NASA hacker appeals to House of Lords to overturn extradition

I have no problem with this person being tried, and if found guilty, punished. What I do have a problem with is the US seeking a sentence of 60 years.

Most states have less harsh sentences for second degree murder. This means that a person in a fit of anger shoots another, and gets 30 years. Yet someone in a fit of curiosity invades a computer, and gets twice that.

This is a clear case of the elite attitude of governement. There was a time in Merry Old England when a nobleman could kill a commoner for eating a wild deer from the king's forest. Yet, a commoner couldn't bring charges of rape against a nobleman, on the grounds that a nobleman would never desire a commoner's wife or daughter.

Again, the idea of punishment is fine. The idea that what this man did in any way justifies even seeking a 60 year penalty is tacit admission that the "nobles" of our fair land are elitists with no concern for anything to do with justice, and everything to do with power.

reply to post by Shadow_Lord

The Supreme Court held in Katz v. United States (1967), that the monitoring and recording of private conversations constitutes a "search" for Fourth Amendment purposes, and therefore the government must obtain a warrant before domestic wiretapping can be engaged in.

As US citizens....we are supposed to be protected from exactly this. I could show you the vague wording used to get around this if you like:

"[Be it resolved] [t]hat the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons."

However, there is a precedent on wiretapping foreigners:

The law recognizes a distinction, however, between domestic surveillance taking place within U.S. borders and foreign surveillance of non-U.S. persons either in the U.S. or abroad.[68] In United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that the Constitution does not extend protection to non-U.S. persons located outside of the United States, so no warrant would be required to engage in even physical searches of non-U.S. citizens abroad.

See my point??
As a guy trying to find UFO's he found out he was a terrorist. Sorry, I get sick every time I see the word terrrist.

[edit on 18-6-2008 by Grafilthy]

reply to post by Grafilthy


Right, I was just making the point that it is not against the law for the government to wiretap without a warrant (depending on the situation)..and comparing that to hacking into military computers.

The concept of what the government is trying to do with the wiretaps is a good idea. (how it does in reality...ok maybe a different story there) Compared to breaking into government computers for the reason the hacker gave? Huge difference in the law. That was my main point.

reply to post by IMAdamnALIEN


If a person breaks into an office, vandalizes cabinets while breaking into them, and steals private secret files, then he should be freed because he says he was looking for evidence of UFO's?

So any crime if forgivable because you're looking for UFO info?

Because that's what you are saying...



As for the 60 yr sentence, that's just the prosecution playing hardass to act as a deterrent. He won't get even half that.

So does anyone know the answer to my earlier question? Is that the guy this thread is talking about? OR is it someone else who has hacked into NASA?

-ChriS

reply to post by Shadow_Lord


Sorry....I got a "up in arms" about that one. It's just that the more I put the pieces together, the more sure I am that they need to be prosecuted.

How can one person be "exempt" from laws if another is looking at 60 years for a comparable offense?

I worked for an internet security company and most of the "security" experts were hackers who got caught and now have six figure jobs, most hackers would most likely get 5-10 with probation or something to that degree if not just a a slap on the wrist. The fact they not only trying to extradite him but give him 60 years is highly suspicious, hacking into pentagon yes, maybe. Hacking into lame NASA, no way. It would be totally retarded to destroy any pc you are hacking into, the whole point is to sneak in and be able to come back whenever. Don't believe everything the PTB , MSM says, use your common sense and intuition. God Bless.

Originally posted by IMAdamnALIEN
reply to post by Desert Dawg

 

WOW man!

I cannot believe you even asked that question!

The subject matter has EVERYTHING to do with his innocence!

Proof of UFOs/Aliens would change the world!

Proof that US governments are hiding this fact from world is punishable by death in my book!

Are you listening to yourself?

Subject matter has nothing to do with it.

He hacked into a supposedly secure data base and that's all there is to it.

It's ok to break the law as long as I share the information?

I don't think so.


While I agree that 60 years is pretty extreme, I don't have much sympathy for lawbreakers.
It's not a game we're playing here.

Lawyers acting on behalf of the US government allegedly said that if McKinnon did not agree to co-operate with them, they would push for the highest possible penalties and that he would be "turned over to New Jersey authorities to see him fry". And, the defence further alleged, the US said if McKinnon did not agree to a deal there would be no chance of him serving his sentence in the UK near his family.

Link.

I hope he got something. Something good.

reply to post by BlasteR


Hey Blaster - Yes, it is indeed the same guy. I have been following this since he got caught, in 2002. He did not, as far as was reported at the time of his arrest under the U.K.'s Criminal Mischief act, download, upload or in any way maliciuosly interfere with the NASA data or databases. Hence, him only getting 2 years of community service as a punishment in the UK.

The ufo-community wondered why he did not save or retrieve any of this sensational data, his reason was that he was on a dial-up.

As to the patriotic (?) outrage that is flaming around here, it puzzles me. He walked into 'open doors' i.e windows pc's with no admin password protection, which is frankly far more alarming to me. In my opinon the 'off with his head' attitude should be directed at those who were so flagrantly irresponsible.

I am going to try to post a quote from wikipedia in my next posting with link (I'm new and unsure how to do these things, if anyone wants to u2u me with guidance as to how to do that it would be much appreciated.)

Nasa is a civilian agency.....they should not have anything that is a matter of national security anyways. What is the real issue here?

Is it WHAT he did???

Or WHO he did it to?

I think he made NASA look bad and they are making an example out of him.
I mean 60 years.....When NASA is completely transparent in what they are spending MY money on, right?

I give him my permission to look at whatever I part I paid for.

I have been following this man since he was arrested.

This man deserves a medal, I believe that his so called 'bungled' hack attack discovered much more than what he says, however, the interesting thing he says is the fact that he came across 'non terrestrial officers' I firmly believe that these are ebes. Also he came across names of non terrestrial craft, I believe again that these are the crafts that are going back and forwards to other 'worlds' on a regular basis.

Admittedly to entertain the notion of ebe's in our military is a little off the wall but what if.........Gary mckinnon in my book is a man that should be honoured as a true hero in ufology.

[edit on 18-6-2008 by franspeakfree]

From wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...

McKinnon was originally tracked down and arrested under the Computer Misuse Act by the UK National Hi-Tech Crime Unit (NHTCU) in 2002 who informed him that he would face community service. The Crown Prosecution Service refused to charge him. Later that year he was indicted by the United States government. McKinnon remained at liberty without restriction for three years until June 2005 (after the UK had implemented a new extradition treaty with the US) when he became subject to bail conditions including a requirement to sign in at his local police station every evening, and to remain at his home address at night. In addition he was banned from using a computer with access to the Internet. There have been no more developments in respect of the charges relating to United Kingdom legislation but in late 2005 the United States began extradition proceedings.

Also from Grafilthy's link on ZDNet, please note: news.zdnet.co.uk...

Under the terms of the controversial Extradition Treaty 2003, the US government has not been required to show any evidence, either of McKinnon's hacking or the alleged damage caused, to secure his extradition. The Extradition Treaty is not reciprocal, as it has not been ratified by the US government.

Also, I sincerely reccomend that everyone watches the YouTube interview posted by Blaster. You get a very complete view of the man and the situation.

MacKinnon pointed how easy it was to enter the USA computer systems. Is it 'hacking' when someone leaves the back door open? Ridiculous! He was even on a 56K dial-up for heaven's sakes.

I have no sympathy with the States over this. If they wanted to deal with genuine hacking, then they should be going after the Communist Chinese government and its HackAttack protocol. (But then the ChiComs own most of the power elite in the USA...)

[edit on 18/6/08 by Pellevoisin]

Originally posted by Desert Dawg

Originally posted by IMAdamnALIEN
reply to post by Desert Dawg

 

WOW man!

I cannot believe you even asked that question!

The subject matter has EVERYTHING to do with his innocence!

Proof of UFOs/Aliens would change the world!

Proof that US governments are hiding this fact from world is punishable by death in my book!

Are you listening to yourself?

Subject matter has nothing to do with it.

He hacked into a supposedly secure data base and that's all there is to it.

It's ok to break the law as long as I share the information?

I don't think so.


While I agree that 60 years is pretty extreme, I don't have much sympathy for lawbreakers.
It's not a game we're playing here.

I agree with DD completely. The subject matter has nothing to do with it. And it's not like he hacked into a corporation's private server holding credit card numbers and customer information. There's a very good chance the Department of Defense computers hold information that we wouldn't want our enemies getting a hold of.

How can you be sure this guy's intentions don't stop at looking info on ETs? What if a crime organization wanted to know the locations of people on a federal witness protection program? How can you be sure this guy isn't corrupt?

He does need to be treated as a terrorist because of where he hack in to, but like jsobecky pointed out the prosecutors are most likely trying to make an example of him by playing hard ball. They would probably make a deal for half that time in exchange for a guilty plea.

Originally posted by Pellevoisin
MacKinnon pointed how easy it was to enter the USA computer systems. Is it 'hacking' when someone leaves the back door open? Ridiculous!
[edit on 18/6/08 by Pellevoisin]

Would it still be considered a home invasion if I left the back door to my house open and you came in and started looking through my kitchen for stuff?

Pretty sure the answer is yes.

reply to post by sos37


No, that would be trespassing.

He didn't take anything as far as I read.

Can people stop saying he deserves to be punished, he has no problem being tried in the UK, he admits that what he did was wrong. What he doesn't want, is to be taken from his home country, put in a foreign prison for the next 60 years of his life.

They have claimed he has done upward (if I remember rightly) of $500k worth of damage, Gary claims that he , in no way, damaged any computers, he even stayed and chatted to an admin that caught him on there!!

IMO, the issue is what he found, 'non-terrestrial' officers and fleets, he cross checked this with, im assuming, other database and found no matching results.

For me, the fact that they are trying to sentence him to 60 years, aswell as £500k worth of damage (don't have to provide evidence?!?) AND extradite him to America as a terrorist says to me he found something that they don't want to be found.

Thanks. EMM

[edit on 18-6-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]

reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers


Agreed...He did get punished by the UK authorities for what he did. Since that is where the crime was committed, I think that is a reasonable way to close this case.

Originally posted by Grafilthy
reply to post by sos37

 

No, that would be trespassing.

He didn't take anything as far as I read.

Oh I see. So basically a trespasser is someone in my house who has no authorization to be there. That sounds an awful lot like hacking doesn't it?