I know this thread will probably get next to no views, and probably fewer replies, but I wanted to just raise the issue because it's news over here in the UK, it involves the US, and I wanted to see if any of the Americans around these parts had an opinion. It's about the extradition of a British citizen to the US, one the American government seems very keen to make an example of but also someone most have probably never heard of: Gary McKinnon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon

All of the background info on what he did and the damage he allegedly caused is in that Wikipedia aricle. Basically, to quickly summarise: McKinnon was a hacker (alias SOLO) who between 2001-2002 broke into the networks at NASA, the US Navy, Army, and the Department of Defence. He was caught after miscalculating the timezones and remotely controlling someone's workstation when they were sitting in front of it. He was tracked down by the UK Natioanl Hi-Tech Crime Unit and arrested. He has admitted to all of his crimes - his guilt is not in question, and he's not tried to deny it.

Here's the bit where it gets prickly. He's a British citizen, but the US are looking to extradite him to America, where he could stand trial in both Virginia and New Jersey. The US government claim he caused around $800,000 of damage and major disruption to vital networks. They consider it a cyber attack by someone looking to humiliate and incapacitate America. They claim he's a cyber terrorist, basically. But Gary McKinnon is actually just a bloke with Asperger's who, he says, was trying to find evidence of UFOs. He took advantage of default passwords (yes, some people on those networks left their passwords blank or just put 'PASSWORD') to try and find evidence of conspiracies he believed the USA was supressing. His intentions were not massively malicious, and he was not looking to bring the US government to its knees and expose it to terrorist attacks. He is simply not the terrorist the Americans are claiming him to be. He's not an ongoing threat to national security.

Extraditing him to the USA would be, I think, an unnecessary strain to put him through. The man has a mental health problem. Dragging him to another country to stand two separate trials and then throwing him a jail (he could, in theory, be sentenced to 70 years in a 'supermax' prison) thousands of miles from his home and his family seems to me to be disproportionate and vindictive, frankly. His doctors fear that the truama and upheaval could result in his committing suicide; he's simply not mentally equipped to deal with it. No-one's saying we should turn him free, that we should let him loose with a computer, but why can't he stand trial in Britain, and serve his time in a British prison? He will do the time for his crimes, but it will not cause him massive anxiety and distress. The man's not a murderer, or even violent. He didn't hurt anyone, just hacked into some networks. And he has a recognised mental conditon. Why treat him so harshly?

The problem lies in the US-UK extradition treaty, which is SIGNIFICANTLY biased in favour of the Americans.  Signed in 2003 in the wake of 9/11, it was created to locate and catch suspected terrorists. But it's so much easier for a Brit to be extradited to America than the other way around'; to extradite a British citizen, the US must provide "reasonable suspicion", but for an American to be extradited to the UK, we have to prove "probable cause" - evidence, really, rather than the information the Americans have to provide. The Americans can 'say' they have evidence and have a UK citizen extradited; we have 'show' the evidence, and let them review it, before we can push for extradition. Is that fair?! If we really have such a 'special relationship', why is the treaty not equal for both parties?

But that'a a separate issue. The extradition of Gary McKinnon is what really bothers me. He has lost all his appeals, and the UK is legally not allowed to prevent the extradition. Only the US can halt the procedure. Why does Obama and the US government not see that what they are doing is unnecessary, avoidable and downright cruel? The man could easily serve his time in a British prison without going through the emotional trauma of being shipped thousands of miles away from everything he knows to be demonised by a foreign media. He's guilty, and he must be punished. But what's that phrase..."temper justice with mercy"? Think that's it. I think it seems apt in this case.

What do any Americans think? Is this about more than just one man and his crimes? Is it about sending a message that you do not fuck with the American government? The media and public here are largely behind McKinnon and think extraditing him is unfair, but out of our hands. What do any of you SimplyScripters over in the States think? Have any of you even heard of him?

(P.S. I think that, one day, his story will make a really good film!)

Johnyboy,
Good morning. I wanted to chime in on this subject being american and all. I personally think if the roles were reversed, I would say "send him to Britian".

Why? You made mention that he was guilty, you also make the point that he should do time in jail. It was America he went after, and we should get the right to punish him.

Other wise, pay us back the $800,000. and you can keep him.

You say he should be put under LESS strain by being in a British, prision? Why? He broke American laws and should be placed under our jurisdiction.

Send him on over, we will take good care of him

As far as being thousands of miles from home, don't worry, the inside of our prision looks just like yours.

Shawn....><

I've been following this case as it all seemed way too over the top to happen.

I can't agree with what the US is charging him with, although I can see why they are  charging him. Nobody made him go looking in NASA and Navy computers

To me the charges and possible sentence are unjustifiable. Typical government reaction to use terrorist laws for any reason they see fit.

THe real culprit here though, besides the hapless KcKinnon, is the the UK Crown Prosecution Service. They could have tried him in the UK. They US would then have to drop extradition charges and be done with it. The Home Secretary at the time was Jacqui Smith, (the one whose husband's masturbatory habits embarrased them both when they tried to claim back the charges for porno moves and two views of Oceans 13 (most would wonder why you'd watch it once, let one twice).

Oops, I've gone over four lines again, and my slugs were dire. Passive verbiage throughout. Plenty of conflict so, at least that's something.

Quoted from Ledbetter Johnyboy, Good morning. I wanted to chime in on this subject being american and all. I personally think if the roles were reversed, I would say "send him to Britian". Why? You made mention that he was guilty, you also make the point that he should do time in jail. It was America he went after, and we should get the right to punish him. Other wise, pay us back the $800,000. and you can keep him. You say he should be put under LESS strain by being in a British, prision? Why? He broke American laws and should be placed under our jurisdiction. Send him on over, we will take good care of him As far as being thousands of miles from home, don't worry, the inside of our prision looks just like yours. Shawn....><

Putting aside the fact that, as the treaty currently stands, it would be much harder for us to get him...

I think the key thing here is the mitigating circumstances. The man has Asperger's Syndrome, a recognised mental condition. He's autistic, basically. It's not just that he'll be inside an American prison cell rather than a British one...it's the anxiety and truama that thw whole process will put him through, and the pain that it will cause him. You've seen Rain Man, right? Imagine if Dustin Hoffman suddenly found himself in a new country, surrounded by people who spoke differently, no-one and nothing he knew around him...people with those conditions require familiarity in order to cope.

Also, the inside of the prison cell WOULDN'T look the same. The Americans technically consider McKinnon a terrorist, a threat to national security. So, feasibly, he could be placed in a supermax prison. Again, from Wikipedia:

"prisoners are generally allowed out of their cells for only one hour a day; often they are kept in solitary confinement. They receive their meals through ports, also known as "chuck holes," in the doors of their cells. When Supermax inmates are allowed to exercise, this may take place in a small, enclosed area where the prisoner will exercise alone.

Prisoners are under constant surveillance, usually with closed-circuit television cameras. Cell doors are usually opaque, while the cells may be windowless. Conditions are spartan, with poured concrete or metal furniture common. Often cell walls, and sometimes plumbing, are soundproofed to prevent communication between the inmates."

McKinnon isn't an ongoing threat. There are other ways to deal with this than throwing the book at him. The man is a vulnerable adult, and while he did wrong and definitely should be punished, surely there's room for compassion? This is a misuse of an extradition treaty drawn up to assist the pursuit of dangerous terrorists, and I think it's wrong.

Quoted from Ledbetter Other wise, pay us back the $800,000. and you can keep him.

Oh...this part wound me up. You want us to buy you off? Because the US is misusing a treaty signed in the wake of 9/11 in order to rip a vulnerable man out of everything he knows and fly him across an ocean to face a long sentence in a harsh environment? No Shawn, we don't have to buy you off. In the 9-11th centuries, local governments in England paid something called Danegeld to the Viking raiders in order to keep their lands from being attacked. The Vikings had the power, the Saxons were powerless to defend themselves, so they paid them off. If you expect the UK to do the same for the US now, then are we really allies at all? There's justice, and then there's cruel and unusual punishment. I'd just hoped that the US goverment would do the humane, decent thing, rather than demanding blood money.

[EDIT: Just want to make clear I'm not looking to come across as anti-American, because I'm not. I'm also not looking to lay into the US. I just see this as a real failure of compassion, and poor judgement on the part of both the US and UK governments. Barack's supposed to be the Messiah...where is he to hand out compassion?]

JohnyBoy,

The $800,000 comment was a joke. Everyone knows Britian can't afford that

You go craking into highly sensitive data bases, you are not looking for UFO's, you're looking for life in prision.

Take it one step further, what if it had been BRITISH sensitive information regarding your home land security? Still a slap on the hand?

To say this man needs the loving arms or a kinder-gentler prision is absurd. Our facilities are plenty able to handle people with all illness's including this mans.

Shawn....><

Who's talking about a 'slap on the hand'? I'm not suggesting he's turned free. He's already admitted his guilt, and he WILL be sent to prison. I'm also not suggesting he's sent to a 'gentler prison', although I suppose I am saying that detainment in a supermax prison, surrounded by mass-murderers and other violent, dangerous criminals, IS disproportionate considering his offence.

I'm also not saying the American penal system won't cater for his needs (although there are those that say that their record on that front isn't particularly great). I'm saying that the process of flying him over there and putting him through the process of trial and imprisonment in a foreign country, given his illness, seems to me to be an extra psychological punishment, on top of the jail sentence he will be given. He can be tried, convicted and detained here. The end result will be the same: he will end up in prison, justice will be served. So why put him through the extra, unavoidable pain? He committed a crime, a bad crime, and he will serve years in prison. But let him serve it HERE, rather than forcing him into a mental breakdown AND imprisoning him. That doesn't seem like justice - that's more like revenge.

Jonny,

I doubt that - if he's convicted in the US, which is the first step - they'll send him to a Supermax (those are reserved for, as you say yourself, mass-murderers and other violent, dangerous criminals).

Quoted from sniper Jonny, I doubt that - if he's convicted in the US, which is the first step - they'll send him to a Supermax (those are reserved for, as you say yourself, mass-murderers and other violent, dangerous criminals).

From a Daily Telegraph article:

"His lawyer David Pannick QC told five Law Lords that it would be an abuse of extradition proceedings to send Mr McKinnon to the US because of the way US authorities had behaved. The threats from US authorities also included one from New Jersey prosecutors that Mr McKinnon "would fry", said Mr Pannick.

If Mr McKinnon refused a plea bargain then the matter could be treated as a terrorism case which could result in a 60-year sentence in a US maximum security prison if he was found guilty, the Law Lords were told."

Okay, so he probably won't go to a supermax. But that's sort of a side-issue, although granted one that I raised. He shouldn't even be flown over to America in the first place.

JohnnyBoy,

OK, which is it, you don't want him being sent to a super max because...

A) He will forced to solitary confinement for 23 hours a day OR-

B) He will be forced to be along side mass murderers.

Because franky you made both of these statements in your aurgument. Also, who did he commit the crime on? THE USA, right? Who should punish him? THE USA.

You should know us by now, we want our pound of flesh. Hell it's the American way.

Not to mention- An entire system that has been scrubbed or has to be reworked in order to make it more fail safe.

In short, Americans don't like to feel open anymore to threats of any kind. We did learn from 911 as should the idiot that hacked the data base.

Send him on over, hell we are allies you know. You have our back, we have yours. Right?

Shawn....><

Quoted from Ledbetter JohnnyBoy, OK, which is it, you don't want him being sent to a super max because... A) He will forced to solitary confinement for 23 hours a day OR- B) He will be forced to be along side mass murderers. Because franky you made both of these statements in your aurgument. Also, who did he commit the crime on? THE USA, right? Who should punish him? THE USA. You should know us by now, we want our pound of flesh. Hell it's the American way. Not to mention- An entire system that has been scrubbed or has to be reworked in order to make it more fail safe. In short, Americans don't like to feel open anymore to threats of any kind. We did learn from 911 as should the idiot that hacked the data base. Send him on over, hell we are allies you know. You have our back, we have yours. Right? Shawn....><

Yeah!  Y'all is either with us or agin us!  Which is it?

You tell em seamus.....yeehaa...

Quoted from Ledbetter JohnnyBoy, OK, which is it, you don't want him being sent to a super max because... A) He will forced to solitary confinement for 23 hours a day OR- B) He will be forced to be along side mass murderers.

Both. It seems disproportionate and unfair. Is this man a mass murderer or a terrorist? No.

Quoted from Ledbetter Also, who did he commit the crime on? THE USA, right? Who should punish him? THE USA.

Yes, but he COMMITTED the crime in the UK. I'm not a lawyer, so I'm really not certain if that matters or not. And why does it matter who punishes him, as long as he's punished? We're back to that justice/revenge thing,

Quoted from Ledbetter Not to mention- An entire system that has been scrubbed or has to be reworked in order to make it more fail safe.

Rather McKinnon than someone who actually intended to seriously hurt you, don't you think? These were pretty basic security shortcomings in what were supposed to be high-security networks.

Quoted from Ledbetter Send him on over, hell we are allies you know. You have our back, we have yours. Right?

Ah, but that's where you're wrong. The extradition treaty doesn't work like that. Say someone puts a knife in your back, and you think it was a Brit - all you have say is, "We think he put a knife in our back", and we have to hand him over. But if someone puts a knife in our back, and we think it was an American, and we say, "We think he put a knife in our back", then we have provide evidence to back up our suspicions. That's hardly fair, is it?

JohnnyBoy,
Now your just dancing. You did not answer the first part, you simply stated he should not be in either. The man broke international laws. I know what, lets send him to an international court and have him tried.

That shouldn't put to much of a stress on him.

As to your second point. There is no point. What if he did it from the moon. What if he was a Brit and commited it in Spain? Is it still your responsibility? No, Spain would hand him over to us.  It is WHO he commited the crime on, not where he commited it?

You asked why does it matter who punishes him? My point exactly, we were the ones he committed the crime on, we should be the ones punishing him.

As to the third comment, this guy has to be at least pretty savvy in order to pull this off, not so dumb after all, yet mentelly unable to handle punishment.

Come on man. How do you know he didn't intend to do harm. Because he said so?
Thats right he was looking for UFO's.  

As to us having each others back, I think we do. At least under the last administration we did. Tony Blair ruled. We loved him over here. If the policy we currently have does not suit you, change it.

Shawn....><

Tony Blair? The one that told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? That was a good call wasn't it?
His initials are TB, in the old days you were a goner if that came near you.

I'd be a bit worried about some UK bloke being able to hack the government's military systems and do £700,000 worth of damage. How many copies of Windows Firewall did he break?
By gum, he must have hacked all the back up stuff too. Otherwise they could just run 'em couldn't they? No. Oh dear.

Either way, the High Court has yet to decide if McKinnon can appeal further or not.

Personally I'd say the US Military should give the a guy a job. That way they might find out how a two-bit Brit with no inside connections and a crappy PC can bust into what is supposed to be one of the most heavily protected systems on the planet.

I do hope they've now plugged the holes and updated their software.

Quoted from Ledbetter As to the third comment, this guy has to be at least pretty savvy in order to pull this off, not so dumb after all, yet mentelly unable to handle punishment.

Shawn, I never said he was dumb. Autism - of which Asperger's is a form - does not make you dumb. In fact, people who have the illness can often have increased intelligence in certain areas. It has other effects.

Quoted from Ledbetter As to us having each others back, I think we do. At least under the last administration we did. Tony Blair ruled. We loved him over here. If the policy we currently have does not suit you, change it.

Of course you loved him - he did whatever Bush told him to. And as for changing the law...hopefully, that's exactly what we're going to do.