The Register has a decent report about Gary McKinnon's House of Lords hearing yesterday:
Pentagon hacker vows to take extradition fight to Europe
McKinnon begins nail-biting Lords wait amid claims of US threats
By Chris Williams
Published Monday 16th June 2008 17:54 GMTGary McKinnon's legal team said they will take their fight against his extradition all the way to the European Court of Human Rights on Monday, as the highest court in England began deliberations on whether to turn him over to US authorities.
The London hacker now faces an anxious wait for the judgment on his latest appeal, which is expected to take about two weeks.
It is hard to believe that they will make a decision in "only" two weeks, that would be swifter than all the lower courts and appeals.in this case.
During a day-long session of legal nit-picking, five Law Lords heard McKinnon's barrister, David Pannick QC, argued that the US had abused process by trying to strong-arm his client into accepting extradition and pleading guilty.
'Play by our rules'
Pannick told the hearing: "If the United States wish to use the processes of English courts to secure the extradition of an alleged offender then they must play by our rules."
It emerged that in exchange for compliance, US prosecutors offered to withdraw a threat to block any application for McKinnon to be repatriated to serve most of his time in a UK jail. This threat is central to his lawyers' claims of abuse of process.
The bargain offered by the US Embassy's Ed Gibson (who is now Microsoft UK's chief security adviser) for a guilty plea would reduce his sentence from eight-to-ten years, to between three and four years. Combined with the UK's more generous parole system, that would mean that McKinnon might have served only two years in prison.
In her evidence, McKinnon's solicitor Karen Todner said that in their correspondence the US had told her that failure to play ball would mean "all bets were off" and that repatriation to the UK "would not occur". This threat, charged McKinnon's team, "sought to impose pressure to accept extradition and plead guilty", and represented an unlawful abuse of the court process that was "disproportionate [and] reprehensible".
Prosecutors exaggerated their influence over the repatriation process, said Pannick, in a bid to secure McKinnon's co-operation, and that had "made it all the worse". Edward Fitzgerald QC, who provided supporting intervention at the hearing on behalf of the civil liberties charity Liberty, said: "What the prosecution [was] saying is 'I have immense powers and I will use them against you'."
McKinnon has admitted taking advantage of lax security in US systems to install covert software that gave him control of settings and access to files. He was looking for evidence of UFOs. He has not admitted causing hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage, a claim at the heart of the US government's allegations.
Clare Montgomery QC, acting for the US government, disputed this, saying if McKinnon had refused to cooperate he would have still been considered for a return to the UK. "This was very close to the type of plea bargaining that might occur here... this was not a case of 'we [US prosecutors] can give or withold the right to transfer [to the UK]'" she told the Lords.
Montgomery also echoed comments from one of the Lords sitting, Baroness Hale, who had suggested that the deal offered to McKinnon might simply have been "the facts of life", rather than a threat, and that it offered him significant benefits. She scorned calls for Gary McKinnon to face trial in the UK, saying: "He must have appreciated as he hacked into American computers that he was committing an act that would have had repercussions in America."
What exactly did the Law Lord, Baroness Hale actually say, rather than what the barrister acting for the US Government "echoed" ?
On a knife-edge
In the Palace of Westminster corridors after the hearing, the consensus among the gathered legal minds was that the case is poised on a knife-edge. Nevertheless, McKinnon's team were cautiously upbeat.
McKinnon himself attended only the morning session of the hearing, flanked by family and supporters. Win or lose, the saga is set to continue for some time.
[...]
Defeat would be a major blow, but McKinnon's team said outside the hearing that it would be by no means the last stand. The precedent set by the European Court of Human Rights in the Babar Ahmad case makes a challenge there likely, said solicitor Karen Todner.
And that can take years.
The Babar Ahmad case is still awaiting a decision by the Grand Committee of the European Court of Human Rights, even though he was refused the right to appeal to the House of Lords, and applied to the ECHR, in June last year.
The Register's IT News rival ZDnet reports more details about the disputed "plea bargain" session held at the US Embassy
At a meeting with Mr Gibson and Mr Stein [in April 2003], Mr McKinnon was told that if he did not agree, then all bets were off," Pannick said. "Eight to 10 years [per count] or possibly longer was indicated."Moreover, in a letter to McKinnon dated 9 April, 2003, Gibson said the US authorities would reserve the right to prosecute McKinnon under US military law, which carries much more stringent penalties, Pannick told the court.
"Mr Gibson is threatening that if you do not co-operate, [the US] will reserve the right to rely on that," said Pannick.
However, court documents submitted by the prosecution on behalf of the US authorities reject the assertion that the legal team led by Gibson was threatening McKinnon, and maintain that Gibson was informing McKinnon of statements of fact.
"Your respondent maintains that it has never 'threatened' the appellant as alleged," stated the documents.
Gibson was unavailable for comment at the time of writing. He became Microsoft's chief security advisor in the UK in 2005.
Ed Gibson, was an FBI special agent and Legal Attache at the US Embassy in London.
Scott Stein was the Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, i.e. the prosecutor who pushed through their Grand Jury indictment of Gary McKinnon in November 2002, and who also now seems to be on the Microsoft payroll, as a senior attorney in their cybercrime unit.
These former US Government officials (and one other) are basically claiming that Gary's legal team, including the eminent barrister Edmund Lawson QC, are lying about the meeting which took place at the US Embassy in London, something which is quite extraordinary, and which might perhaps influence the law Lords against the US Government.
This is hardly going to dampen down conspiracy theories about the case, or help to win friends for the US Government.
Fred Flinstones
What I want to see is an apology from the stupid yanks because we have to live in a a world where they create what they call 'secure' computer networks that are supposed to assist in freeing the world of WMD's etc. What a load of crap that was. Yanks, stop wasting everybody'd time, leave this guy alone and spend your time creating networks with somthing more than preeschool velev security in place.
Paul
Just want to say nice one for creating this blog to support Gary McKinnon. Talk about Yankee tunnel vision. Geez.
christine smith
Hi Gary, the offence was committed in the UK therefore the US Pentagon should try the case in the UK courts.
regards
christine
Jon
The US has been making threats about trying Gary as a terrorist - well maybe it's time to make some threats of his own!
I'm sure there's any number of countries who could give Gary asylum. Maybe he could go do some work for Chavez?
Not really of course, but just let the US think that that is on the cards and they might think twice about the best way to deal with Gary.
fg
@ Jon - why should anyone in the United Kingdom have to seek asylum elsewhere ?
elaine
Why doesn't the US government thank Gary and hire him to work on our computers ? If he can find a glich, so can the terrorists - so Gary should be hired and thanked. The USA should think more like the Donald. Donald Trump would hire him in a second. The government is so shallow. No business savvy at all. And we pay for these lawyers to sit in Washington. No wonder we are becoming a third world nation.
Ben Kane
I have studied this case since it broke on the internet. Under no circumstances should Gary be extradited to the states. The prison system there with the largest prison population in the world per capita, will not have the time nor the inclination to differentiate between a murderer and someone who was able to glean information regarding the UFO enigma. As far as I am concerned, if Gary in his goal to research this phenomena was able to garner information from a public library or from another source without being blocked from doing so, I consider those banks of information open to the public. If the Pentagon, being the security benchmark that it is, did not secure that area that was being researched, it is their fault and not that of Gary's. It is the intent that should be questioned here. There was no malice of forethought. In fact, what Gary did is not unlike many journalists that glean their information from inside sources within any governmental structure. Look at the Valerie Plame case. Now that was a real malicious and intentional breach of security. Are those responsible for this act being prosecuted? NO!!!
This double standard is unacceptable.
To the lawyers of Gary McKinnon. Don't let him be extradited. If it means a physical blockade, do not allow this to happen. He will be used as an example and only for that reason.
Good Luck Gary and God Bless.
B.
Another Jon
As being close allies to us, Yanks, we would hope that you would treat us with the same courtesy as you would expect in return. It's not like the UK has any embarrassing moments in history after all.
While I agree that the means of trying to get McKinnon are unethical, so is what the defendant did and the cowardice of facing prosecution in the land where the crime was committed. How does that make him any different than a terrorist or enemy combatant since they would seek the same aims, both politically and functionally. Shouldn't he be prosecuted like everyone else? By the way Christine, the crime was committed in the US since last time I checked, the Pentagon is in the US, along with other sites that were breached. I'm all for meaningful investigation and discovering the truth, but regardless of the ends, the means have consequences and they need to be paid. That is justice.
Fred and Elaine, no computer network is secure by nature of being a useful network, in that something needs to access it and means to do so. Deterring attacks by punishing offenders is a big part of network defense. Read a security book sometime.
As far as tunnel vision, Paul, what about the crime that was committed? Can you argue that it was justified? In a time of war? If this were in the Cold War period, this would not have been an issue. Information is not for everyone unfortunately. Individuals and groups have secrets, I'm sure you have a couple of your own that you would like to keep private. Would you be fine with someone posting your life on the evening news?
Chuck
You sound like a criminal to me! Enjoy American prison.
Charli
I see Bush's army are out again, easily recognisable to all by the nasty overtones and wishes for extreme punishment for non violent crimes that occurred because of the gross inadequacy in security on their part.
The Pentagons security should at least be of the standard of the average bank and it's very far from it.
Wide open doors will always attract intrusion and thank God someone like Gary walked in to give the Pentagon a chance to tighten its security but it seems that still hasn't been done as according to their own people, more serious intrusions regularly occur.
Sierra Mills
I'm an american citizen and the american government is quite corrupt. Shocking! The american government and its military industrial complex do as they like regardless of the ethics involved. I have no doubt that what Gary McKinnon found concerning UFO technology was indeed accurate. I'm amazed at people's naivete concerning governments in general. Wake up my sleepy little sheep.
John
Hundreds of former and current members of the US military & astronauts all claim to have worked with or seen UFO technology. Gary McKinnon claims he found evidence of that on Pentagon servers. If that turns out to be accurate the relevant US goverment officials should be put on trial, and McKinnon given a knighthood.
If he is found to be malicious hacker then the relevant court proceedings should go ahead in the US, but a trial must first take place in the UK. Where the US will be able to put forward their case and evidence but must include all evidence of UFO technology to the court with former military UFO witnesseses & scientists who claim to have worked with the technology being allowed to testify should the need arise.
The US evidence showing malicious intent should be scrutinised and not just assumed to be completely accurate without doing so. If determined by the UK court that the US is hiding information on UFO technology, McKinnon will be vindicated in his efforts to attempt to discover this by hacking into a poorly secured system that his effort to do so can hardly be called hacking.
Following this either minor charges or none at all will sound appropriate. Further proceedings should then be taken by the UK goverment and other goverments into disclosing the technology to solve the world's energy problems, and a failure to do so should be defined as a crime against humanity.
Martin
I don't know if you guys heard of David Icke but I am starting to believe that guy. How could you consider Gary a terrorist? As fas as I know, terrorists instill fears. I don't think Gary did that. On the contrary, he is just showing us that some Governments are turning into fascist states. Gary is not just one man, he actually represents what might happen in the future to all of us.
Sylvain Pimpare
The truth about UFOs has been kept for too long. Mr. McKinnon is just a US treat against people who want to disclose the truth. MR. McKinnon is a world hero.
james
As Gary is a Scottish citizen would it not make sense to return home to Scotland that way he is out of English law and maybe out of any extradition laws England has with America ok I know it comes under uk law but these laws where implemented before Scotland achieved its own parliament so maybe a loophole exists that can be exploited. Also he is more likely to obtain support from the Scottish people for which Alex Salmond SNP will not want to loose votes over with being so close to independence. Maybe worth looking into.
Paul
During the decades of IRA terrorism that Britain endured, one of the bitterest pills for us to swallow was the fact that much of it was funded from the USA.
The IRA’s coffers were filled with donations from the States, and the American government refused all requests from the British government to staunch the flow.
Nor would the Americans ever extradite IRA terrorists to the UK.
There is not a single case of that happening.
Which is why the US Congress has refused to ratify the ‘treaty’ under which Tony Blair is so happy to extradite British subjects: reciprocity would mean that the US would have to send IRA bombers for trial here.
Heaven forbid that Britain should expect a fair exchange!
Bob Hoskins
@paul
There is one case, see above. But Thatcher had let Reagan bomb Gaddafi from British airstrips first.
JOINTHERESISTANCE
don't worry people, the truth will be revealed very shortly, disclosure is imminent. free gary!
JOINTHERESISTANCE
mate i have respect for you till the end, you sir are a real truth seeker Gary, put it this way, there is more people behind you then against you! GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES = hundreds of thousands HUMAN CITIZENS/GENERAL PUBLIC = BILLIONS
PUT IT THIS WAY, THERE IS MORE OF US THEN THERE IS OF THEM! FREE GARY AND SPREAD THE TRUTH, MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON US ALL. I SEE A REVOLUTION ON THE SUNRISE..
Eric Bernales
Considero exagerada la pena , Creo que el gobierno de los estados unidos debe canalizar sus energias en contra de asesinos y violadores, acaso por matar a 10 personas le daran 20 años?
LIBERTAD PARA GARY...!!!
Cristian Rodriguez
Creo que la pena es demasiado desproporcionada, creo que EEUU, esta abusando de la situacion y exagernadola demasiado, la pena yo se las daria a los encargados de seguridad del pentagono, porque por culpa de ellos se filtro Gary.
el hacking es culpa de las malas practicas de los administradores de Sistemas.
LIBERTAD PARA GARY !!!!!!!
FREE GARY !!!!!!!!!!!!!
james
This is actually an interesting scenario, Microsoft on behalf of the American government installed a back door in windows software giving them access to look and copy your hard drive. Now as I am not an American subject and I reside in Scotland and I have on no account given them permission to do so and have not seen any warning on the Microsoft package warning me that this is the case then surely the American government has committed the same crime as Gary but on a massive scale, if this is the case then surely George Bush should be extradited to stand trial in this country with him being the elected leader of said organization after all we are supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law.
Jay
James,
Over six years ago the UK police burst into Gary's bed room and arrested him. At the police station they told him he'd probably get community service, so Gary told them he had accessed the Pentagon.
The CPS decided against prosecuting Gary.
One of the main reasons to be tried in your own country is if the evidence is there but the UK police then flew over to America with "the evidence" and gave the US prosecution Gary's hard drives and they have never been returned to him.
Ed Gibson was one of the FBI men that made the alleged threats against Gary (including the Fry Statement) and he is now the head of/chief spokesman for Microsoft security in the UK.
Scott Stein was one of the others at the meetings in the US Embassy in London where said threats were made against Gary (if Gary excercised his legal right to fight Extradition and didn't accept a Plea Bargain) Scott Stein (Ex FBI) then went to work for Microsoft.
Bill Gates is now apparently Leaving Microsoft....Has Microsoft been taken over? Has it all become too much for Bill Gates.
Jay
Esa
The people in power want to hold on to that power,
this knowledge is the means of holding on to it.
thats why they want to make an example of gary mckinnon.
Shame on the british establishment for not defending us from another countries bad idea of justice.
I am hoping and preying that this unfair extradition will be thrown out.But i suspect that the government will win, save this man from barbaric treatment in the U.S prison system.
David kelleher
You should never run with scissors,or play with matches, and you should never hack computers run and owned by the american government.
I can't imagine how scared you must be, but what exactly did you expect.
You broke their laws,and now they want their pound of flesh.
If you couldn't do the time,you shouldn't have done the crime.
jedley le monde
dave kelleher,you typify the stupid american the world is so tired of.i dont know if the US dollar is sliding quicker than bush's popularity,or,idiots like you believe god george will determine the future of the 'free' world.your gov spies on its own people but that would be ok.yeah.you shit on third world countries,bully the rest.you can have your enrons,tycos,arthur andersons,kenny lays,bush/bin laden businesses,guantanamos,iraqs,irans....even hillary.
hopefully obama will rebuild your collective sick minds and fat asses before rome bursts its xxxxxl seams.
you people are so stupid.and america is NOT the world
David kelleher
@ jedley lemonde
I'm neither an idiot,nor american. i don't believe that george bush is a god, but i do believe that you are a moron.
I attended the same school as gary and knew him quite well.
My point was, if you poke a bear, don't complain if it rips your arm off.
Of course i dont want to see gary go to prison, but if someone breaks the law, they should be punished.
If he'd taken the plea agreement,he would have already served his sentence,and be free to continue on with his life.
As for you jedley,do you condone crime,without punishment, or are you mearley hitching yourself to this wagon, to spew your anti american sentiment?
fg
@ David kelleher - there was no written plea bargain offer, and even if there was, it could not bind either the US Judge in a civilian court, or prevent the US Military authorities demanding that the trial be held under Guantanamo Bays style rules i.e. no civilian defence lawyers, no access to all the evidence if it is "secret".
Gary has accepted that he must be prepared to be punished for his actions, but only after a fair trial, which seems impossible in the USA. None of the British citizens who were held in Guantanamo Bay were ever accused of actually attacking the US Military, but Gary is so accused.
All of his alleged offences are covered by existing UK Law, the Computer Misuse Act 1990, which can and has been used to prosecute people in the UK for computer hacking offences in the USA e.g. involving e-commerce credit card systems etc.
If the US and UK authorities had prosecuted Gary in the UK back n 2002, they would not have been able to make the ridiculously overinflated claims for financial fraud at $5,000 per computer, which is, suspiciously, exactly the minimum amount of financial damage which is required to be claimed (but not actually proven) in the USA, before the Federal authorities are allowed to get involved in a computer hacking investigation. Even in 2002, this was enough to buy and re-configure securely completely brand new computers.
This would have meant that the maximum in prison that Gary might serve if found guilty would have been 6 months in prison for Computer Misuse Act 1990 Section 1, and , if proven, up to 2 years in prison for a Section 3 offence.
The advantage from the US side to this would have been, that a UK Court would have held all the evidence sessions in camera, with reporting restrictions and anonymous "intelligence agency" witnesses, so the utterly scandalous and shameful lack of security of those systems would have been exposed (default Local Administrator password i.e. no password at all, plus NETBIOS file sharing exposed to the entire internet without any firewalls - something which even home computer users do not expose themselves to).
The traitorously incompetent idiots who allowed such a situation to linger, not for a few days after a human misconfiguration error, but for years on end, on thousands of computers, despite alleged security audits and procedures, which supposedly tightened things up after September 2001, obviously to no avail.
Some of these serving and former US military officers and civil servants, are going to be extremely embarrassed, possibly in a career threatening way, if they are cross examined about their incompetence in an open US court.
fg
@ jedley le monde - the current US Government does not represent the majority of US people, any more than the current UK Labour Government (elected by only 22% of the electorate, with an unelected Prime Minister) properly represents us here in the United Kingdom.
You should learn to distinguish between the Government and the People.
General hate rants against the USA or against anyone else will get treated as spam.
Jan
David, Gary remembers you from his school.
Pounce
All these people protesting this idiots innocence. I wonder if they would still be saying the same thing if he had accessed their computers and left abuse all over them.
Yeah right, they would have smashed his teeth in.
So much for human rights when somebody has stomped all over your things.
david kelleher
They're not protesting his innocence,they protesting the way he's being treated, and the inflated charges he now faces.
I believe the punishement should fit the crime, his motives were not fueled by self interest,but a misguided mulderesque moment.
Mad Hatter
Dear ppl,
ALL of YOU seem to have forgotten the ONLY 2 RULES OF COMPUTER SECURITY as correctly defined by the Dark Avenger circa 1986 so for your edification they are as follows....
Rule 1 = DO NOT BUY A COMPUTER
Rule 2 = HAVING IGNORED RULE 1 DON'T TURN IT ON
It really is that simple!!!
So it's OK for governments to trash my personal security by reading / watching / listening to any transmission I might make but not vice versa. Sorry but I don't subscribe to that sort of slavery / tyranny.
Anyone who thinks keeping secrets is good for humanity needs to grow and maintain more than one neuron!!
For the rod walloping law types show me the contract I signed before being born which says i agreed to be bound by anything at all... As a pragmatic anarchist your just lucky I choose to leave you all be.
Gary you seem to have crossed the line from hacker (look but don't touch) to cracker/criminal (altered something) pity about that.
Of course there is a wonderful opportunity being ignored here and that is to draw out the truth re UFO knowledge/technology being suppressed by various government's....(fat chance)... pursued properly it would negate the need for attention by so many hackers... (what was that about having 2 neurons to rub together)
I pray you are delivered relatively unscathed from the sheeple controllers.
cheers
Mad Hatter
Lorna
Abuse or Truth? It's all in the eyes of the beholder; half of the world believes the same and the current US administration is out of touch with its people and with people throughout the world.
Gary walked in to an unsecured system that had no passwords or firewalls; the US government is responsible for this negligence that has persisted for twenty years.
Why don't they get their act together and pay for the same security as Banks have for Gods sake.
If anyone leaves their doors wide open they can't complain that someone walked straight in and by their own admission, people are "walking" into US government computers on a daily basis and unlike Gary who had a dial up computer, many of the current hackers are much more worrying.
If my door was left wide open I'd be relieved it was someone like Gary that walked in and alerted me to the fact that I hadn't locked my door, rather than some dangerous terrorist with more sinister intentions.
Maybe the new US government will pay for the security that their citizens expect.
Jose
Pounce, that would never happen to us as unlike the U.S Government we've got Passwords and Firewalls.
John J.
All these nice words and well wishes are great, but the people have to get behind gary. There has to be some sort of congregation, somewhere for us to demonstrate. This is a miscarriage of justice...
People cannot be that ignorant or gullible to believe everything that our governments tell us, especially the american government. The way things are twisted, and then unhealthy amount of propaganda is implemented to change our perceptions on any given topic, show that we are too easily swayed, sheep following one another. Get out there in numbers and organize some sort of protest, this can't be allowed to happen.
Scott
I have no love for the Americans, nor do I believe in capital punishment.
However if someone takes drugs into Bali and receives the death penalty, I feel little sympathy as they should know the consequences.
I'm concerned that Gary is looking at all this attention with pride.
Gary you are not a revolutionary. You are not a hero. You are a criminal.
I work in IT in the Banking industry and I have a pretty good idea of what these criminals cost society.
It's been said that with the huge cost, in the future Justice departments will start looking at Virus crime, and Hackers the same as rapists and murderers when handing down sentences.
I disagree with America and the way they treat prisoners, I will have no sympathy for Gary if he is in fact sent there to face justice.
Either way, like all hackers and virus writers, I hope the justice you receive is swift and firm.
fg
@ Scott - if you work in "IT in the Banking industry", you are also at risk of being extradited under the Extradition Act 2003, to the USA, from the UK, without any prima facie evidence being heard in a UK court against you.
How can you be sure that one of the systems you support has not been used to commit a crime in the USA, and that you will not be accused as an accomplice ?
This can happen even if what you are accused of in the USA is not even a crime in the UK (see the Morgan Crucible price fixing case, or the arrests of people involved in Internet Gambling), or if it could easily have been tried in a UK court and under UK law - see the case of the NatWest 3 bankers
The fact that you choose to legally fight a US Extradition Request, also means that you are almost always deemed to be a "flight risk", and so you are remanded into custody i.e. a prison, instead of being granted bail.
Would you not prefer to face a court in the UK, where you and your lawyers can get the more ridiculous unproven allegations against you dismissed for lack of evidence, rather than having to try to do so in a foreign country, where you have, by the mere fact of having been extradited, already been judged as guilty by most people ?
That is neither proportionate nor just.
How about criminal prosecutions for internet security negligence and incompetence by large organisations like banks or Government departments ?
Wil
Scott, to equate hackers with rapists and murderers shows a lack of inelligence, aack of compassion and understanding for victims of rape and murder.
Hacking to find information bears no relation to senseless and mindless violence.
If you feel no sympathy for someone receiving the death penalty, then you are not against capital punishment, or you would find it abhorrent.
Gary did not write viruses, there is a huge difference between virus writers and people in search of the truth.
The U.S government's internet security is patheticly poor and they should be sued by U.S citizens for not having passwords and firewalls and thereby putting U.S citizens at risk on a daily basis from real terrorists.
Gary does not regard or put himself forward as a hero or a revolutionary. If other people do then that's up to them and might be a reflection of the distaste they feel for the out of proportion sixty year sentence he's been threatened with and the vindictiveness shown towards him after six long years.
I'm sure Gary would be more than happy if he hadn't got himself into this mess but it's pretty obvious that he could now never get a fair trial in America.
One man was aquitted by a jury in the U.S and was then taken to Guantanamo. Where's the so called Justice in that instance and in many others?
"Justice" can't possibly be swift as it's now over six years after the fact.
The U.S government is now seen as a bad example throughout the world and America is increasingly seen by law makers as a place that no one should be extradited to.
When Torture including simulated drowning "waterboarding" is seen as acceptable, it's obvious that they have lost the plot and are now totally out of control.
Gary should be tried in his own country and not sent to a country that routinely ignores Human Rights, thinks torture is acceptable and invades countries and conducts illegal wars.
Fortunately Good Americans are now making sure that their voices are heard and with a new Government in place there might be hope for a more intelligent administration that can start to clean up the mess that our world has been plunged into.
I Pray for Justice for Gary and for U.K citizens to have their rights restored to them.
The U.S can take U.K citizens on a whim as David Blunket signed an extradition "treaty" in secret but the U.S haven't signed the one sided Extradition Treaty and never will as it's against their constitution, but the U.K continues to extradite its citizens on the strength of a treaty that has been signed by only one side. .
Where's the Justice in that?
Scott
Thanks for your rational comments guys. Too many times on these sorts of boards turn into rants where nothing of value comes out. That is obviously not the case with this one.
Firstly let me apologise for making anyone feel that I was belittling the trauma rape victims and the loved ones of murder victims go through. Nothing could have been further from my intention.
I was sighting a magazine article that I had read a couple of years ago. I didn’t keep it so going from memory I think it was in IT weekly (which for those of you not in London was a weekly newspaper style magazine which was all the weeks IT News).
The article was about the bottom line costs of virus’s and hackers. The article went on to sight millions of dollars damage done by virus’s like Melissa, as well as various hackers who had done things like hack into a Hospital network and change round a surgery schedule for fun.
The article also pointed out that as hackers and virus’s get more sophisticated, and the potential for damage so great, law makers in the US and Europe were talking about sentences being handed out that are as severe as those given to rapists and murderers. When you start to quantify the extent of damage that can be caused by criminals like Gary, you can understand why law makers feel this is necessary to protect society, the job they have been elected to do.
My comments about the death penalty are about the stupidity of the proverbial “putting ones head in the lions mouth”. I love living in a society that has realised the death penalty is barbaric and I would vehemently protest if that were ever to change (and just to clarify that was an analogy, I’m obviously not suggesting Gary receive the death penalty).
At the end of the day we are spending a lot of time and money (I’m assuming a lot of UK Tax payers money as well) into defending the rights of someone who committed a crime in another country. If a hacker broke his/her way into UK government systems and was caught, you’re damn right I’d want to see them in the UK Courts facing UK Justice and punished for it. I expect my government to show these criminals, and the rest of the world that they do not tolerate these actions and will prosecute to the full extent of the law. And whether we agree with America’s methods or not I believe we should show them the same courtesy.
@fg – I’m not too sure about what you’re saying with me being a possible unwitting accomplice. I think that’s a bit left field and extremely rare and unlucky. It really can’t be compared to a criminal hacker knowingly breaking in networks.
@Wil – I agree with what you are saying about the incredible negligence shown by the US government by not securing their systems, but that doesn’t excuse Gary’s actions and he should be punished accordingly. As for David Blunket’s treaty, I don’t know anything about that. I don’t like the sound of it, so thanks for pointing that out, I’ll look it up.
On the subject of torture and Guantanamo, I was dead against it once just out of pure principal. And I guess, in principal I still am. But as the world is changing so rapidly and we are faced with more threats of terrorism, I am left wondering what is the alternative? If you have a known terrorist, in custody, and you feel that you can get information from him or here that can stop acts of terrorism then what lengths would you go to. I just don’t think it’s a cut and dry argument of principals any more. And I used to hate the thought of ending up in a society where that was the case, but I believe we have. Again just to clarify we have gotten on to this because of talking about US Justice, I am certainly not suggesting that Gary be shipped off to Guantanamo and treated like a terror suspect.
I don’t know, I wish I had all the answers but I don’t. The one thing I do know is we should stop wasting time and money trying to defend criminals like Gary. There are more pressing issues in society that deserve much more of our time and attention than him.
Thanks again for your comments. I'm definitely not one of this people who thinks he's always right about these things so I love a good discussion.
??
Scott - lets hope you never have to rely on your goverment for help! Maybe you would think twice about that rant!
Scott
@?? I don't really understand your point.
I'm in the vast majority of law abiding citizens so if I ever do need help from my government then I would almost guarantee it's warranted and deserved.
And in fact Gary deserves the representation of his government.
But the fact of the matter is he committed a crime in a country that we have important diplomatic ties with.
I don't see sending him over there to answer these crimes as his government letting him down.
Janine
The average Law abiding UK citizen is sick of child abusers and murderers being set free or being given too short a sentence.
This makes us all the more incensed that a computer geek that was able to walk into a highly unsecure system is being threatened by the US authorities with sixty years in a US prison because of their own ineptitude.
Many people are constantly infiltrating US government computers because their security is crap and it's become a bit of a joke.
Computer geeks will always think it's a game to walk into unsecured systems whether Gary McKinnon is imprisoned or not. The answer is for the US government to get it's act together and pay for decent security. Gary had a dial up connection for Christ sake!!!
If looking for someone to make an example of, they should have chosen a seriously bad person with seriously violent tendencies and not a dope smoking computer nerd that has basically suffered a six year sentence of fear at the thought of facing a sixty year sentence.
We are not wasting time defending Gary; we are fighting for the rights of all British citizens not to be threatened with insane punishment such as sixty years imprisonment and being "Fried" because of a six / seven year old non violent crime that many schoolchildren will no doubt commit in the future unless the US government can sort out its frighteningly lax security.
The current American Government is increasingly being seen by people, lawyers and Judges throughout the world as being on the lunatic fringe. They are seen as vengeful and extremely paranoid and yesterday one of the politicians said "It would Help John McCain if there was a Terrorist Attack"!!!
With statements like that it only adds to the conspiracy theorists belief that 9/11 may have been perpetrated by the US Government themselves.
We in the UK cannot extradite any US citizen without presenting proof, whereas the US can extradite any UK citizen they feel like on the strength of an allegation, because David Blunket signed a "treaty" with the US in secret that the US has still not and never will sign.
The reason Gary McKinnon is still in the UK is because of the threats and the insane proposed sentence.
This has woken British people up to the fact that it could be them or their children being carted off to a US prison on the whim of the American government.
There are many more computer people out there in every corner of the world that are far more sophisticated and far cleverer than this dope smoking Pacifist who has become a victim himself.
Why doesn't the US Government stop embarrising itself by wasting time on a computer nerd like Gary and start arresting real terrorists and violent criminals.
What really terrifies me is the fact that someone like Gary can sit in a North London flat and on a "Dial up connection" can literally walk into the Pentagon and look around.
This is the US governments fault and they should be sued by their citizens for not investing in state of the art security. They had literally no Passwords and no Firewalls!!! How crazy is that?
Wil
Scott,
If you have a "known terrorist" in custody then you must have evidence against him/her and they should be put on trial in a civilian court. If the evidence is not there, then they are not "known" terrorists.
If you think torture is acceptable for any reason, then you and the terrorists have become indistinguishable.
Han
fg: Why are you so incensed that the prosecution is, in your words, calling Gary's barristers liars? It does not seem to be the case. There is a disagreement about what was said over five-and-a-half years ago. Isn't it possible that the U.S. representatives were attempting to explain the benefits of Gary pleading guilty and agreeing to extradition, versus fighting the process and possibly being found guilty?
As noted numerous times on this board, the English and American justice systems are different, and what seems perfectly normal in one is anathma in the other. Plea bargaining is aparently not the norm in England, while being required to talk to the police is viewed with equal horror in the U.S. Neither system is right or wrong, they are just different. While the U.S. representatives most likely did not completely understand the English system, and may have said things that appeared to an Englishman as a threat or coercion, that does not mean that they meant them as threats, and thus they are not calling the barristers liars, they are explaining the conversations from their perspectives.
What incentive do the ex-American authorities have to lie? They have no stake in the game. They were not political appointees, but civil servants. Now they are, as noted, in the private sector and whether or not threats were made or coercion used, and whether or not Gary is extradited or convicted it will have no real impact on them. It would seem that barristers representing a client would have a greater interest in the outcome and thus more incentive to lie. This is not to suggest that the barristers did lie or purposely distorted the truth, simply that on the whole it seems odd to suggest that people with nothing to gain are obviously lying but that those with something to gain are above all possible reproach.
As a side note, I find it all rather amusing that so many people on this board are all up in arms about American Aggression, the striping of Rights by the U.S. government, and the Evils of George Bush. Meanwhile, the British government is busily recording every move of every citizen with nary a peep of protest here. It is rather doubtful that President Bush has the slightest idea who Gary is (anymore than do 99%+ of Americans) or would have any interest in sending him to Gitmo or ordering a military trial, even assuming that there was any basis to do so.
But this case is not about any of those things, it is about Gary allegedly breaking into computers to which he had no authorized access. While Gary could be charged in the U.K. under a nationality or territoriality principle, the U.K. authorities made the decision not to prosecute him but to instead defer prosecution to the United States. Under the protection principle, effects principle, or territoriality principles, the U.S. is a reasonable place to try Gary. Because Gary was located in the U.K., the U.K. would have precedence over the U.S. in prosecuting Gary, but they are not the only State with jurisidiction over the offense.
Since Gary has repeatedly admitted every element of the crime, it seems rather hollow each time the oft-repeated mantra that "the U.S. should have to show evidence of each element prior to extradition" is proclaimed. Although most everyone here has apparently overlooked it, the crime charged does not require $5000 per computer, it requires either $5000 in damages aggragated over all compters (~$50 per computer), or that the computers were used by or for a government entity for the National Defense. See Count 1 on Page 3 of the Indictment where it charges 18 U.S.C. 1030(a)(5)(B)(i) and (v) where (i) requires $5000 in the aggregate and (v) requires that the computer be used by or for the government for National Defense, etc. The U.S. only has to prove one of the two, not both.
For all of your extolling the barristers' virtues, they should know enough about the elements of the crimes charged to tell Gary not to admit to every element in every interview for the last 4-5 years . . . don't you think? If he had simply taken responsibility for his actions at the start, all this would already be behind him, instead of his now looking at a long stretch in prison.
- Han
Ian Lowe
Scott, you said:
"But the fact of the matter is he committed a crime in a country that we have important diplomatic ties with. I don't see sending him over there to answer these crimes as his government letting him down."
and that is the crux of the case right there. Gary DID NOT commit a crime in the United States.
He was sat in front of a keyboard in his house in the UK. The fact that the computer he connected to was in the US is absolutely irrelevant.
Consider this - if you posted on a blog about chinese human rights, and the server hosting the blog happened to be in a Data centre in Beijing... should you be exradited to China for dissent? you would have commited a criminal offense in China, if we apply the same standard you have applied to McKinnon.
This notion of telepresence in the law is an incredibly dangerous concept - how can any reasonable person argue that the legality of an action carried out over the internet should be determined at the "virtual" side, rather than where the flesh and blood human being is located?
Extradition is supposed to be used for people who have commited a crime, then fled - not to impose the laws of one country onto another's sovereign territory!!
Ian Lowe
Just for the record? what I believe should happen here is that Gary McKinnon whouls be tried in a UK court for criminal acts under the Computer Misuse act 1980, and if found guilty should be sentenced in a UK court.
He is a UK citizen and should NOT be subject to US law.
Time for that extradition treaty to be revoked.
Scott
See this is why I take part in these things. I was focusing on the fact that he's a criminal and getting ticked off about the fact that we waste time helping too many criminals.
Reading the last three comments from Janine, Wil and Ian has made me see the bigger picture.
In my head I was focusing on Gary, but it's not Gary we are defending, it's "a British Citizen".
The only comment I disagree with is yours Ian about the fact that he "did not" commit the crime in the US. It's a crime against the US and the US Government but most importantly against the US people.
Perhaps instead of using Human rights in China as an example (i.e. not really a crime because we lucky ones in a free society know better) but perhaps murder or theft on foreign soil (again I'm not equating hacking to murder it's just a crime to list as an example).
But Ian, Wil and Janine (and the others on this board now) what you said makes sense to me now.
I hope that if Gary is found to have broken the law he gets punished accordingly, but also gets the full strength of the British legal system behind him to make sure he's treated fairly... in Britain.
Cheers all.
fg
@ Hari - thanks for taking the time to comment at length - your comment got trapped in the anti-spam filters
If it was obvious that this is what they were doing, then it would never have got this far in the legal process.
Both the Appeal Court and the House of Lords, our equivalent of the US Supreme Court obviously saw enough merit in this to hear the appeal.
One of the alleged comments, probably second hand, seems to have been that a New Jersey prosecutor wanted to "see him fry" i.e. a death penalty threat.
Presumably, they are trying to save face. and possibly the careers of some of their colleagues and contacts within the US Government, which is what makes them commercially valuable to Microsoft.
To us in the UK, it certainly looks as if there is a political element which has manipulated the supposedly impartial judicial system.
Gary's alleged offences cover over a dozen different US States, but, somehow, it is the Eastern District of Virginia, with the court house in Alexandria, which was chosen for the main Grand Jury Indictment,
The fact that the available Jury pool in this area, which is surrounded by the Pentagon (across the State line, but physically within commuting distance), the Fort Meade (NSA), Fort Belvoir (US Army) the CIA headquarters in Langley and various "Beltway Bandit" US Defence contractors, means that it is certain that the Jury will comprise of people who either work for the US Government and Military and Intelligence agencies, or private companies who work for such agencies, or who have family members who do.
This court has one of the highest conviction rates in the USA, and was chosen, even though it is not in any of the States which were targets of the September 11th 2001 attacks i.e. New York, Washington DC or Pennsylvania for the maximum media publicity show trial of the alleged "20th hijacker" Zacarias Moussaoui
Scott Stein was the Deputy US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. i.e. the prosecutor.
His immediate boss at the time, i.e. the US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was Paul McNulty
He was promoted by President George Bush, to become the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, something which rather does imply political connections and influence.
He resigned in 2006, after having lied to Congress, in the highly political dismissal of US Attorneys scandal
At each stage during this lengthy Extradition process, the US side appears to have prevaricated and delayed, in the run up to US Presidential or Congressional elections.
They have built up their professional reputations on catching "cyber criminals" and "cyber terrorists" etc., so it will affect them professionally.
Eminent barristers like Edmund Lawson Q.C. are professionally dispassionate, and work sometimes for the Defence, and sometimes for the Prosecution. He has actually represented the UK Government side in other Extradition cases.
Not entirely true.
There is plenty of public concern and fear, about the excesses of the repressive legislation and surveillance powers of the Government, which is not actually reducing the threat of crime or terrorism, but is breaching the rights of innocent people who get caught up in the anti-crime and anti-terrorism bureaucracy.
See NO2ID Campaign against the database state and and the David Davis by-election campaign.
He almost certainly does not know all the names of the people being held in Guantanamo Bay, but that did not prevent him from rubber stamping the Presidential decrees he was presented with, declaring them to be "enemy combatants"
Correct, but neither is the United States.
I do not think that he has admitted to any criminal damage.
How the US authorities intend to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that he, and he alone, damaged anything, when their computer systems were so literally wide open (full administrator access, without password, without a firewall, remotely accessible from anywhere else in the world via the internet), when there were, and probably still are today, lots of other foreign and US people accessing those systems illegally, is a bit of a mystery.
Showing some subset of prima facie evidence to an extradition court, is not the same as producing all the evidence and arguments at a full trial.
No challengable evidence whatsoever, even of a reduced, prima facie variety, needs to be produced, or has been produced, under the Extradition Act 2003 supposedly "fast track" extradition process, only allegations.
Even at 2002 prices, $5000 per computer system was enough to buy a brand new, fully configured, fully secured Windows NT computer system two or three times over. It is probably at least 10 times what it would cost to restore a system from a backup.
No doubt the excessive claims for financial damage would be challenged in a US court, if it goes that far. They would also, under the old UK - US extradition rules, have been challenged in a UK Court, to help to determine just how serious the alleged offences were.
That is exactly what would happen in a US extradition hearing, if the UK authorities were extraditing someone from the USA.
That cannot be done under the present, unequal UK - US extradition system.
There is a UK legal precedent for rejecting the over-inflated claims of financial damage to a hacked computer system. There was a case where a server in London was remotely hacked into by Russian hackers, with a strong commercial motive, in order to see confidential legal papers in a forthcoming court case, and where the lawyers for the owners of the hacked server tried to claim the cost of a brand new system, and of outside security consultants etc.
.
See UK Commercial Law case precedent on alleged financial damage to a remotely hacked server ?
Several people have made comments over the years, likening unauthorised computer access to burglary. It is actually more akin to trespassing. It would be completely disproportionate, bordering on the fraudulent, to claim financial damages for trespassing in a building, through an open door, amounting to a sum of money which would be enough to purchase a brand new, bigger and better architect designed building, to replace the undamaged, mundane one which you had at the time of the alleged trespass. The same is true for unauthorised computer access cases.
N.B. Gary is not yet charged with stealing any classified military secrets, but, since the USA re-classified lots of things which were oeven on th epublic internet, in the last few years, they could decide to do so, once if they have him in custody.
He has not admitted to any of the criminal damage allegations.
Gary has stated many times that he regrets his actions, and is willing to face a fair trial in the UK, and to accept any subsequent punishment, even prison.
ozzie
free gary havent seen you in a while but supporting you.
Trevor
Having just read read all of the comments on this blog it is easy to feel a little dizzy, the legality of the whole scenario is completely bizarre.
So hopefully my point of view will air on the side of COMMON SENSE rather than who did what, when and where.
It seems that Gary is rapidly turning into a cyber martyr and it remains to be seen whether the UK government will turn Judas on him.
Given that the US consider Gary to be a terrorist, it seems a little illogical that the American guy who now works for Microsoft UK would work in the UK at all as surely he should fear his safety because if Gary really were a terrorist he would have motive to cause him harm.
The whole scenario is just ridiculous, not only have the US been exposed and embarrassed by having a serious lack of security in relation to important information, they are embarrassing themselves further by trying to extradite Gary.
Let us just hope that in this case the UK law lords grow some testicles and stand up to the Americans who think they can throw their weight around whenever it suits them.
It would also be interesting to know if Gary were to be extradited to the US would he be tried as according to the law as it stood in 2002 when the alledged offence was committed or would he be tried under the new laws that have come into place since events such as 9 11.
Personally I hope that all charges against Gary will be dropped however this is not likely to be the case.
The UK will probably bow down to the US demands and be the bigger beings whipping boy just like they did with Iraq.
As for the subject of hacking, i typed the word "hacking" into youtube and instantly received 228,000 results, it seems that with a little application I could be a hacking genius in next to no time or a heroin producer etc.
So given that the internet legally provides us with all this information ie, The Anarchists Cook Book and how to make bombs etc, shouldn't all of the people who have posted these clips online also be guilty of a crime and dragged before the courts?
Gary accessed information regarding UFO's and energy technology, pretty harmless stuff you would think!
Also having looked at UFO clips on youtube there are plenty of ex NASA and US servicemen giving frank accounts of UFO sightings shouldn't they also be in breach of the official secrets act and also dragged before the courts.
It would actually be nice to see Mark Thomas ( http://www.shopanmp.com/ ) do a documentary about this whole case, I am sure he is the man Gary needs to make the governments look like the idiots they are and also to bring the story to a wider audience.
Anyway I fear that I am starting to ramble, so good luck Gary, you need it, I have little faith in the UK saving you but the hopefully the EU will see sense.
Josie
Hari,
the prosecution were definitely making serious threats, as initially they offered Gary McKiinon around 18months to three years I believe.
They then informed him that he would be prosecuted to the max and face sixty years with no remission and no repatriation....IF HE DID NOT PLEAD GUILTY TO THE ALLEGED DAMAGE AND IF HE DID NOT ACCEPT THEIR "OFFER". PLUS the "FRY" comment was made....the death penalty....
If that isn't extremely SERIOUS THREATS being made against a UK citizen, then I don't know what is.
Why should a UK citizen that denies the alleged damage, plead guilty to the alleged damage that he absolutely denies.
Why should a UK citizen be threatened for exercising his or her Legal rights in the UK. The right to oppose extradition to a foreign country. A country that is fast gaining a seriously bad reputation for violating Human Rights.
As I understand it there were no guarantees offered in this case and the sentence proposed could not be guaranteed, plus the prosecution reserved the right to change Gary McKinnons status to that of enemy combatant.
All of that along with an unsigned Diplomatic note makes any supposed guarantee given totally worthless.
Clive Stafford Smith gave evidence that a man acquitted in an American court was then sent to Guantanamo under military order number one, which was signed by President George Bush.
So even if Gary was acquited, he could be sent to Guantanamo.
It's time for honesty to prevail in order to protect UK citizens from the gross injustices of this one sided extradition treaty. A treaty that gives America the right to extradite any UK citizens on a mere whim.
So why are many Judges ignoring America's track record in this regard and therefore naively believe that Gary McKinnon could now ever have any hope of getting a fair trial in America.
With regard to the current American justice system, even moreso in the state of Virginia; I hope the Lords will not adopt the three monkeys approach and will open their eyes and let the Truth be spoken and heard.
Gary McKinnon could no longer get a fair trial in America and that's a fact.
Arturo
VENEZUELA
FREE GARY !!! Mc
Siv
I think it is ironic that an agency that prides itself on hacking into other people's computers is worrying about one guy that is only doing what they do but to them. If the CIA were convicted on every case of hacking they have been involved in, the CIA would be put away for life...... several hundreds of times over.
JOINTHERESISTANCE
WITH YA ALL THE WAY GARY! THERES A REVOLUTION ON THE HORIZEN!
Alex Macleod
Dear Gary,
Maximum respect, bro.
USA - too much pride.
Hope this sorts its self out and you can get on with your life.
Alex
P.S. Send over that PERL script ;-)
ewok
If someone breaks into your house and the locks are no-good. IT IS YOUR FAULT not the burglars. These systems were using that silly american windoze operating system that had no /or the default passwords.
It was the systems administrators fault.
Jay Macleod
Someone posted a while back talking about the proof of the said threats/coercion levelled at Gary, being dependent on the memories of those invloved of conversations that took place more than five years ago in the US embassy in London etc.
A file with details of the meetings during which the threats were made, "went missing" from Gary's solicitors office.
A laptop with details of these same meetings was stolen from the car of one of Gary's Barristers.
People that are a very naieve often refer to logic, common sense and truth as "conspiracy theorys".
The prosecution might think the proof of what was said in those meetings has gone but they might have a surprise waiting.
If they are found to have commited perjury or to have attempted to pervert the course of Justice would they be extradited to face charges?
....Of course not because they're American and America hasn't signed the still one sided extradition treatyand never will.
So what have the prosecution got to lose by lying?....Absolutely Nothing
What have the prosecution got to gain by lying?
...Well They very much want to make an example of someone with regard to computer crime and they've invested a great deal of time and money into trying to make Gary the one they want to make an example of.
They also want to deflect from the incompetence of their staff for not having secured their internet connections.
They also want to punish Gary for embarrasing them because of that same incompetence.
This is a test case and the current US government want to set a precedent to make it even easier to extradite any UK citizen they feel like on a mere whim.
If they win this case, no UK citizen will be safe and we in the UK will automatically become second class citizens with far fewer rights than our American counterparts.
Why are our government not only allowing this to happen but actively trying to make it so, rather than attempting to protect UK citizens and to ensure that we have equal rights with American citizens.
One posting on here said.... what would Ex FBI men that now work for Microsoft have to gain by signing Afidavits against Gary? Well who said that they don't still unoficially work for the FBI.
Rather convenient that Ex FBI men run Microsoft security at a time when the EU is set to allow the US government to access the browsing habits of EU computer users. This is over and above the "legal" monitoring of emails Tel. calls etc of all UK citizens.
Ex FBI agent Scott Stein worked for the department of Justice (the head of whom has signed one of the Afidavits against Gary) and of course he will still be loyal to his Ex boss.
The US department of Justice took Microsoft to court and following this the EX FBI men went to work for Microsoft.
A bit naive I think, to believe that this is just a coincidence. They have a great deal to gain by attempting to pervert the course of Justice by (lying) denying that the said threats against Gary were made and to believe otherwise seems to me to be extremely Naieve.
wil
Re-The File containing a record of the threats made against Gary from the pre-named people.
The fact that the file went missing from Gary's solicitors office and that a LapTop containing the same information was stolen from the car of Gary's Barrister is extremely sinister.
The fact that Gary's Hard Drives were taken to the US by UK police years ago is also pretty worrying, as if the pre-mentioned files in Gary's solicitors office went Missing and Gary's Barristers Laptop was stolen, then common sense tells us that Gary's Hard Drives could easily be tampered with.
All Very Sinister
Elle, Elec.Eng.Tech.
It is a much known fact due to the absolute power of the Internet and future directions - that - any person who is an IT Security person or known Hacker is an extremely valuable person...
Unknown to most of the general public is that Countries have been putting together Cyber Forces similar to Air Forces, except, of course, the Cyber Forces are virtual IT personnel. The reason is very simple.
1. You can cause great loss in terms of financial loss by taking down a website.
2. You can silence damaging information by taking down a website.
You know what they say..."Knowledge Is Power"
Elle, Elec.Eng.Tech.
PS - Canada2600 supports you Gary...
From Janis (Gary's Mum) A Huge Thank You To Everyone!!!
The Lords Recess (Holiday)starts this coming Tuesday 22nd July and they don'r return until October.
We thought the decision would come out before 22nd, otherwise it's on to October 2008 (more than six and a half years after Gary was first arrested by the UK Police)
Thank you to everyone that has taken the time to contribute to this website and to support Gary when we most needed it and Thank You to the incredible fg for running and moderating this website so spectacularly and for his incredible knowledge that has helped us more than I can say.
Words aren't enough to express the gratitude felt by Gary and none of you will ever know just how much your signatures to the petitions and the incredible comments supporting Gary have meant to us and have uplifted our spirits at the times we most needed it.
To know that people care is so wonderful because it's people like you that can change the world for the better.... and for people to take the time to write a message of support for someone they have never met is just awesome.
Thank you just doesn't sound enough but it comes from the very core of our hearts.
On behalf of Gary, (as he's not allowed to use the internet)and from all of his family and friends.
Thank You Everyone! Thank you so very, very much!!!
Love Janis (Gary's mum)
www.lunargirl.com
Anonymous
Hey Gary. Good luck to you. I really hope the UK (or else Europe) will finally protect its citizens from the uncontrolled madness of the US.
You broke the EU cybercrime law and you should face the consequences, but you broke that law in the UK and there should be no reason to deliver you to the US where they currently hold people without any protection of their human rights.
Peaches DuBois
We are waiting for Gry's Gary's arrival here in the USA.
Peaches DuBois
We are waiting for Gary's arrival here in the USA.