It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Alleged British Computer Hacker To Be Deported To U.S.

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Because unlike the UK the US has no extradition agreements with Russia. We do have extradition agreements with both the UK and the EU (which they are still a part of for the time being). Our extradition agreement with the UK is a separate agreement from the EU one. Secondly he is in Russia under asylum, which complicates matters.

Even if we had an extradition agreement with Russia the Russian government, like the UK government has done, can still block an extradition request.

Last I checked Russian extradition agreements are essentially non existent for their pwn citizens. Since Snowden is in Russia and under Russian government protection (asylum) I dont see them handing him over unless Snowden asks for it.

Also one of the core requirements on criminal extradition involves both countries having similar laws on the books excluding term of punishment.
edit on 17-9-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-9-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

The terms of punishment are an obvious issue all the same. Personally I imagine it would be better to find out how he managed to accomplish the hack rather than prosecute him to the full extent of the law and jail him for the next two decades. Not that he does not deserve to be punished or made to see the error of his ways, but let's face it in the U.S that punishment, mental health issues or otherwise nay be rather extreme.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 08:51 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

In terms of extradition the punishment is not a factor under the agreements. The only exception is extraditing when the death penalty is a possibility and even then if its removed as an option to extradition can move forward.

You are misunderstanding what im saying about the crimes and punishment. In the UK he could only be charged with hacking. He could not be charged with violations of the espionage act (US law). Just because a law allows for imprisonment up to say 30 years doesnt not mean that is what is given. Sentencing takes into account a lot of factors, mental capacity being one factor (actually even before a trial can begin it can be called into question). If he has no record of doing this I dont see a prison sentence.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

If no sentence will be forth coming then why waste the monies and resources prosecuting the fellow in the first place? Probably be better served employing the guy as a consultant and fixing the issue rather than waste money on prosecution if that's the case.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Xcathdra

If no sentence will be forth coming then why waste the monies and resources prosecuting the fellow in the first place? Probably be better served employing the guy as a consultant and fixing the issue rather than waste money on prosecution if that's the case.


Working as a consultant as terms of a plea deal is a possibility.

Why do it? Because he broke the law. There has to be consistency, especially in the felony realm of crimes. Its difficult to safeguard national security when you let people do their thing with no punishment. The DOJ is not responsible for ensuring agency networks are secure.

Also keep in mind in this area the agencies affected by the hack are not the ones dealing with the investigation / prosecution. That action falls under the Department of Justice and the ultimate say on prosecution resides with the Attorney General.
edit on 17-9-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 09:22 AM
link   
Here is some inf on the treaty. Considering US Law is based on English Common Law there are not many differences when it comes to evidence requirements, legalese requirements, reasonable suspicion and probable cause.

Wiki - UK–US extradition treaty of 2003


From January 2004 to the end of December 2011, 7 known US citizens were extradited from the US to the UK.[19] No US citizen was extradited for an alleged crime while the person was based in the US.[14] The U.S. embassy in London reports that, as of April 2013, 38 individuals have been extradited from the US to the UK.[20]


* - UK applies new simplified extradition procedures to USA and over a hundred other countries

* - ***PDF*** - House of Commons Home Affairs Committee The US-UK Extradition Treaty Twentieth Report of Session 2010–12 ***PDF***



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Still hope the wee guy gets any extradition to the US overturned, treaty or otherwise.

Just like Gary Mckinnon, "They" are after the wrong people.

I mean why help create ISIS and there like and then not chase them. Plenty of other real legitimate persons of interest to harass both foreign and domestic.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

Sounds like LOGIC to me,they don't really DO that.
OTHERWISE we might figure out how to stop them.



posted on Sep, 17 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Listen mate - you don't get it.

This person is not subject to US Law. I don't give a rat's bum how similar the laws are.

He is not subject to US Law.

Great Britain can certainly go after him for breaking UK Law. That is how it should be but once again ...

He is not subject to US Law!!!

Great Britain can have a trial and lock him up ... he is their citizen!

US can go and take a running jump!

P



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: pheonix358
This person is not subject to US Law. I don't give a rat's bum how similar the laws are.

He is not subject to US Law.


He broke into US systems, he's subject to US law as long as his host country is willing to turn him over.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 01:31 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

I do get it and he is subject to US law.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

So if I take a gun and randomly shoot people, only wounding them, the police should ignore my crime and go after real criminals, like those who shot and actually killed someone?



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 02:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Ok the UK cant hand down some draconian 60 year sentence.

But we can give 5 years or 10 if damage was done.

5 years is far better than walking free cause they got out of extradition.

Plus is charges of treason ect really in the publics intrest for some idiot kid or autistic person?

5 or 10 years seems appropriate in those cases.

I would leave the extradition and extreme penalties for the cyber terrorists or spys or people out to do real and malicious damage.


End of the day something is better than nothing.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 02:37 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

The UK government cannot prosecute a person under the US espionage act. That leaves them with the generic hacking charge. Just as a US prosecutor could not prosecute an American that violated the British Official secrets act by hacking the MoD from his bedroom in Tippecanoe Indiana.

He would have to be extradited to the UK for prosecution. Because both countries have similar laws on the book it meets extradition requirements.
edit on 18-9-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 04:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: alldaylong
Here we go again.

Another U.K. citizen who apparently has Asperger's Syndrome ( Garry McKinnon anyone ) is to be deported to The U.S. He is suspected of hacking into F.B.I., The U.S. Central Bank and The U.S. Missile Defence Agency computer systems.

Seems like it is to easy to hack into anything you wish in The U.S. Hadn't they learnt their lesson after McKinnon ?



dont they know about computer security? I wonder if they know what there supposed to do with it?



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

That would be attempted murder through. I really don't see the comparison to what this guy accomplished. He hacked into a system that should have been rather more robust and secure than it obviously is. As to his intent, who knows if it was even malicious by nature.

Curiosity should not be rewarded with extradition and possible long term prison sentences. Fair enough there are national security issues that come in to play regarding the guys actions, but lets face it, there is no national security really if some person can hack into the U.S. Missile Defense Agency systems with such ease.

Like i said, give the guy a job, he obviously understands the ins/outs and security holes in there system a hell of a lot better than "They" do.
edit on 18-9-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

In this case its not curiosity.. its a crime.

As for my gun comparison you made my point.

Yes its attempted murder however using the logic you laid out in your comparison - Because no one died the police should focus their efforts going after people who actual succeeded in murdering someone.

I am pretty certain had you been the one that someone shot at and didnt succeed in killing you, you would still want the police to investigate and the suspect be prosecuted. I would also imagine if you were told that because you werent killed the police have "more important" things to do than investigate your crime to find the person who tried to kill you you would be torqued off.

So the guy who shot at you and missed. If he is not prosecuted whats to prevent that person from engaging in the same behavior? When he does succeed in killing someone, say a relative of yours, I would again imagine you would be torqued off because the guy was not a threat because he never managed to kill anyone so the police never bothered to investigate and no one was prosecuted.

Had he been investigated and prosecuted your relative would still be alive.

See my point?



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I can see you point Xcathdra, but i can also see the point of not allowing extradition to a nation where the guy in question may not receive a fair trial and if found guilty also receive an exorbitant gaol sentence.

Personally i imagine he could be more of an asset than a threat given the correct incentive.

Look at it this way the real people who should be in gaol are the half arsed buffoons that are responsible for deploying a broken system that's supposed to protect the US. Not some poor sod with mental health issues that defeats there defense measures from his bedroom.

Its not like he was selling secrets to a hostile foreign nation, far as i can determine.

See my point?
edit on 18-9-2016 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I think part of the real point here is that most other countries, and their peoples, look at the U.S. as a prison nation with overly-exorbitant and ridiculously harsh sentencing requirements. In a nutshell, we look a the US as a country that treats it's citizens like dirt.

Very few people would willingly allow their own citizens to be sent to the US for trial when the punishment there is 10 times what the equivalent punishment would be in their own respective countries.



posted on Sep, 18 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Our legal system is based of the English system. I am perplexed at the not receiving a fair trial bit as he is entitled to the very same rights and remedies as a US citizen. As for punishment again just because a crime says a person can spend up to 60 years in prison does not mean thats what they will get if found guilty. Judges have the latitude to determine punishment... From incarceration to probation to working with the US etc.

So if the front and back door to your residence are broke and someone enters your house the blame lies with the owner and not the person who entered an area they dont own or belong in violation of the law?

It doesnt matter if he were selling it or not. Its not his system and the info contained does not belong to him.




top topics



 
12
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join