registered 6 years ago
    Wouldn't he have to see a specialist psychologist for diagnosis though?

    Either they're lying - highly unlikely - or he's faking it. I mean come on - there are 1,001 things that are better suited to faking.
  • Khanivor 28 Aug 2008 18:36:56 41,261 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Whether he has it or not should be irrelevent. If you have MS and kill someone does that let you off? The nice thing about AS is it's something you can get yourself diagnosed with fairly easily, if you find the right doctor.

    Unless he's clinically insane then he's fit to stand trial. A trial where the case against him is made and a jury decides if he is innocent, rather than the Guardian and the internet. Except, of course, he's admitted his guilt. We just don't know whether he is also guilty of causing damage as the US claims. They would have to present evidence that he had to gain a conviction. Evidence which the courts in the UK have no doubt had some exposure to in determining that he should be extradited.

    I don't buy the whole 'innocent little script kiddy' line. A nice, sympathetic defense for the public but it seems a bit of a stretch to me. Sure, it'd be nice to be able to laugh at the US military for being wide open to attacks from scripts downloaded from the internet but I'm a tad sceptical their security is quite that bad.
  • Khanivor 28 Aug 2008 18:43:48 41,261 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    FFS wrote:
    Wouldn't he have to see a specialist psychologist for diagnosis though?

    Either they're lying - highly unlikely - or he's faking it. I mean come on - there are 1,001 things that are better suited to faking.

    Like whether or not you are groovemeister?

    Thanks for the IGM groove, you really should pay more attention to what account you're logged into at the time ;D
  • Khanivor 28 Aug 2008 18:55:16 41,261 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    If the US security system was that weak would it really be smart to publicise it just for the sake of making an example of out someone, someone no one would have heard of if he himself hadn't been as public about it?
  • Page

    of 12 First / Last

Log in or register to reply