A Victory for Common Sense

[Moscow Mule]

there is no doubt that the guy did what he is accused of,

Not quite, they say he caused lots of damage he says he didn't.

[Diver]

We have a reciprocal extradition treaty in place with the USA.

unfortunately there is no requirement on the US to provide prima facie evidence when requesting the extradition of people from the UK but maintains the requirement on the UK to satisfy the "probable cause" requirement in the US when seeking the extradition of US nationals; Unfortunately it is part of the American constitution that a US citizen has the inalienable right to be tried in a US court.

Also unfortunate is the fact that although we are willing to extradite British and other nationalities to the US for trail. The US will only extradite Non US citizens to the UK for trail unless the UK satisfies the "probable cause" requirement to an American court of law.

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/jul/25ukus.htm

[AtW]

Not quite, they say he caused lots of damage he says he didn't.

Well, just because he says he didn't does not mean it is actually the case. The way to establish it is to bring him to court where all evidence will be looked at.

As far as I can see given that he adimts that he hacked into those computers (for whatever reason), then if we take emergency call out securite cleared contractor rate to review security of those computers is likely to result in a lot of $$$$.

The fact that he is doing his best to get out of going to USA to face justice pretty much speaks for itself - he is not stupid and knows pretty well that there is enough evidence to convict him there.

It's crazy that a lot of people support him just because it is something "against USA" kind of thing - sure, America did a lot of wrong things, including Iraq war, however that does not mean *all* their actions are wrong. In this case USA is perfectly right.

[AtW]

unfortunately there is no requirement on the US to provide prima facie evidence when requesting the extradition of people from the UK

He publicly admitted that he did it. What more do you want? He wasn't exactly under duress or under torture. He does not dispute the fact that he hacked into all those places - he disputes costs of clean up after his act, claims that his mental state would doom him to die there and offer public interest arguement that has no support - he found nothing that would justify "public interest" angle, none - bugger all.

[AlfredJPruffock]

It's crazy that a lot of people support him just because it is something "against USA" kind of thing - sure, America did a lot of wrong things, including Iraq war, however that does not mean *all* their actions are wrong. In this case USA is perfectly right.

So now you're resorting to Anti-American sentiment to shore up your argument ?

So the Conservatives are now Anti-American ?

Absurd.

[shaunbhoy]

He does not dispute the fact that he hacked into all those places - he disputes costs of clean up after his act

How much more cost would have been involved had the hacker been of a more malignant nature? AFAIK he simply found ways through their rather feeble firewalls etc. and left notes highlighting their security deficiencies. They ought to be paying him for his work rather than trying to bury him to hide their embarrassment.

he found nothing that would justify "public interest" angle, none - bugger all.

I, and many others, would say that the fact he was able to so routinely break into the systems of the richest and most powerful nation on the planet's computer networks, from thousands of miles away, is of HUGE public interest and concern.

[AtW]

So the Conservatives are now Anti-American ?

I did not say Cons are anti-american, but I do detect plenty of anti-american feelings on this board from some of the posters - that includes yourself.

IMHO Cons are cynically supporting him because their mates in the City are concerned about some of them following the fate of Natwest 3.

[AtW]

How much more cost would have been involved had the hacker been of a more malignant nature? AFAIK he simply found ways through their rather feeble firewalls etc. and left notes highlighting their security deficiencies.

Look, the fact that firewalls were not secure only means that sys admins on their side will get fired or receive some serious bollocking.

[shaunbhoy]

Look, the fact that firewalls were not secure only means that sys admins on their side will get fired or receive some serious bollocking.

Oh well...........as long as it is no big deal, what are we waiting for?

[AlfredJPruffock]

I did not say Cons are anti-american, but I do detect plenty of anti-american feelings on this board from some of the posters - that includes yourself.

IMHO Cons are cynically supporting him because their mates in the City are concerned about some of them following the fate of Natwest 3.

Your views on why the Conservative Pary are supporting McKinnon are way off the mark - I do have an old friend who happens to be in a rather senior position in the Tory party - and the suppoert for McKinnon is not for the reasons you mention - Im sure Blair had plenty of friends in the City as well for that matter.

Your comments as to myself being Anti-American meets with a similar rebuttal - its true I did criticise the Bush administration for their foreign policy disaster in Iraq - way before the conflict - time has proven that my view were correct in this matter.

Since the Republicans were removed from power I have not made a single criticism of the US administration - you are confusing being anti-republican with being anti-American - the Bush administration was a disaster for the US at every level - the Obama administration has been working hard to repair the damage and restore the image of the US - good luck to them.