Free Gary McKinnon

"Butler previously was released from jail in 2002 after serving an 18-month sentence for hacking into Pentagon computers, the report said. He only was sentenced after he stopped cooperating with federal authorities."

What? You gotta see this. This guy gets only 18 months - whilst they want to send Gary away to Guantanamo for 60 years.

Insane.

http://www.scmagazineus.com/13-years-in-prison-cometh-for-the-iceman-hacker/article/163867/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SCMagazineNews+%28SC+Magazine+News%29

What can the Royal Family do to stop the extradition, according to British law. There's the Privy Council. Prince Charles is a member. Of course, the queen is a member. Can either one of them as part of the Council, just put an end to this nonsense and pain. Are there other legal mechanisms available to the Royals to act on their own and end this? For example, if one of them decides that the extradition treaty harms British sovereignty or the national interest, can the Queen kill it - stomp it into the ground? Now's the time for everyone to act. Not just for Gary, but, the harmful precedent that his case will set whereby nothing can stop an extradition to the U.S.

Gary's fighting for all Britains. Are you a British Bull Dog or a lap dog?

@ Honeybear - Her Majesty the Queen is not a "member" of the Privy Council - historically it exists to "advise" her.

Every British Cabinet Minister gets automatically rubber stamped as a Member of the Privy Council, and usually a couple of Opposition party leaders are appointed as well. There are also politicians from Commonwealth countries.

Other Members of the Privy Council are usually current or former senior Judges and senior military officers and civil service Whitehall mandarins - membership of the Privy Council is for life.

See the list of Privy Counsellors (note the spelling)

The prefix "the Right Honourable" , usually abbreviated to "Rt. Hon." or "Rt Hon", signifies membership of the Privy Council, even though the Labour Home Secretaries who have dithered over the Gary McKinnon case, have been neither "right", nor "honourable".

The Privy Council has no power to intervene in the United Kingdom judicial system i.e. the Gary McKinnon case under the Extradition Act 2003.

However, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which consists solely of senior Judges, does

...act as the highest court of civil and criminal appeal

[...]

for many current and former Commonwealth countries, as well as the United Kingdom’s overseas territories, crown dependencies, and military sovereign base areas.

[...]

The Judicial Committee also hears very occasional appeals from a number of ancient and ecclesiastical courts. These include the Church Commissioners, the Arches Court of Canterbury, the Chancery Court of York, prize courts and the Court of Admiralty of the Cinque Ports.

Five judges normally sit to hear Commonwealth appeals, and three for other matters. These judges are usually Justices of The Supreme Court.

Whatever influence members of the Royal Family may have on the Gary McKinnon case will be entirely "behind the scenes" - they cannot and will not ever say anything "political" in public, especially in the run up to a General Election, without causing a constitutional crisis, which would threaten their own position.

Thanks and the info on the Counsellors on the Council is fascinating. It's also hopeful. I hope after the election, the Royal Family will make the personal the political. Elected British politicians have proven they can't govern. Prince Charles is real hope. Some of the power taken away from the Royal Family should be restored - could this loss be part of the reason a fine young man like Gary is suffering? Consider the Spanish Royal Family. They're much more involved in politics and the Spanish government, to understate it, runs much more smoothly. Spain seems to be doing alright, Royals and all.

FREE GARY - RESTORE THE MONARCHY.

I was just looking through and reading some of the info on this site. Good PR Campaign.

But, I think you are dreaming if you believe the Royals or the Tories are going to get anywhere near this case.

It's like the Amanda Knox case and so many others like it. Governments look at them, look at the facts and generally don't touch them with a cattle prod unless there is an extremely good case for intervention. Huge PR Campaigns or not, facts are facts. Common sense is common sense. The Case I see being put forward on this site. tbh - appears whooly and a bit concocted.

Hey ho though, one last appeal. But when that is over, regardless of the outcome I for one, hope we hear less and less of this.

I don't have the right to rain on your parade...
Just saw the pictures of the December protest.

It erks me to no end to see massive PR campaigns generated around guilty people. But.
Gary's mother, well, it's his mother. She has every right and I commend her for her efforts and can respect her motivations.

I still believe it's a lost cause... but wish her peace and a 'calmness' on her road ahead.

Gary, on the other hand. Do the right thing, Stand up be a Man and take responsibility for your actions.

Can't you see the pain you are causing people around you???

I will now respectfully bow out as one of the few cynics that visit this site to "rant"!

Innocent until proven guilty Rob.

Allegations are not facts and in disclosure from the Crown Prosecution Service at the last court hearing, the lawyer for the CPS had marked the supposed evidence presented by the U.S as "No Evidence and Hearsay".

Had the U.S applied to extradite Gary in 2002 they would have to have presented real evidence of the alleged damage....but they waited for three more years to apply to the U.K to extradite, as by then the U.K was using the one sided extradition treaty with the U.S and the U.S no longer had to produce any evidence of the alleged damage.

Says it all my friend.

There are 300 intrusions into U.S military computers every day but they've only applied to extradite a UFO guy with Aspergers Syndrome.

Shame on them

Sorry, I thought Gary openly admitted his guilt of hacking into Government networks for the purpose of disruption; already.

Yes actual damage, to be announced. But isn't that in principle illegal and open to prosecution? If you claim innocence it is innocent until proven guilty... but if you openly admit your guilty... Aren't you guilty??? I'm sure if you pay lawyer enought they'll argue it for you.

If any of the 300 admitted their guilt, I'm sure the US would try them as well. I certainly would expect it to happen to me.

Aspergers: Sorry, but too many reporters who have been following this from the beginning who commented on his demeanor and change of therin once the Aspergers claim came to light... well their candid observations swayed me. You look at all these cases the hit the media.. they all follow the same formula. It's embarrassing to watch.

You have your PR campaign.. there will always be the opposing view being promoted. *We are the angry mob and we read the papers every day, eh?

Let's just hold our breath until the end of May.. and see what happens.

Sorry, I'm new to this story. Background: I am a former member of the US military, and now live and work in Europe. My son has Asperger's Syndrome.

Asperger's is no excuse for Gary's behavior, nor is it a valid argument against his extradition. Asperger's does not interfere with ones ability to know right from wrong.

As far as the hundreds of successful or attempted daily hacks on Pentagon computers, if those hackers can be identified, they will be prosecuted. No one is picking on Gary, he was unlucky enough to get caught.

The remarks/worries about Guantanamo are non-starters. Not gonna happen. Anyone who argues it loses any and all credibility.

The MAXIMUM sentence Gary could face is 70 years. In the US criminal justice system, there is significant leeway granted to the sentencing judge as to the actual sentence. The judge can and almost always takes into account: the defendant's cooperation, past criminal record, expression of remorse, and likelihood of repeating the offense (though some crimes carry mandatory minimum sentences--I don't know about Gary's situation). Rarely is the maximum sentence imposed, and even then, it is rarely fully served due to parole eligibility.

look for project camelot and gary mckinnon.

The U.S. had an extradition treaty with Afghanistan. Under the treaty, the U.S. had to provide prima facia (? - the spelling isn't important) evidence to Afghanistan in order for Afghanistan to extradite Osama bin Ladin (spelling again?). The U.S. refused to do so even after Afghanistan agreed to extradite bin Ladin if the U.S. would have obeyed it's treaty obligations. Instead, the U.S. invaded.

Gary's opposition to the extradition represents reason, the rule of law, - the U.S. represents, what? It's important to know what and it's not that spectacular. It's just, might makes right. Unfortunately, the U.S. is just now beginning to learn that it's reached the limits of its power.

It appears that there is a hidden hand working behind the scene that will not allow Gary to be extradited and therefore, I'm not worried for Gary or the UK. The U.S. government will turn on its own subjects when it fails to beat Gary and win by force in Afghanistan which, interestingly enough, involve extradition and the rule of law.

God, when I'm finally caught with my hand stuck in the honey pot, please let Crash be the judge.

@ Honeybear - it is spelled prima facie

There was no internationally recognised government of Afghanistan when allied forces invaded, only the Taliban warlords, who did not bother with anything like a proper legal justice system, they just tortured and murdered anyone who opposed them.

It seems more likely that any "hidden hand behind the scenes" has being trying to do exactly the opposite of what you hope for.

If you're correct, fg, then blame just a local Taliban, opium-free, warlord, for blowing up those two 100's of years old Bhuddhist statues.

You mean, Gary's having avoided extradition up to now, considering all of his legal defenses and defeats at the various courts, etc., means that the British "system" works, at least somewhat? O.M.G., L.O.L. Even in that case, I'm not worried and neither should Gary worry.

O.M.G., the chickens have come home to roost. America's complete frustration at still not getting Gary seems to be turning on itself. Thanks Gary.

http://www.rense.com/general90/dcu.htm

"While China is no model human rights champion, America is guilty of far worse crimes as well as all of the above abuses, yet rarely do major media reports reveal them.

On March 13, two days after the State Department's report, China's Information Office of the State Council published its own comprehensive report, titled: "The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2009," correctly saying America:

"released its Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2009....posing as 'the world judge of human rights' again. As in previous years, the reports are full of accusations of the human rights situation in more than 190 countries and regions including China, but turn a blind eye to, or dodge and even cover up rampant human rights abuses on its own territory (and those..."

@ Honeybear - you should not believe very much of what the Communist dictatorship in China pumps out as propaganda - when they talk of "Human Rights" their words mean almost the opposite of what we think they do.

The Communist Chinese have executed. "computer hackers" in the past (admittedly ones who had actually stolen some money from a bank).

China's treatment of hackers is a sobering lesson. It's not too far of a stretch to equate stolen money with the cost of damage that Gary is falsely accused of by the U.S. government - noting that the U.S. is much different than China. The Asian mind is interesting if not inscrutible and comparing American half-truths with Chinese opposite-meanings is a little spookey. If I looked too closely for too long, I'd need a new prescription for my eye-glasses, to differentiate.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/weshallremain/the_films/episode_5_trailer

Nevertheless, Gary's human rights have been and are being violated by the U.S. in this extradition attempt and there may be things in the Chinese report that Gary can use. They cited sources. Would it be cricket for Gary to use them when true?

Why should Gary be nice when they're trying to destroy him physically, mentally, and spiritually?

PLEASE, realise that the bureaucratic system serves the elite only. The bureaucratic system is the overhead that protects the dark elite and controlls the people, even while the people pay for it.

Please watch this video I made from my close encounter with a hovering UFO. Gary got to close to revealing the huge scam of the corrupt governments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0AEzX4hw4tI

From my experience I'm 99.99% sure that technological matters like LCD are reverse engineered at the TAX payers costs, and Gary got too close to finding the bureaucratic evidence, meaning he would beat them from within their system.

Why would the UK always cry out when situations turns out not to favour them,public international law is about interest and understanding, so either way it goes, they were not bullied into such conventions.

Whether Gary should be tried in the UK revolves around him having a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome. If he does, then according to the medical literature, he has to remain in the UK because doing so is the only way for him to receive treatment. It's that cut and dry. Once, the British government knows that that's his diagnosis, they will have to, according to the law, keep Gary home. I don't see how the degree of his diagnosis can be part of a debate whether he can be extradited. He can't have just a little Asperger's. Once the government doctors find that he does, which they already should have, then he stays home. The next matter is the injustice of his being under legal threat for the past eight years. What a nightmare.

By the way, the C.I.A. keeps the U.F.O. phenomenon under control for the same reason everything is controlled - to make money for the controllers. Is it ethical to make us pay to live? pdccdosg.htm

Gary has already been diagnosed with Aspergers by three of the countries worlds leading experts including: Professor Simon Baron Cohen, Professor Jeremy Turke and Doctor Thomas Bernie. The court has already fully accepted this diagnosis as unequivical.
Gary is also suffering from deep depression and the new medical assessments are to determine whether it would be opressive under our Human Rights act to extradite Gary.
However a Psychiatrist put forward by the governments chief Medical Officer is not an expert in Aspergers/autism and has no background in either, so presumably another expert who is more suitable will have to be appointed.