Hacker loses extradition battle - Page 5

Gordie · 02-12-2009, 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

Guinness if a guy sent you an invasive program to your computer that stole your personal details and used that fraudulently then were would you want him tried in the country of origin or here?

Good answer,you just hit the nail on the head with this quote,Smuggie

cashman · 02-12-2009, 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

Ok, my last plea, then the defence rests...

FACT...The government that claims this guy is a cyber terrorist and did all this damage is the same government that claimed that saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

FACT....The judicial system that he will be tried under is the same one that allowed miscarriages of justice so that OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson could play their get out of jail free cards, yet still holds people in Guantanemo Bay without trial.

FACT...The alleged crime was carried out in this country not in the US.

FACT...And finally..regardless of what you believe to be the truth about the case... we have a biased extradition treaty, and that the current labour home secretary describes this bias as 'academic'.

Airstrip One looms ever closer.

well that was one long rest.

shillelagh · 02-12-2009, 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

Ok, my last plea, then the defence rests...

FACT...The government that claims this guy is a cyber terrorist and did all this damage is the same government that claimed that saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

FACT....The judicial system that he will be tried under is the same one that allowed miscarriages of justice so that OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson could play their get out of jail free cards, yet still holds people in Guantanemo Bay without trial.

FACT...The alleged crime was carried out in this country not in the US.

FACT...And finally..regardless of what you believe to be the truth about the case... we have a biased extradition treaty, and that the current labour home secretary describes this bias as 'academic'.

Airstrip One looms ever closer.

have a read of this .. its the timeline given by the Telegraph ..

Gary McKinnon extradition: timeline on how the fight unfolded - Telegraph

cashman · 02-12-2009, 21:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by shillelagh

have a read of this .. its the timeline given by the Telegraph ..

Gary McKinnon extradition: timeline on how the fight unfolded - Telegraph

How old is this guy? seems funny he had been fighting extradition 4 YEARS, before being diagnosed,

more like a last throw of the dice to me.

Guinness · 02-12-2009, 21:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

well that was one long rest.

I have the right to rebut stupid remarks.

We have the right to debate and disagree, my interpretation may disagree with yours, but I do not post something as fact without being certain of what I post.

Your buddy jumped and fell on his face by not even being aware of the timeframe of this case.

Spuggie and yourself tried to score cheap shots, which judging from what i've read on this forum is beneath both of you, and you both now have egg on your face.

A simple apology would have been nice, instead I get another cheap shot. You are so much better than this Cashman..I'm disappointed

Guinness · 02-12-2009, 22:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by shillelagh

have a read of this .. its the timeline given by the Telegraph ..

Gary McKinnon extradition: timeline on how the fight unfolded - Telegraph

I have already read this, and much more besides...McKinnon allegedly committed the crimes in 2001-2002 though. It was much later that the now defunct UK anti hacker squad got involved.

cashman · 02-12-2009, 22:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

Ok, my last plea, then the defence rests...

FACT...The government that claims this guy is a cyber terrorist and did all this damage is the same government that claimed that saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction.not relavant

FACT....The judicial system that he will be tried under is the same one that allowed miscarriages of justice so that OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson could play their get out of jail free cards, yet still holds people in Guantanemo Bay without trial.without doubt but irrelavant

FACT...The alleged crime was carried out in this country not in the US.The crime was against the U.S.

FACT...And finally..regardless of what you believe to be the truth about the case... we have a biased extradition treaty, and that the current labour home secretary describes this bias as 'academic'. it is a biased treaty, has the guy commited a crime or not, cos thats the rules right or not.

Airstrip One looms ever closer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

I have the right to rebut stupid remarks.

We have the right to debate and disagree, my interpretation may disagree with yours, but I do not post something as fact without being certain of what I post.

Your buddy jumped and fell on his face by not even being aware of the timeframe of this case.

Spuggie and yourself tried to score cheap shots, which judging from what i've read on this forum is beneath both of you, and you both now have egg on your face.

A simple apology would have been nice, instead I get another cheap shot. You are so much better than this Cashman..I'm disappointed

the facts you speak only of quoting are not valid cos they are not relavant. its you that are trying to take people fer dummies for quoting em. its you who should apologise fer taking people as stupid.

Guinness · 02-12-2009, 22:29

Relevance...if a government will lie over something as serious as weapons of mass destruction, why would they not lie about the amount of damage done by a cyber terrorist

Relevance..proof of miscarriage of justice and inability to receive a fair trial

Relevance...this point is debatable in law, I am prepared to stand corrected but I do not believe that there is a law covering where you should be tried in case of cross border cyber crime, and therefore but for a flawed extradition treaty etc..etc..

The last point as I stated has nothing to do with the case, it was simply a statement that it has highlighted that we have a biased treaty that the current government doesn't give a fig about.

I wont slam the door on my way out

flashy · 02-12-2009, 22:35

just mind it doesnt hit you on the ass then

cashman · 02-12-2009, 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

Relevance...if a government will lie over something as serious as weapons of mass destruction, why would they not lie about the amount of damage done by a cyber terrorist

Relevance..proof of miscarriage of justice and inability to receive a fair trial

Relevance...this point is debatable in law, I am prepared to stand corrected but I do not believe that there is a law covering where you should be tried in case of cross border cyber crime, and therefore but for a flawed extradition treaty etc..etc..

The last point as I stated has nothing to do with the case, it was simply a statement that it has highlighted that we have a biased treaty that the current government doesn't give a fig about.

I wont slam the door on my way out

ya still have not answered what people are asking ya, Has the guy commited a crime? who against? do you think its a serious crime? i have no love fer quite a few of our laws/rules etc, but as they are in force i obey em.

shillelagh · 02-12-2009, 23:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

I have already read this, and much more besides...McKinnon allegedly committed the crimes in 2001-2002 though. It was much later that the now defunct UK anti hacker squad got involved.

Glasgow-born Mr McKinnon has always admitted hacking into the computer systems in 2001-2 - which the US government says caused damage costing $800,000 (£550,000).

BBC NEWS | UK | Hacker step closer to extradition

BBC NEWS | Technology | Profile: Gary McKinnon

When Britain's hi-tech crime unit finally came for him 2002, Mr McKinnon was not surprised. He told the BBC: "I think I almost wanted to be caught, because it was ruining me. I had this classic thing of wanting to be caught so there would be an end to it."
He thought he would be tried in Britain, and that he might get, at the most, three to four years in prison.
Then, later that year, the United States decided to indict him with charges that could mean up to 70 years in a US prison. It has never been entirely clear why it took US officials until 2005 to begin extradition proceedings. Gary McKinnon's been fighting extradition ever since, on the grounds that he never intended anything malicious by his hacking. He's been free on bail, but it has been a strange kind of freedom.

Neil · 02-12-2009, 23:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by shillelagh

....but it has been a strange kind of freedom.

A better kind of freedom than he will be getting when Big Bubba gets a hold of him

Eric · 03-12-2009, 01:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guinness

Ok, my last plea, then the defence rests...

FACT...The government that claims this guy is a cyber terrorist and did all this damage is the same government that claimed that saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

FACT....The judicial system that he will be tried under is the same one that allowed miscarriages of justice so that OJ Simpson and Michael Jackson could play their get out of jail free cards, yet still holds people in Guantanemo Bay without trial.

FACT...The alleged crime was carried out in this country not in the US.

FACT...And finally..regardless of what you believe to be the truth about the case... we have a biased extradition treaty, and that the current labour home secretary describes this bias as 'academic'.

Airstrip One looms ever closer.

I think I'm with you ... mostly. Until the US respects international law, and until there are extradition treaties with this hegomenic country, that have as their base complete equality of treatment, no British subject should be sent there to stand trial. You can say "no" to the sonsofbitches ....

garinda · 03-12-2009, 01:54

A one sided extradition treaty is another example of our government's subservience to the U.S.A.

Never mind being America's poodle, our government's not only willingly bent over, but also handed them the lubrication.

By the way, I think the hacker knew exactly what penalties he faced, and his arrogance is evident from the messages he left on the hacked systems, and the Asperger's is just being used as a defence for his being a cretin.

steeljack · 03-12-2009, 03:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric

I think I'm with you ... mostly. Until the US respects international law, and until there are extradition treaties with this hegomenic country, that have as their base complete equality of treatment, no British subject should be sent there to stand trial. You can say "no" to the sonsofbitches ....

I'm thinking the Conrad Black trial show's that US justice can go easy at times