Janis Sharp, the mother of Gary McKinnon, to stand against Jack Straw in Blackburn at the General Election

| 39 Comments

Janis Sharp, the mother of Gary McKinnon has announced her candidacy in the forthcoming General Election.

She will be standing against the Jack Straw, the former Labour Home Secretary and current Minister of (in)Justice in the constituency of Blackburn, in Lancashire.

See Janis's Twitter feed: https://twitter.com/JanisSharp

Interestingly, Jack Straw is the only former Labour Home Secretary who has not had to deal with the Gary McKinnon extradition case, as he had been edged sideways by David Blunkett, by the time Gary was arrested in April 2002.

He was Foreign Secretary at the time of the UK Governments secret extradition treaty negotiations with the US Government which resulted in the Extradition Act 2003, which Gary McKinnon and other extradition cases to the USA have fallen foul of.

He is personally at least as much to blame for the ongoing legal travesty and betrayal of British sovereignty as any of his Labour Government colleagues.

Other high profile political dissidents and human rights campaigners such as the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, have stood against Jack Straw in previous General Elections.

Perhaps Craig can advise Janis on the sort of Labour party political trickery and postal ballot corruption which has tainted the elections in Blackburn in the past. e.g. Blackburn Council Jack Straw Electoral Corruption Starts Again

The fact that the Gary McKinnon extradition case has exceeded the lifetime of this current Parliament, is a scandal which belies any promises of swift or fair justice, made by this Labour government.

UPDATE:

Janis Sharp has a General Election campaign website at: http://www.JanisSharp.com

39 Comments

only wish I could vote for you! - hope you at least manage to unseat him. Is anyone taking on Alan Johnson? There's another idiot the country could well do without - he doesn't even look like he believes anything he says himself!

Just heard the news. Good luck Janice. I'd vote for you.

He deserves everything he get's !

He thought he was a smart arse doing what he did. Didn't he think he'd get caught lol.

SERVES HIM RIGHT !

Hi Janis,

I wish you well in your election campaign.

Gary's extradition case should have been thrown out a long time ago.

Warm regards,
Billy Dunn

If you HACK into someone else's computer, email etc, you are invading a person's/organisation's privacy and should expect to face the consequences. McKinnon shouldn't have done it. He was caught-TOUGH! Then starts crying. Send him to the U.S. and let them put the jerk away!

Patricia

Sounds like you too are yet another victim of the information wars. What must be considered is that the simple lack of critical information can lead us down the garden path. Hidden and concealed information can result in disastorous incidence. Sometimes all is required is a single missleading word to incite rage and motivate people to do things that they would not normally do - against innocent people - humanity itself.

Information = Power;

My question to you is how have you equated

1. Unsubstanciated allegations = Guilt without Trial?
2. Pro human rights = Soft on crime?

PS - Expecting an answer...

Elle

Who's Patricia ?

Arthur - see comments on "Ian Norris loses his UK Supreme Court appeal against Extradition to the USA" regarding Patricia.

steve smith - FYI(for your information)

1.There was no HACK involved. The US Military webspace was open to the general public due to a mistake made by the administrator not configuring installed windows systems. No password was set for the administrators account. Which gives access to everyone without the need for a password.
2.There was many people on the .mil network that accessed this way. People from all over the world walked the directory trees on the us military network. It has become a joke to the geek crowd - such as myself. The only reason he was caught and not any of the rest of us - is because he left a note to the administrators alerting them about the lax security. The IP of the sender was then tracked to Gary.
3.I agree with you, if a wrong is commited, there should be justice. You, however, missed the whole point of this site. It is to obtain rightful justice so that Gary McKinnon and his family and friends can recieve due closure on this matter. Not a bogus 60 year sentence in Guantanamo Bay but a standard sentence as per precident for the type of crime involved - ie: no personal gain/ no malicious HACK ( And personally - I feel the last 8 years ahould be time served )

Elle

"no malicious HACK"?

He trashed the network at Naval Weapons Station Earle, just 12 days after 9-11.

Later he said "I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest level".

@ Socrates - who exactly are you quoting the word "malicious" from ? Nobody else has used that word in this comment thread.

Given how open to the world the New Jersey Naval systems systems allegedly were, it is going to be hard to prove "beyond reasonable doubt", in a proper court that only Gary and not any of the dozens or hundreds of other people who were also exploiting the same inept lack of security from within the UA and from, China, Russia and the rest of the world.

Tellingly, none of the self proclaimed experts from the USA who have commentated negatively on Gary's case, have ever dared to deny just how negligently vulnerable these systems were, for the several years before Gary's arrest in 2002.

Gary's alleged note, left on the desktop of a single worksation, is hardly in the same league as even the stupidest web server defacements of US Military systems, which preceded and followed his arerest.

Any US Military people who feel threatened by the content of that alleged message, should face a Court Martial for cowardice.

Socrates - Are you one of those people who believe everything you hear on your TV...And blend that together with no legal knowledge...And what you get is a recipe for disaster.

Unfortunately most are sheep - believe anything without question.

FACT :: Any allegations are not legit until proven in a court of law.
FACT :: The OPEN ACCESS prior to and during and post 911 can determine true motives by a Judge in a court of law.

Elle

How could they blame Gary for hacking !

why they just go after "who ever" left their accounts with blank passwords!!??
any why only blame one side?


The disruption was cyber notes he left warning them that their security was virtually non existent in the hope that someone from the highest level would read them and do something about U.S security.
In the full cyber note that you refer to, Gary McKinnon shows concern for U.S citizens and says it's not their faul their democracy is slowly being taken away and that he belived it was no accident there was a deliberate stand down by U.S security on 9/11. Gary McKinnon points out in the cyber note you refer to, that the U.S airforce was responsible for U.S security >
"yet the U.S airforce did nothing to monitor the planes flying off course on 9/11 even though one of those planes flying off course was heading towards the Pentagon"
Shouldn't someone have asked the U.S airforce why this was? Did the Bush government order them to stand down?

Gary McKinnon was a whistleblower who despite leaving cyber notes trying to alert the aurhorities, it was a U.S university that had to alert the military to Gary's presence.

Several U.S universities told the U.S government that Gary McKinnon had not caused any damage to their systems and the prosecutors were forced to issue a superceding indictment removing the allegations of damage against the universities from the indictment.

The Crown Prosecution Service disclosure at a recent court hearing showed that the Crown Prosecution Service described the so called U.S evidence as No evidence and hearsay.

A professor of computing gave a statement to the court saying that the alleged financial damage was not for any actual damage other than for the basic firewalls and security that NASA and the military should have had installed that would have flagged up any intruders.

A colonel from the U.S military stated: Gary McKinnon's intrusion was not decisive to U.S security....

Odd how even Alan Johnson our Home Secretary (and you) publicly edit Gary's cyber notes to try and make his actions sound sinister.

He was a whistleblower and no one would listen to his concerns that the U.S; the worlds superpower's computer security was virtually non existent.... "for years on end"

Election 2010

This is what David Cameron said last year - will he keep his word if the Conservatives get in i wonder?

"Conservative Party leader David Cameron, who has come out in support of Mr McKinnon and called on the extradition treaty between the US and Britain to be reviewed. "Gary McKinnon is a vulnerable young man and I see no compassion in sending him thousands of miles away from his home and loved ones to face trial," he said. "If he has questions to answer, there is a clear argument to be made that he should answer to them in a British court."

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne claimed the American government would not "hang one of their citizens out to dry in the same way".

"The [UK] government must ensure that the US-UK Extradition Treaty is repealed and that its replacement treats US and British citizens equally," he said

Prominent psychiatrist says Gary McKinnon is not guilty of a crime.

"Does McKinnon Need a Doctor or Prison?

I wish I could tell you that I had the answers to this dilemma. I do believe that Asperger Syndrome is a developmental disorder, worthy of diagnosis and treatment. There is a lot of suffering among those in this population, including their loved ones. And there are psychological treatments that alleviate some of this suffering, with inspiring new research breaking ground daily. So I would hate to see people continue to suffer simply because this diagnosis is part of a political debate."

http://psychcentral.com/lib/2009/obsessed-should-a-computer-hacker-with-asperger-syndrome-go-to-prison/

Indeed, here in Canada, a real criminal guilty of a violent crime, simply needs to claim insanity, and they are excused. Political debate is definitely the issue here. Personally - I find the inconsistencies in law an insane paradox. ie:: It is ok for a country to kill people for oil en mass - but it is not ok for a person to kill a neighbour for oil. Where is the logic here? Who is the criminal here? How is intent different?

Elle

As a computer security specialist i have followed this case quite closely. Frankly i am amazed this case has gone on for so long over such a benign incident labelled as a "hack". When you consider the actual facts it is no more than an act of voyuerism, neive maybe but never a "hack". A Hack is where somebody breaches or cracks code to subvert security to gain entry. The Systems had no passwords, and no IP security controls at all! Everyone knows this is an act of red faced revenge by the US mil.

Its laughable (not for gary)how all the money wasted on Lawyers,lawlords and Foreign office staff could have probably paid to fix the Security issues exposed by Gary and many others. Lets be absolutely clear that this was not a sophisticated breach of security comparable to online ID theft or even phishing attacks and complex botnets, this was just somebody logging into a server with no Security and having a snoop arround. As far as im aware current Law prohibits this tpye of activity now unless you are an approved PEN tester with relevant non disclosure waivers, but i wasnt aware it was law at the time of gary's alledged hack but Im not conversant with US Law or policy regarding computer security. As has been stated most of this is hearsay as the only peice of evidence to tie gary down was the IP address he was using at the time. To make further accusations requires a chain of forensic evidence from untampered timestamped system logs which judging by the laxed Public domain security is unlikey to have happened after the incident.Common sense needs to be applied here but it doesnt seem to be at all. Computer hacks have varying outcomes and impact and the punishment needs to be proportional to the crime as in any other trial. This would never happen if Gary was to be trialled in the US regardless of what is said in public, if that was the case why not have a uk trial with the US representatives giving evidence? this whole episode screams of scapegoat public hanging.

"Straw introduced the current treaty during his time as home secretary."

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/security-threats/2010/04/27/lib-dems-aim-to-halt-mckinnon-extradition-40088767/

This is the way legislation is passed.
1. One person introduces the bill that was funded.
2. Ten people vote it in without research or debate.
3. The new law adversely effects all.

Perfect example of how the system does not work. We need open government so that everyone who chooses can vote on bills and also check where the money comes from and goes to.

Elle

Gary was breaking the law in the US. Although he was in the UK, the system he was accessing without authorisation was in the US and therefore that is where the law states he should be trailed.

Secondly Gary knew exactly what he was doing, you don't gain an understanding of breaking system security overnight. He thought he was safe behind his computer, unfortunately for him he wasn't and must pay the consequences.

Have a nice flight.


@ Chris - Which part of the the United Kingdom Computer Misuse Act 1990 do you think does not apply to Gary's case ?

Gary has always been willing to face a fair trial and even a prison sentence here in the United Kingdom.

Remember, that despite all the years of legal proceedings so far, no Court has actually cross-examined any of the alleged evidence or witnesses against him, it has all been about general points of law.

"Alan Johnson (Home Secretary; Kingston upon Hull West & Hessle, Labour)

"No, I will take an intervention later.

The US and the UK have different legal systems. I am sure that there are no hon. Members who think that we could put the two legal systems together and-hey presto!-get similar definitions. However, what we ask for in demonstrating reasonable suspicion is as follows: the

"circumstances of the case being such that a reasonable man"-

this language is not gender-friendly-

"acting without passion or prejudice would fairly have suspected the person of having committed the offence".

That is what we in this country apply.

The US asks in its legal terminology for "probable cause"-this dates back to the constitution, so it has always been the case and was not developed as part of the treaty-which is defined as

"facts and circumstances which are sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime".

Those two definitions are about as close as they can be in any two different legal systems."
---

Funny how such a common sense explanation is so widely disregarded because it does not fit your agenda.

Eyes4Lies::

Here is the legal definition for you.

uncorroborated [ˌʌnkəˈrɒbəˌreɪtɪd]
adj
(of evidence, a statement, etc.) lacking confirmation or evidence

Adj. 1uncorroborated - unsupported by other evidence
unsubstantiated
unsupported - not sustained or maintained by nonmaterial aid; "unsupported accusations"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/uncorroborated

@ "Eyes4Lies" when you are arrested in the USA because of allegations made by the United Kingdom authorities, will you voluntarily give up your US Constitutional right to have any exaggerated allegations presented as prima facie evidence to be cross examined by your lawyers and thrown out in a US Court, before you are extradited and sent for trial in the United Kingdom ?

No ? Didn't think so.

The reverse is what the appalling Extradition Act 2003 inflicts on UK citizens or residents through the force of law.

Alan Johnson's inept, arrogant and rude performance in the Commons that day was summed up by John Gummer

Not only did the Home Secretary come to the debate unprepared; he came believing that hectoring and rudeness were suitable responses to what is a serious issue for many people around the country.

Your question is what is exaggerated. If the UK presented probable cause for something I did to the people or government of the United Kingdom, I would willingly accept what is going to happen anyway.

I read the entire debate and totally disagree with the hon John Gummer summary of the debate. The Home Secretary was well prepared for the debate and maintained appropriate control among excessively obtrusive opponents who did not want common sense explanations read into the record and constantly tried to interrupt the Home Secretary.

You read what happened to the NatWest3 and see the similarity between what you are claiming will happen to Gary and what they claimed would happen to them. The truth is always far from the exaggeration. But truth is not in your agenda or your interests...is it?

@ "Eyes4Lies" - you still do not appear to understand.

If the UK presented probable cause for something I did to the people or government of the United Kingdom, I would willingly accept what is going to happen anyway.

That means that the UK authorities have to present some actual evidence or witnesses, to a US court, where your lawyers can challenge it. It is obviously not the full weight of evidence as would be presented at a trial.

No such evidence whatsoever is now presented by the US authorities under the Extradition Act 2003, so there is no opportunity to even question the allegations about the alleged amount of financial damage in Gary's case.

All that the UK Extradition Hearings are allowed to consider are questions about the identity of the person who has been mistakenly arrested, if the alleged crimes might incur the death penalty and if the paperwork has been correctly filled in.
None of the High Court or House of Lords or Supreme Court or European Court of Human Rights appeals have been allowed to cross examine any of the facts of the case, only the wider general points of law.

I do not believe that you would simply hand yourself over to be extradited by a foreign government without first challenging their evidence and allegations.

Why would you betray US sovereignty to the political whims of incompetent, corrupt or hostile foreign legal systems ?

Why do you expect us in the United Kingdom to do so ?

@fg,

I do understand and more than you know. Your interpretation of "Probable Cause" is wrong. The probable burden only required documentation of the facts, no witnesses, no physical evidence need be presented. Only a swearing of the truth by a duly appointed officer of the court.

I do not appreciate you insinuation that the US legal system is hostile, corrupt or incompetent. I on the other hand have similar opinions of the UK courts that coddles criminals and maintains an embarrassingly poor conviction rate. If I was going to commit an international crime, I would definitely choose the UK. Talk about soft on crime. You guys must just accept that victims are to blame for what happens to them all the time.

The treaty is fair and equitable. Gary's case is a political pawn that will be sacrificed soon after the election.

In one week, I am sure you will realize this to be a fact.

The other notion that I got from the debate was that the opposition kept harping on the point that the Home Secretary needed to review the treaty to satisfy the "Layperson" who doesn't really understand the equity is not in the semantics of the treaty? The equity is in the interpretation of the legal definitions based on the individual legal system's requirements.

So does this mean he needs to satisfy those citizens who do not take the time to understand the meanings behind the legal definitions? Or, is he saying that the UK citizens are incapable of understanding? I wonder...

@ Eyes4Lies - the Probable Cause affidavits in the USA sworn by say, FBI investigating officers go online almost immediately, unless the case is sealed.That is a normal kind of prima facie evidence.

Your lawyers are allowed to challenge these before a Judge who can decide whether or not to give any weight to each of the often multiple alleged offences.

That is what used to happen in the UK under the previous Extradition Act 1989.

Under the the Extradition Act 2003 there is now no opportunity to do this.

Even if a higher appeal court does get to read any such sworn statements in private etc., they must ignore them in their Judgments, because as the Act is deliberately worded, they are not allowed to examine the alleged facts of the case, only the paperwork of the Extradition request, which they are meant to trust implicitly.

Similarly the former "appeals to the Home Secretary" have been deliberately abolished under the Extradition Act 2003.

The conviction rate under the Computer Misuse Act 1990 is extremely high, it is just that such cases are far, far less common than say, murders.

The same is true for prosecutions and convictions of US based computer hackers.

No US based computer hacker has ever been extradited to a foreign country, even though lots of them are attacking the United Kingdom and the rest of the world every day.

Unless the US government drops its extradition request, the case of Gary McKinnon will continue to grind on after the UK General Election, regardless of who wins.

There is no chance of any new or amended legislation regarding the Extradition Act 2003 before the Judicial Review hearing on 25th and 26th of May.

The disruption was cyber notes he left warning them that their security was virtually non existent in the hope that someone from the highest level would read them and do something about U.S security.
In the full cyber note often referred to, Gary McKinnon shows concern for U.S citizens and says it's not their faul their democracy is slowly being taken away and that he belived it was no accident there was a deliberate stand down by U.S security on 9/11.
Gary McKinnon points out in the cyber note, that the U.S airforce was responsible for U.S security >
"yet the U.S airforce did nothing to monitor the planes flying off course on 9/11 even though one of those planes flying off course was heading towards the Pentagon"
Shouldn't someone have asked the U.S airforce why this was? Did the Bush government order them to stand down?

Gary McKinnon was a whistleblower who despite leaving cyber notes trying to alert the aurhorities, it was a U.S university that had to alert the military to Gary's presence.

Several U.S universities told the U.S government that Gary McKinnon had not caused any damage to their systems and the prosecutors were forced to issue a superceding indictment removing the allegations of damage against the universities from the indictment.

The Crown Prosecution Service disclosure at a recent court hearing showed that the Crown Prosecution Service described the so called U.S evidence as No evidence and hearsay.

A professor of computing gave a statement to the court saying that the alleged financial damage was not for any actual damage other than for the basic firewalls and security that NASA and the military should have had installed that would have flagged up any intruders.

A colonel from the U.S military stated: Gary McKinnon's intrusion was not decisive to U.S security....

Odd how even Alan Johnson our Home Secretary publicly edit Gary's cyber notes to try and make his actions sound sinister when they know that searching for info on UFI's was what he was doing.

He was a whistleblower and no one would listen to his concerns that the U.S; the worlds superpower's computer security was virtually non existent.... "for years on end"

New Government on it's way in U.K that might actually be able to stand up to U.S

This treaty was supposedly for terrorists but being used against many vulnerable U.K citizens for non violent crimes.

The extradition Treaty is not fair at all and is one sided. U.K politicians could solve this immediately by saying "We Demand Probable Cause and Equality for U.K citizens starting from tomorrow".

Baroness Scotland the U.K attorney general said that America demands a higher burden of proof before the U.K can extradite an American and she makes no apology for that as the American constitution protects U.S citizens!
Well who protects British citizems? Not this Labour Government who appear to work on behalf of America and are afraid to stand up to them.

We might be friends with the U.S but we have very different attitudes from yours, although you by no means represent the many good and caring Americam people.
British citizens should be tried in the U.K unless they have murdered someone in the U.S or committed some henious crime and even then evidence/Probable cause should protect U.K citizens just as it protects American citizens from injustice.

America recently extradited 67 yr old cancer sufferer Ian Norris for obstruction of Justice for Price Fixing which was not even a crime in the U.K, Extradition for a crime that wasn't a crime.
America is now trying to extradite Liz Prosser and had her on bail for 12 years for bringing her own daughter to the U.K when her work permit ran out. Her then six year old daughter was then forcibly returned to the U.S and Liz Prosser lost her daughters childhood but this wasn't enough for the vindictive prosecutors, so 12 years later they want to extradite her.

Liz Prosser has been reunited with her daughter after her daughter traced her and plans to move and study in the U.K to be with her mother. Liz is now friends with her ex partner.
Yet this 60 year old woman who has Crohn's disease and is on chemotherapy is being extradited to the U.S. For Who? Who wants this? and how can anyone be kept on bail for 12 years?

Americas reputation is falling back into the gutter with these extraditions. The U.S authorities is being seen by British people as cruel and vindictive, you just never let go and your authorities bully and pursue some of the most vulnerable in our society.
Many good American people are appalled at what their prosecutors and government is doing, they thought an administration under Obama was going to be different.
Even Jane Smiley a U.S Pulitzer prize winner author is apalled at what the U.S authorities are doing to the likes of Gary McKinnon and others.

The American governments previous reputation as being cruel,vindictive
and bullying is surfacing once again and no wonder.

Shame on you to try and defend your barbaric position.

Shame on me for defending my views in this matter? Talk about barbaric.

To be so arrogant must take a lot of practice. It has been explained to you people time and time again that the United States definition of Probable Cause is equal to/synonymous with the United Kingdoms definition of Reasonable Suspicion. I truly don't understand why that is so hard for you to grasp. Is it more of the same arrogance that you believe every legal system in the world should adhere to the UK definitions? Totally Pompous and Stubborn Arrogance!

Your knowledge of this case stems from the half truths of this website and your own bias interpretation of the cherry picked facts that fit your perception of this case.

I have read the reports and I have seen the evidence. I know what Gary did and it was malicious in nature and disruptive in its affect. There is a Navy Base and an Army Base that suffered this disruption he claims was an accident...twice.

You can take away the 90 or so computers that he accessed which had no password or a poor password. But he must answer for the computers that he accessed with stolen passwords and disabled the operating systems. He know what he did and he knows what his intent was when he did it.

Computer evidence is clear and irrefutable. You can try to convoluted or discredit the proof, but it is still there for a jury to review and judge for themselves.

@ "Eyes4Lies" - You are at least as guilty as anyone else who has left comments here of "cherry picking" and of arrogance and pomposity.

I have read the reports and I have seen the evidence.

Why should anyone believe that you have somehow actually "seen the evidence" which may be presented in a Court ?

You are simply wrong in your false claim that

the United States definition of Probable Cause is equal to/synonymous with the United Kingdoms definition of Reasonable Suspicion

The fact that these are not identical was even admitted by the Labour Ministers during the several debates in Parliament where the Opposition parties failed to amend the Extradition Act 2003.

You are also repeating your imprecise and misleading weasel words "stolen passwords".
Anybody who knows how Microsoft NTLM hashed credentials are meant to work and how they are attacked in practice should know better. There is no legal concept of "ownership of Passwords", which is why the Computer Misuse Act 1990 etc. have specific offences for "unauthorised access" to computer systems.

imprecise and misleading weasel words "stolen passwords".

Oh, I am sorry, I should have said, he stole the SAM file containing the NT Hash of the passwords. He then cracked the NT hash so he could use those passwords to further his criminal acts. Whether they are considered "Stolen Passwords" or he "used" passwords without authorization all comes down to one issue that your supports ignore. Gary did gain unauthorized access to US Computers and caused intentional damage to the operating system with the intent to disable the computer; thus depriving the users of these computers their use until the systems are restored.

Since we are splitting hairs here, the only difference between Reasonable Suspicion and Probable Cause in both legal systems is that Reasonable Suspicion allows for acts that have not yet been committed. Probable Cause assumes the act was already committed. Since we know that Gary was arrested after the criminal act occurred it is obvious that he is being extradited with sufficient "Probable Cause" to make a reasonable person believe he committed these criminal offenses.

@ "Eyes4lies" - if you want to discuss a case involving computer technology and the law, you have to be very precise, especially given your unsubstantiated claims to have somehow "seen the evidence" and to have been writing a "thesis".

You cannot "steal" a SAM file either, you can only copy it and then only if you already have complete control of the computer.

There are other methods of obtaining Microsoft NT hashed credentials, but unless they involve possession of some physical media they are not "stealing" either.

The UK Theft Act 1968 section 1 defines theft or "stealing" as:

(1)A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it;

Probably all the equivalent US statutes dealing with pre-internet physical goods or money have similar definitions.

There would have been no need to pass, say, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to punish "reverse engineering" of commercial electronic media goods for sale (obviously not applicable in this case) if copying digital data could ever be prosecuted as "stealing" or theft.

Gary has not been accused of "stealing" anything whatsoever.

As has been mentioned on this blog many times in the past, the most difficult part of any computer crime prosecution is proving criminal intent, beyond reasonable doubt, but you

"Reasonable Suspicion" and "Probable Cause" are standards of how detailed any evidence needs to be. I would be happy if prima facie evidence according to either such standard had actually been presented before a UK Court, where it could have been cross examined.

This is what used to happen under the previous Extradition Act 1989.

However this has simply not happened because of the Extradition Act 2003, which was applied retrospectively to Gary's case
(he was arrested in 2002).

John | May 2, 2010 11:28 PM | Reply
The extradition Treaty is not fair at all and is one sided. U.K politicians could solve this immediately by saying "We Demand Probable Cause and Equality for U.K citizens starting from tomorrow".

Baroness Scotland the U.K attorney general said that America demands a higher burden of proof before the U.K can extradite an American and she makes no apology for that as the American constitution protects U.S citizens!
Well who protects British citizems? Not this Labour Government who appear to work on behalf of America and are afraid to stand up to them.

British citizens should be tried in the U.K unless they have murdered someone in the U.S or committed some henious crime and even then evidence/Probable cause should protect U.K citizens just as it protects American citizens from injustice.

America recently extradited 67 yr old cancer sufferer Ian Norris for obstruction of Justice for Price Fixing which was not even a crime in the U.K, Extradition for a crime that wasn't a crime.
America is now trying to extradite Liz Prosser and had her on bail for 12 years for bringing her own daughter to the U.K when her work permit ran out. Her then six year old daughter was then forcibly returned to the U.S and Liz Prosser lost her daughters childhood but this wasn't enough for the vindictive prosecutors, so 12 years later they want to extradite her.

Liz Prosser has been reunited with her daughter after her daughter traced her and plans to move and study in the U.K to be with her mother. Liz is now friends with her ex partner.
Yet this 60 year old woman who has Crohn's disease and is on chemotherapy is being extradited to the U.S. For Who? Who wants this? and how can anyone be kept on bail for 12 years?

Americas reputation is falling back into the gutter with these extraditions. The U.S authorities is being seen by British people as cruel and vindictive. The U.S just never knows when to let go and U.S authorities are bullying and pursuing some of the most vulnerable in British society.
Many good American people are appalled at what their prosecutors and government is doing, they thought an administration under Obama was going to be different.
Even Jane Smiley a U.S Pulitzer prize winner author is apalled at what the U.S authorities are doing to the likes of Gary McKinnon and others.

The American governments previous reputation as being cruel,vindictive and bullying is surfacing once again and no wonder.

Shame on them.

To eyes4lies and others whom seem to think Gary is guilty! firstly there is so much "secrecy" around the american Deep underground military bases (DUMB) that garys case is " laughable" to the extreme, it should never have been so accelerated into a pompmous governmental "farce", which one day may be made into a film! Particularly when truth comes out about the secret co-operation between US covert groups and Aliens in these DUMB! Lets not forget people like Phil-schneider and british Ufologist Anthony dodds. Phil a geologist whom helped build these underground-bases was "killed" for telling the truth about aliens underground! . Anthony dodds was threatened in los-angeles by Men-in-black (Alien-human-hybrids!) for talking upon an south-antarctica alien base! Read all on the NET! I also am a Ufologist whom has encountered over a number of years three-seperate alien-craft, two at twenty-ft away and one at eighty-ft away. I like gary shall do my utmost to expose the alien-cover-up, and there are many many like me, more so than the so called pros of hacking justice! Im PRO Gary and if he ends up deported there will be more than his "tiny" tribute to exposing the truth, brought into the open, an army on the NET will have something to say! There are im afraid a lot of humans whom dismiss UFOs/aliens because "they" are afraid of the Truth!

The provisions of the Magna Carta reveal, among other things, the famous chapter 39 from which habeas corpus, prohibition of torture, trial by jury, and the rule of law are derived:

Chapter 39: No free man shall be arrested or imprisoned or disseised or outlawed or exiled or any way victimized, neither will we attack him or send anyone to attack him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers [in other words] by the law of [from] the land. Chapter 40: To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay right or justice.

Trial by jury in all cases, our English ancestors deemed (as Story correctly tells us), "the great protection of their civil and political liberties, and watched with an unceasing jealousy and solicitude." "Nullus liber homo capiatur nec imprisonetur aut exulet, aut aliquo modo, destruator, etc.; nisi per legae judicium parium suorum, vel per legem terrea." Magna Carta [1225, 1297]

In response the Levellers fought for “the right, freedome, safety, and well-being of every particular man, woman, and child in England.” They argued that Parliament may not act against the fundamental law of the land as expressed in the Magna Carta. It became “the Englishman’s legall birthright and inheritance.” “Free-Born John” Lilburne based his arguments on the Magna Carta; he said “the liberty of the whole English nation” is in clause 39.

Gary McKinnon is facing extradition to the USA under the controversial Extradition Act 2003, without any prima facie evidence or charges brought against him in a UK court. Try him here in the UK, under UK law.

Write in support of Gary

If you feel strongly enough that Gary McKinnon should not be extradited to the USA, but should be tried here in Britain, then there are various people you can write to.

Firstly you can write to us here at info@freegary.org.uk. We will pass your messages of support on to Gary, and publicise this support to the media and to the politicians.

You can post anonymously here on this blog, but please be polite. Alternatively you can send us emails, but if you want a reply and the latest news, then you need to use a valid email address.

You can write to your Member of Parliament via WriteToThem

If your Member of Parliament has not already done so, then please ask them to sign

Early Day Motion 2388 sponsored by David Burrowes MP

(Previously, EDM 241 sponnsored by the then Conservative MP and now Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, also gathered a large number of MP's signatures opposed to the unfair Extradition Act 2003 and the Extradition Treaty with the USA).

You can also write to David Blunkett Charles Clarke John Reid Jacqui Smith Alan Johnson Theresa May who is now the 6th Home Secretary who has had the responsibility for Gary McKinnon's extradition case:

You can send an email public.enquiries@ homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk or a letter to:

Home Secretary
Rt Hon. Theresa May MP
c/o Direct Communications Unit
Home Office
2 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4DF

Home Office Contact Us page

Write to US President Barack Obama

WhiteHouse.gov - the official website of the President of the Umited States of America, Barack Obama.

"President Obama is committed to creating the most open and accessible administration in American history. To send questions, comments, concerns, or well-wishes to the President or his staff, please use the form below:"

Contact the White House web message form.

Please use this form to remind them just how counterproductive, and damaging to US national interests, especially to their supposedly changed international reputation, putting Gary McKinnon on trial in the USA would be.

Extradition Watch

Extradition_Watch_logo_150.gif

Extradition Watch campaign to reform the Extradition Act 2003 by Liberty Human Rights .

You can download a PDF Paper Aeroplane and then photograph it, in support of Gary McKinnon

Donation via PayPal

Click on the PayPal Donations button above, to make a secure credit card or direct debit or PayPal account financial contribution to help support this FreeGary.org.uk blog website.

Syndicate this site (XML):

Comments Policy

This blog operates a reasonably tolerant blog comments policy.

You are free to condemn Gary McKinnon's past stupidity, and to highlight the need for appropriate, proportionate criminal justice, all of which Gary accepts.

Please try to be polite (although you will not be banned simply for the odd expletive).

Do try to keep on topic

If you feel the need to publicise lots of URLs (especially without explanation), or lengthy articles, not directly related to Gary McKinnon's extradition case, then link to your own blog article, otherwise your comment will be filtered out as spam.

You would be very wise to read the small print of the Internet Acceptable Use Policy applied by your Internet Service Provider, company or educational institution etc. and refrain from threats or libel (including unsubstantiated allegations without any real evidence) or expressions of hatred etc. against Gary, his family or supporters, or even against groups people or organisations in the United States of America or the United Kingdom etc.

Recent Comments

  • Ann: The provisions of the Magna Carta reveal, among other things, read more
  • TRThompson: To eyes4lies and others whom seem to think Gary is read more
  • John: John | May 2, 2010 11:28 PM | Reply The read more
  • fg: @ "Eyes4lies" - if you want to discuss a case read more
  • Eyes4Lies: imprecise and misleading weasel words "stolen passwords". Oh, I am read more
  • fg: @ "Eyes4Lies" - You are at least as guilty as read more
  • Eyes4Lies: Shame on me for defending my views in this matter? read more
  • John: The extradition Treaty is not fair at all and is read more
  • John: The disruption was cyber notes he left warning them that read more
  • fg: @ Eyes4Lies - the Probable Cause affidavits in the USA read more
  • Eyes4Lies: The other notion that I got from the debate was read more
  • Eyes4Lies: @fg, I do understand and more than you know. Your read more
  • fg: @ "Eyes4Lies" - you still do not appear to understand. read more
  • Eyes4Lies: Your question is what is exaggerated. If the UK presented read more
  • fg: @ "Eyes4Lies" when you are arrested in the USA because read more

Photos of Gary

Gary_McKinnon_150_min.jpg

Gary_McKinnon_Bow_Street_Magistrates_24_Nov_2005_600.jpg Gary McKinnon outside Bow Street Magistrates' Court, London, 24th November 2005

Bow_Street_Magistrates_Gary_McKinnon_24_Nov_2005_600.jpg Gary McKinnon outside Bow Street Magistrates' Court, London, 24th November 2005

Gary_McKinnon_Janis_Sharp_15Jan2009_150min.jpg Gary McKinnon and his mother Janis Sharp at the Doughty Street Chambers press conference 15 January 2009

Gary McKinnon and his mother Janis Sharp at the Doughty Street Chambers press conference 15 January 2009 (click the image for a larger version in a new window)

gary-janis-mayday_150.jpg Gary McKinnon and his mother Janis Sharp at the May Day Bank Holioday 2010 balloon release event event near the Houses of Parliament

Gary McKinnon and his mother Janis Sharp at the May Day Bank Holiday 2010 balloon release event event near the Houses of Parliament (click the image for a larger version in a new window)

July 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

Free Gary website buttons

Either save this image and link to us, or copy the HTML code below into your web page or template:

Gary McKinnon is facing extradition to the USA under the controversial Extradition Act 2003, <strong>without any prima facie evidence</strong> or charges brought against him in a UK court. Try him here in the UK, under UK law.

Gary McKinnon is facing extradition to the USA under the controversial Extradition Act 2003, without any prima facie evidence or charges brought against him in a UK court. Try him here in the UK, under UK law.

Thanks to Putfile.com for hosting one of these links locally on their servers. The over half a million hits this site took in 24 hours when they were linking directly, is welcome publicity, but was costing us a lot of bandwidth !

About this blog

This blog website is intended to support British citizen Gary McKinnon, who is facing "fast track" extradition to the USA (after over five six seven eight nine ten years since his initial arrest !). Gary was indicted by a US court in November 2002, accused of "hacking" into over 90 US Military computer systems from here in the UK. The unjust treatment of British citizens (and others) when facing the might of the US Military "justice" system, which practices detention without trial in Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere, and stands accused of making use of torture by allied regimes ("extraordinary rendition") is an ongoing scandal. It cannot be excused even by a "war on terror". It seems only just that Gary should face any charges in a British court, and to serve any sentence, if he is found guilty, in a British prison. N.B. With the good news that Gary will not now be extradited to the USA, this blog will continue to raise awareness of the issues raised by Gary's case and others who have suffered unjustly through the UK's one sided extradition arrangements with the USA and to a lesser extent, Europe.

Email Contact

Please feel free to email us your views about this blog, or news about the issues it tries to comment on:

info@freegary.org.uk

Download our PGP Public Encryption Key, if you want to make use of it to send us anything confidential.

N.B. Gary McKinnon was "not allowed to use any computer connected to the internet", as part of his bail conditions.

Is anyone more likely to have any email accounts he dared to use, monitored by the UK and US authorities ?

If you are a tv or radio or print journalist, or a freelance writer or documentary film maker, wanting to interview Gary, please include some full contact details and a contact phone number, and we will pass on your request to Gary's family.

Gary McKinnon offers Search Engine Optimisation

Small_SEO_125.jpg

Gary McKinnon is now offering low cost Search Engine Optimisation services

SmallSEO.co.uk

@Gary_SmallSEO

Follow Gary's mother on Twitter

twitter_logo_125.jpg

Gary McKinnon's mother, Janis Sharp is indefatigable in support of her son, and is now using Twitter to help to keep friends and supporters informed. You can follow her "tweets" at:

https://twitter.com/JanisSharp/

https://tweetstorm4gary.wordpress.com/ #TweetsStorm's in support of Gary Mckinnon.

Media Links and Videos

Links to media interviews and video clips about Gary McKinnon's extradition case, featuring Gary, his mother Janis Sharpe and other supporters, can be found at:

http://www.londontv.net/latestnews.htm

Petitions in support of Gary McKinnon and others

Several people have expressed interest in "signing a petition" in support of Gary's plight.

N.B. the anti-road pricing / snooping petition on the Number 10 Downing Street website achieved 1,791,942 signatures, but this was rubbished and ignored by the Labour Government under Tony Blair, so do not expect too much of what will inevitably be much smaller petitions in support of Gary McKinnon.

This PledgeBank Pledge (not quite the same as a traditional petition), resulted in lots of people actua;lly taking the time and trouble to write to the then Home Secretary John Reid - so many that the Home Office stopped sending back indfividual replies.

http://www.pledgebank.com/FreeGary

This Pledge closed on 8th June 2006, and attracted 745 pledge signatures.


People have petitoned the Prime Minister (Tony Blair):

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/ GaryMcKinnon/

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Stop the extradition to the US of accused hacker Gary McKinnon.

This petition closed on 27 August 2007 with 876 Signatures.


There is a petition on a web petitons site, which is open for signature:

Stop the extradition of Gary McKinnon to the United States

We the undersigned urge Gordon Brown and the UK Government to consider the evidence and if appropriate prosecute Gary McKinnon, an Asperger Syndrome sufferer, in UK courts rather than allow him to be extradited to the US for offences relating to accessing US Government computers in 2001.


There is another current No 10 Downing Street website Petition to the Prime Minister (Gordon Brown):

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/US-extradition/

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Scrap the US/UK extradition treaty


Another Petiton (August 2009): Sign up 4 Gary McKinnon:

We, the undersigned, call on the Prime Minster Of the UK and Alan Johnson and the UK Government, for Gary to be tried in the UK- FREE GARY.

Petition to Stop the Gary McKinnon extradition to the United States (November 24th 2009)

We the undersigned urge Gordon Brown and the UK Government to consider the evidence and if appropriate prosecute Gary McKinnon, an Asperger Syndrome sufferer, in UK courts rather than allow him to be extradited to the US for offences relating to accessing US Government computers in 2001.

Blog Links

Spy Blog - Privacy and Civil Liberties commentary and campaigns

Rat's Blog - The Reverend Rat comments on London street life and technology

Dr. K's blog - Hacker, Author, Musician, Philosopher

Legal Links

Kaim Todner - solicitors

November 2002 Grand Jury Indictment (.pdf)

November 2002 Grand Jury Indictment with all the "censored" IP addresses revealed by "cut and paste".

Virginia Indictment - November 2002 Department of Justice press release

New Jersey Indictment - November 2002 Department of Justice press release

New Jersey indictment - full text

Military Commission Order No. 1 (.pdf) - signed by President George W. Bush, March 21st 2002.

Extradition Act 2003

Computer Misuse Act 1990

Read the Foreign & Commonwealth Office official online  and printed copies of the unbalanced USA - UK Extradition Treaty - it even uses American English words and spellings e.g "offenses" and "authorize" ! Extradition Treaty between the UK and the United States of America with Exchange of Notes Presented to Parliament: June 2007 (.pdf)

Statewatch's analysis of the civil rights defects in the UK-US Extradition treaty

Oral Evidence on UK-US Extradition Treaty given to the House of Commons Select Committee on Home Affairs on 22nd November 2005 given by Senior District Judge Tim Workman; Ms Sally Ireland, Senior Legal Officer, JUSTICE; Andy Burnham MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office

International Extradition Blog - by McNabb Associates a law firm that specialises in international extradition cases.

The Appeal Court Judgement issued on 3rd April 2007 is now online via the BAILII database

The House of Lords Judgment - 30th July 2008:

McKinnon (Appellant) v Government of the United States of America (Respondents) and another

Gary McKinnon's statement to the Director of Public Prosecutions, January 2009, published by Computer Weekly: US took 39 months to demand McKinnon's extradition.

McKinnon v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2009] EWHC 170 (Admin) (23 January 2009) - Oral Hearing which allowed a Judicial review on the Asperger's Syndrome aspects of the case, to be held some time after 16th March 2009

Computer Weekly have published Crown Prosecution Service Review Note 3, which explains some of the reasons why the CPS found insufficient evidence to prosecute Gary in the UK, including some inadmissable hearsay, and doubts that some of the alleged computer foresnic evidence was up to the ACPO guidlines for ensuring an untampered chain of evidence, and doubts about the unproven amount of alleged financial damage being claimed.

The British and Irish Legal Information Institute have published the text of the two combined Judicial Review Judgments made against Gary McKinnon which were handed down on Friday 31st July 2009:

Lord Justice Stanley Burnton and Mr. Justice Wilkie's refusal to allow Gary McKinnon's case to be certified to go up to the Supreme Court on appeal,handed down on Friday 9th October 2009.

McKinnon, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Home Affairs [2009] EWHC 2449 (Admin) (09 October 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/2449.html Cite as: [2009] EWHC 2449 (Admin)

Other Links

London 2600 - open monthly meeting which discusses IT Security and Technology etc., from both sides of the fence.

Egypt 2600 - just like London 2600, but in Egypt, also interested in the Gary McKinnon's case.

School of the Americas Watch - information on the notorious "School of the Americas" renamed to the "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation" in Fort Benning, Georgia.

The Disclosure Project serious research about possible UFOs

Wikipedia entry for Gary McKinnon - has links to several media interviews etc.

Scottish Human Rights website inspired by thinking about Gary McKinnon's case, and realising that similar things could so easily happen to you. The law in Scotland is somewhat different from the rest of the United Kingdom.

free_babar_ahmad.jpg
Free Babar Ahmad - another British (Muslim) IT worker, also facing extradition to the USA, also at risk of a Military Tribunal.

FriendsExtradited.org - campaign support for the Enron / NatWest 3 bankers - David Bermingham, Giles Darby and Gary Mulgrew facing extradition extradited to the USA for alleged crimes committed in the UK.

Stop the Extradition of Sean Garland - an Irish Republican politician arrested in Belfast, also facing extradition to the USA for alleged crimes committed in the UK or in Russia.

www.notoextradition.co.uk - petiton Labour MPs to support the amendments to the Extradition Act 2003 passed by the House of Lords to the Police and Justice Bill, when it comes before the House of Commons at Report Stage on the 9th and 10th of October 2006. About 50 Labour MPs are required, as all of the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and most of the other minor Opposition parties are committed to support these amendments.

Howes Family Extradition Fight - amother extraordinary extradition case to the USA.

Financial appeal to sue the UK Government - Ross Hemsworth, an online radio presenter of paranormal and UFO investigations, is trying to taise £5000 to initiate legal proceedings, with the help of top human rights law firm Bindmans LLP, against the Home Secretary, to "challenge the government's refusal to review the unjust and one-sided extradition treaty with the USA."

www.garymckinnon.tk - support website for Gary McKinnon by Ed Johnson.

Gary the musician

Gary McKinnon is, amongst other things, a musician and songwriter.

You can download a couple of his songs from the low budget film Lunar Girl which was produced in 2001.

The video from this film of Only Fool, still available on YouTube, was very popular on MySpace, until it got censored.

How not to research a thesis on Gary McKinnon

This blog tries to be helpful to journalists, documenatry film makers, book researchers etc. who are researching the background of the Gary McKinnon extradition story.

For those academic thesis supervisors using search engines or academic plagiarism detection tools, here is an example of how not to "research" a thesis or dissertation about the Gary McKinnon extradition case.

See the comments by "Eye4Lies" in the comments on starting at House of Lords Judgment against Gary McKinnon now online and again at European Court of Human Rights to hear Gary McKinnon's application against extradition to the USA on 28th August 2008