By silicon.com, 7 July 2006 17:00
When did we all get so caring and liberal? Twelve months ago the majority of people who responded to articles on silicon.com about the punishments which should be meted out to hackers were of the 'hang 'em and flog 'em' mindset.
Now that the extradition of Gary McKinnon, who it should not be forgotten hacked into several US military systems, has been granted by the Home Office there is uproar and a serious division in people's opinions.
The majority of us, it would seem, are of the opinion McKinnon should not be handed over to the government he so wronged. Research from antivirus company Sophos today found that 52 per cent of respondents oppose his extradition.
Perhaps this is because we realise the US is unlikely to give him a fair trial, given his actions trampled over the highly sensitive line marked 'Homeland Security' - but can we really say, hand on heart, that this man, who rather idiotically claims he was looking for proof of UFOs, posed a serious threat to world peace, or even the sanctity of the US?
We suspect McKinnon's concerns about being sent to Guantanamo Bay may be a case of playing to the crowd and trying to find some heart strings to pull on in UK legal circles. But irrespective of how far wide of the mark that proves, there are still very real concerns the US will make an example of McKinnon, above and beyond the punishment - and he should certainly be punished - warrant.
When it is faceless individuals committing these crimes it's very easy to say lock 'em up and throw away the key but McKinnon's plight has been publicised to a degree where he has been humanised to all of us.
The genuine fear we've seen in his face while attending his court hearings certainly make it difficult to condone the UK government's decision to hand this man over to the US.
But if you commit a crime against a country it stands to reason you should be tried in that country. Doesn't it?
It's just a shame that UK government has probably made its decision based not on that common sense approach (or at least it would be common sense if we could be sure the US will try McKinnon accordingly) but on the basis that the US has asked for something and the Home Office has dutifully rolled over and given them what they want.
Comments
There are 37 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
The law is the law. I do not think we can arbitrarily decide who should be prosecuted and who shouldn't. If the law is wrong, change it...but otherwise enforce it.
2. Frank Rizzo
throw his im guantonemo as a terrorist. get him over here so he can face his crimes and do his time.
3. anonymous
I think you underestimate us (US citizens). We're more likely to bend over backwards to give him a fair trial than not.
4. Kevin Soss
It's a shame that the apparent "altar boy" nature of the violator have the masses over looking both the nature of the crime as well as the somewhat subtle aspect of a "criminal" hiding under the protection of another sovereign nation. If the roles were reversed and Mr. McKinnon was a US citizen, operating out of Miami or San Francisco, I am quite confident that the hue and cry that would be eminating from the British Isles would be quite intense. "How could the US hide/protect a hooligan who has violated the sanctity of King and Kingdom... and hacked into the nations most closely guarded network".
And should we Americans have the right to determine whether or not the accused would get a fair trial under the British Legal System, where the nations Secrecy Act may prevent the entire trial from being made public.
We have a long history of mutual regard, trust and common ground (at least since 1812 *smile*) and let's have confidence that the tenets our governments are based upon are still strong enough to guide our courts and government to "do the right thing"!
If this is not the case, then we lay open our borders to any form of internet criminals, terrorists or law breakers (what ever the intentions of the accused) and allow them to hide or seek sanctuary from justice by national boundaries.
Trust our courts as they are based upon the same principles.
Thank you for allowing me to share my comments and opinions, even when I am insulated from any form of retribution or castigation by 2,000 miles of ocean.
Best Regards from the Land of Lincoln
5. Ben McCargo
Let me ask you this? If someone came waltzing into your home, through your closed but unlocked door, would you still want to prosecute them for tresppass? Or, would you allow them in to look at all your most personal effects without a care in the world and no retribution to be doled out? Of course he should be extradited and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. And why not?!? Because he's a hacker and meant no harm??!? Please!!
6. anonymous
I am not a fan of the US justice system and feel McKinnon stands no chance of a fair trial.
If the boot were on the other foot I dont think we would have stood a chance of extraditing anyone with out years of appeals.
Its another case of the Americans demanding and us rolling over
7. C Blackmore
No, he should not be handed over to the Americans, unless the people who failed to secure their systems are going to be punished as much as he is. That seems fair!
8. Mister Christopher Blackore
George asked Tony to bend over... again. We are OWNED by America, it seems. They have even told us to buy more nuclear weapons, and guess what? We will. Tony says so. How much longer can this insanity continue?
9. John Jackson
I think it appalling that those appointed to serve *this* country (the UK) are gutlessly doing the political bidding of a foreign power (the US). McKinnon has clearly embarassed people who should have been better protecting the US military systems, but that is no excuse for the UK legal and political systems to neglect to protect one of our citizens. *If* he has a case to answer then he should be tried in a UK court and afforded the protection - and if necessary punishment - of the UK justice system. Also, McKinnon is constantly described as a 'hacker' and this word these days automatically damns with connotations of organised crime &/or malicious major destruction of systems - features which clearly appear to be missing in this case.
10. Peter Rigby
What would you say if the extradition demand came from say, China, Iran,or perhaps Saudi Arabia ?
The answer would be a resounding no !
Nothing to do with the 'law', a lot to do with our guess as to whether or not the silly bonehead would get a fair trial.
Have we really got such a blind faith in American justice that we meekly hand over one of our youngsters ?
When the USA feels threatened, they have a history of ruthless response.
Does the USA administration trust us so little ? McKinnon is one of ours. However daft, he should be dealt with, and dealt with here, for what he is; a twit. Threatening the silly boy with the possibility of fifty years inside is simply cruel.
11. anonymous
The only idiot is the person who wrote this article.
12. anonymous
Hackers are criminals and should be treated as such. Too many judges see hacking as a game but it is about time that we cracked down on internet crime.
13. anonymous
If the US have shown sufficient evidence to the UK authorities, then he should be extradited and face trial.
If he is found guilty, then he should serve his sentence.
I appreciate that that black and white situations don't exist, but this has got to be as close to pure black and white as you will get.
I find the self-proclaimed philosopher's comments about punishing the wronged party (for inadequate security)rather interesting. We should extend this to other areas of crime (prosecute victims of burglary for inadequate locks and security systems, prosecute victims of muggings for not bothering to learn martial arts - wow, we could have all kinds of fun making up these kinds of laws!).
14. anonymous
Whilst I agree that "if you cant do the crime etc.." these extraditions seem to be very one sided.
The UK will quite happily hand over its citizens to the US, the US are not prepared to do the same.
Perhaps a case of "Fetch Rover"
15. anonymous
Of course he should be extradited. He broke the law by hacking into several sensitive US military sites. Everyone knows how touchy the Americans are about this at the moment. Did he really thingk that he would just get a slap on the wrist!! Why shouldn't they want to prosecute him in their country for breaking their laws.
16. Marcus Howell
I think there is an element of (justifiable) sour grapes here. For years known citizens of the US sponsored terrorism in our homeland. The US government deliberately turned a blind eye to it and the misery of the cowardly terrorism continued here unabated. When the UK government wanted to extradite these known terrorists they were protected by the US on the basis of they would not get a fair trial. This caused considerable resentment by UK citizens towards the US. Now the boot is on the other foot, I know two wrongs don't make a right, but at least this guy is not killing innocent Brits or Americans.
17. John Chapman
As an an American living in the UK I think McKinnon should be tried in the UK. There is little doubt he will be made an example of and will be given a disproportionate sentence in the US. As to whether he will receive a fair trial demonstrably many of America's own citizens haven't. Why would it be any different for a British hacker who embarrassed the US military. What next for UK Gov. Granting extradition to Robert Mugabe for Peter Tatchell to stand trial in Zimbabwe?
18. anonymous
If he had been in the US when he committed the alleged ofences then of course he should be sent back there to stand trial.
However, as he was in the UK and we have anti hacking laws he should be prosecuted and (if found guilty) punished here.
19. anonymous
Undoubtedly McKinnon is a daft berk if he has allegedly done what it is alleged he has done.
But the UK government has a perceived duty to protect its citizens from what will probably be cruel, unjust punishment meted out by a paranoid nation if McKinnon is found guilty - and prior release of information has stacked the cards against him. The UK is failing to so protect him(surprise!).
As to the US, presumably it won't be trying any of its own system administrators for contributory negligence in McKinnon's alleged crime?
20. anonymous
A fair trial whether in the UK or the US is the most important thing here. I'm all for the 'lock um up and throw away the key' provided he has been able to properly defend himself and yet still found guilty.
I hope the US has provided the Home Office with proof of their intentions and they considered examined it properly.
At the end of the day, if McKinnon was stupid enought to go break into those sites for what ever reason (looking for UFO evidence doesn't seem beyond him actually) then maybe he is better off in prison, and not roaming the Internet. Kind if like a techno Darwin Effect..??
21. Emrys Jones
When Bush talked of "States that sponsor terrorism" after 9/11, for a full 5 seconds I thought he meant Massachusetts and California. The UK suffered 30 years of US sponsored terrorism, and now they have not even bothered to ratify their side of this extradition treaty that is so important to them. Until the treaty is reciporical (even when ratified it it will be totally one sided, but that is our Government's fault) it should not be brought into operation.
22. I love Americans really
OK, the Yanks can have all the defendents they want if we can have all those IRA scumbag murderers hiding out in the US from justice please.
What's that? We can't, beause the Yanks won't ratify their side of the extradition treaty.
Wasn't the new extradition treaty designed to help the War on Terror? Aren't IRA murderers actually terrorists? No, according to the Irish-American political lobby stopping ratification.
Oh and how many terrorists has the US extradited from the UK? Not many at all. And white collar criminals? Lots and lots. That wasn't the aim of the treaty was it?
The UK has been mis-sold a treaty and should suspend it until parity has been reintroduced into the "special relationship" which is quite clearly lacking here.
23. Iain Benger-Stevenson
There is a disturbing trend in this country (UK), and perhaps in America too for anti-terrorism laws to be used to crush people guilty of relatively innocuous offences. I cite the case of the elderly couple who wanted to put some leaflets opposing the local council's policy in the local library. The police visited them and threatened action if they put out the leaflets.
Iain.
24. anonymous
You should have allowed room for comment such as :
"Yes but only after the US has ratified their side of the treaty so that we can extradite some of the Florida spammers to test the new Computer Misuse Act "
25. BB
The only reason he should be sent to the US is to show the incompetents, who 'secure' the systems, how to prevent it happening again. If I were a US citizen I'd like to hear how an 'average' IT worker managed to get through a superpower's security system. It's a joke!
As for Tony B Liar, he's a spineless plonker who as Mr. C Blackore said, is too afraid to say no to "Dumbya"!
26. Sean Ss
This is the same attitude by liberals and wets who do not let us protect our home against theives and vandals in case we might hurt one of those poor people ruining our lives.
"What a shame....
Poor innocent hacker....." - NOT!!
As far as I am concerned, HANG the buggers. Hang spammers too as far as I am concerned. Half of a computer system is just to prevent people like him from destroyinig or stealing what we have.
Just when did it get to be the perpetrator who gets all the sympathy and protection, rather than any of the victims???
27. anonymous
It was a criminal act, if you dont want to face prosecution dont commit the crime.
What is the difference between this and someone hacking into a system that has your records on and releasing the information to the public, nothing. (Ed note. McKinnon is requesting he be tried in the UK, not that he not be tried at all.)
If you wanna hack be prepared to face the consequences, no one forced him to hack.
28. Kenneth Henry Knight
There are 3 categories of cyber criminals who deserve no mercy and must be taken out of circulation.
1. Those who endanger the internet with viruses, who cause loss to all of us.
2. Phishers who aim to steal your money and can endanger the whole economy.
3. Sexual predators, seeking victims and those who peddle porn for financial gain.
A Hacker may fall into one of these categories but may also find themselves innocently accessing data not intended for them. We need hackers to trace and eliminate the three previous categories of criminals. A hacker who does not use his knowledge for wrongdoing is not neccesserily a criminal.
In the USA it seems that profit is the most important thing even if it is being made from other peoples misery such as gambling or mis-used sex.
If he is a good hacker they could make use of his skills and not imprison him.
Ken Knight
29. Patrick Moore
There are several aspects of this case that I find disturbing. Top of the list is the existence of an extremely one-sided extradition treaty between the UK and the US, which has been a feature of both this case and that of the "NatWest Three".
The gist of it is as follows:
If UK authorities wish to extradite a US citizen, they need to provide a comprehensive, near-watertight case of serious criminal behaviour. Then, the US government might consider complying with an extradition request.
If US authorities wish to extradite a UK citizen, they..... errrm..... only have to ask.
How did we get into that situation, really? I'd love to know. For some reason, Tony and friends seem to be desperate to bend over for George and his Amercian buddies. Why? Who knows. Maybe they just wanna be liked by the big boys ;-)
The other thing to remember is that one part of the US government (the White House and Department of Defence) has recently been taken to task by another part (the judiciary) over Guantanamo Bay. To put it bluntly, what's gone on at Guantanamo is, by its own admission, a series of criminal acts on the part of the US Government.
Why would we expect a British citizen to get fair treatment from a group of people who've already demonstrated that they treat the law as an inconvenient obstacle to getting what they want, to be circumvented or ignored as required....
Uncomfortable with all this? I certainly am!
30. Sebastian Phillips
McKinnon did wrong and should be tried but I think the trial should take place in a British court. He will not get a fair trial in the US.
There are another set of criminals in this case too. The technicians who left the doors open. Hacking only takes places because temptation is left in the path of those who get a buzz out of this type of activity.
31. Simon
It's nice to see a couple of comments from US citizens who believe in their legal system. I believe that whilst they may be in the majority, unfortunately they are not in control. Perhaps it's time for the citizens of the US up show their displeasure at an overbearing government again, like they did a couple of centuries ago when (to use their vernacular) they "whooped our asses" !
I agree with Patrick Moore that this case has some very disturbing aspects to it. The US President and certain sections of the government have all but come out and stated that they hold themselves above the law - once 'our guy' is over there he will have absolutely zero protection from being treated as a military enemy and denied any semblance of due legal process. The fact that Bush has refused to guarantee his status as a civilian should tell us all we need to know !
I'm not against this pillock standing trial, heck he deserves punishment IF he has done what reports suggest he has. But I more strongly believe that he should be tried in a fair and proper manner. I do NOT believe for one moment that he will get a fair trial in the US where it seems "anything goes" if you can label it as "for security".
Unfortunately, our lot are no better than Bush & Co. Tony must have been sharing the "how to become a dictator by manipulating the law" lessons that Bush seems to have had - it certainly seems to be where he's headed if we don't stop him.
32. Jeremy Wickins MA LLB
@ Shaun Ss:
Who *exactly* is the "victim" here? Who got hurt? Who lost out? No-one, therefore your comments are not logical. In fact, really, McKinnon should be awarded a Congressional medal for highlighting how inadequate the US systems were (are??) at protecting themselves. For God's sake, my computer at home is more secure than the systems McKinnon hacked!
33. Steve M
Okay, the extradition treaty is flawed and biased in one direction but at the end of the day what he did was irresponsible, foolish and against the law. I see no reason why he shouldn't be extradited.
If you want to find out about aliens go to google and pick up some good conspiracy theory sites. You don't hack into NASA just because you can! Enough said.
34. Patrick Archibald
As long as the US maintains Guantanamo and the 'Patriot Act', no-one is guaranteed the basic right to a speedy and fair trial - or even to get a trial at all. As long as this persists, we should not allow extradition to the US on any charge, no matter how serious; especially not when the crime is committed by a person in the UK. We are entirely capable of prosecuting our own criminals - and without violating their basic human rights.
35. The Revolutionist
Perhaps Tony Blair & George Bush should be extradited to Iraq for crimes against their country! Lets see if they get a humain trial there!
36. Chris P
First the Nat West 3 now McKinnon whether or whether not these people should be extradited is not the case; the case is the US Government has not reciprocated in terms of extradiction and still to this day provides a haven for IRA terrorists who live there with impunitity. In addition the present terrorist legislation has been abused by the US Government. I'm a great believer regarding our 'special relationship' with the USA and long may it continue but we are not the 53rd State and the US Government should respect that!
37. anonymous
So now it's all clear, Blair and his cronies have turned the U.K. into the 51st State.
Who needs the British judiciary, as they are powerless to do anything to provide a fair trial in our own country.
McKinnon should not be extradited. If the Yanks cannot protect their own data, it's their problem. They should thank McKinnon for showing them the open doors as he did not do them any damage.