Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
Bah. Its just another US v. UK pissing match. If it was the other way around Im betting the Brits would want to prosecute.
Sacrificial lamb or criminal master mind?
- Thread starter Tez3
- Start date
OP
- Thread Starter
- #22
It is if thats what you want to turn it into. The anger here is directed towards our government not the US.
CoryKS
Senior Master
Prolly the bill for making changes to the system.
Here's what I want to know. So we've got British perps afraid of American jail...that's OK, but what in blazes do we have to do to get AMERICAN perps afraid of American jail? M aybe we'd have less crime overall if we could make that happen. LOL!
I don't quite get it either, and I'm in telecom. I'm wondering if it took $700,000 to close the security holes that he exposed. That's a realistic figure, but that doesn't exactly seem like "damage" to me.
EDIT: Oops, Cory beat me to it
OP
- Thread Starter
- #26
It's the TV programmes and films, Yours about prison are gritty and brutal...we have 'Porridge' and 'Prisoner, Cell Block H' ( I know thats Aussie but it was very popular here!)
Live True
Brown Belt
There seems to be an underlying belief that he will get unfair treatment in a US court of law. In my opinion, our system is no worse than the British system, and I think that assumption leads to all sorts of faulty reasoning. Should he be extradited, it will likely be a very public trial. We haven't resorted to stoning the last I checked, so let's put that issue off the table. It's not a matter of whether he'll get a fair trail.
It's also not a matter of whether he committed the crime, he's admitted to doing it.
So that leaves two big issues: his diagnosis and how serious the crime (let's just table all the political issues, both internally British and international for a bit).
His recent diagnosis of Aspergers, timed just after the European courts refused his plea, causes me some concern. I appreciate that it was provided by a notable expert, and I respect that diagnosis. However, by introducing that diagnosis, you add a wholly emotional aspect to the political brew and the actual legal question....which was certainly his legal team's point.
But, mentally and physically different individuals are tried daily, all over the world. While thier specific circumstances should be taken into account, they should not used as an excuse for thier actions nor as a reason to not prosecute. It should be taken into consideration in thier sentencing, etc. But this man has functioned quite sufficiently in society until now, and I think they are portraying his diagnosis to an emotional extreme that does not actually appear to apply to this particular man.
I don't agree with painting him as a victim because he has a diagnosis of Aspergers. To do so casts an unfavorable light on any who share this diagnosis, and that would be a shame and a disservice. Folks with any disease, disability, or other challenge have choices...at least to a point. His actions since his arrest show a smart and intelligent man, who has an awareness of his situations and what he has done. It also shows a man who is blithey proud of his accomplishments and afraid of jail (as anyone should be).
Everyone is dimissing his actions as embarrassing and harmless, and not terrorist actions. I think the timing of some of his actions (so close to 9/11), his anti-war slogans, and the fact that he has specifically targeted US military computers lends some credence to the concerns of terrorism.
Quite honestly, terrorism is very hard to define, but it usually involves violence or the threat of violence (intimidation, threats, etc.). Disabling computers responsible for Naval battle readiness - -even if temporary and especially in light that this took place immediately after 9/11 - - could certainly fall under the label of potential terrorist actions as they are threatening and potentionally harmful. Even if you believe the actions were unintentional that does not change the impact. His admission to leaving political diatribes also would certainly fall under the lable of potential terrorist actions as possible threats and intimidation linked to personal ideologies.
Now, do I think he was trying to bring down the US military? Personally, no I don't.
Do I think he was acting with malicious intent? I am not certain, but I do think his political diatribes and targets certainly point to a mischievious intent and not the completely innocent error he is trying to support.
There is certainly the appearance that his search blossomed into something more than he may have originally intended, and that would be in line with Aspergers. His stated intent to search for UFOs may have been his honest starting point, but leaving anti-war messages is not related to UFOs in any way that I can see. Again, he is more than capable of making choices. He made bad ones, and not all of those can or should be laid at the feet of his diagnosis.
As an attempt at balance of viewpoint..here are the US news reports from CNN, in date order:
11/2002
6/2005
8/2008
1/2009
2/2009
7/2009
I really would like to support him, as I feel for his fear and concern. He's gotten caught and admitted to a serious breach and offense. I also noted that the US news reports do not show the attractive portraits that are in the British news releases Tez shows. Public opinion is more likely to be swayed and influenced by someone who appears attractive and is shown with his family than a person who is squinting and looking disheveled and angry. It is what it is.
So, I feel for his worries and concerns, but what I'm reading shows a fairly savvy, faintly narcissitic, definatley obsessed individual. I think he should be tried publically in the US for the nature of his crimes. I think his mental considerations should be taken into account, but I do not feel they should be used to excuse his actions, as I don't believe he was fully unaware of his actions and consequences.
I feel for anyone who gets caught doing something stupid, but diagnosis or no...I do not think he is wholly as innocent or a victim as he claims.
It's also not a matter of whether he committed the crime, he's admitted to doing it.
So that leaves two big issues: his diagnosis and how serious the crime (let's just table all the political issues, both internally British and international for a bit).
His recent diagnosis of Aspergers, timed just after the European courts refused his plea, causes me some concern. I appreciate that it was provided by a notable expert, and I respect that diagnosis. However, by introducing that diagnosis, you add a wholly emotional aspect to the political brew and the actual legal question....which was certainly his legal team's point.
But, mentally and physically different individuals are tried daily, all over the world. While thier specific circumstances should be taken into account, they should not used as an excuse for thier actions nor as a reason to not prosecute. It should be taken into consideration in thier sentencing, etc. But this man has functioned quite sufficiently in society until now, and I think they are portraying his diagnosis to an emotional extreme that does not actually appear to apply to this particular man.
I don't agree with painting him as a victim because he has a diagnosis of Aspergers. To do so casts an unfavorable light on any who share this diagnosis, and that would be a shame and a disservice. Folks with any disease, disability, or other challenge have choices...at least to a point. His actions since his arrest show a smart and intelligent man, who has an awareness of his situations and what he has done. It also shows a man who is blithey proud of his accomplishments and afraid of jail (as anyone should be).
Everyone is dimissing his actions as embarrassing and harmless, and not terrorist actions. I think the timing of some of his actions (so close to 9/11), his anti-war slogans, and the fact that he has specifically targeted US military computers lends some credence to the concerns of terrorism.
Quite honestly, terrorism is very hard to define, but it usually involves violence or the threat of violence (intimidation, threats, etc.). Disabling computers responsible for Naval battle readiness - -even if temporary and especially in light that this took place immediately after 9/11 - - could certainly fall under the label of potential terrorist actions as they are threatening and potentionally harmful. Even if you believe the actions were unintentional that does not change the impact. His admission to leaving political diatribes also would certainly fall under the lable of potential terrorist actions as possible threats and intimidation linked to personal ideologies.
Now, do I think he was trying to bring down the US military? Personally, no I don't.
Do I think he was acting with malicious intent? I am not certain, but I do think his political diatribes and targets certainly point to a mischievious intent and not the completely innocent error he is trying to support.
There is certainly the appearance that his search blossomed into something more than he may have originally intended, and that would be in line with Aspergers. His stated intent to search for UFOs may have been his honest starting point, but leaving anti-war messages is not related to UFOs in any way that I can see. Again, he is more than capable of making choices. He made bad ones, and not all of those can or should be laid at the feet of his diagnosis.
As an attempt at balance of viewpoint..here are the US news reports from CNN, in date order:
11/2002
6/2005
8/2008
1/2009
2/2009
7/2009
I really would like to support him, as I feel for his fear and concern. He's gotten caught and admitted to a serious breach and offense. I also noted that the US news reports do not show the attractive portraits that are in the British news releases Tez shows. Public opinion is more likely to be swayed and influenced by someone who appears attractive and is shown with his family than a person who is squinting and looking disheveled and angry. It is what it is.
So, I feel for his worries and concerns, but what I'm reading shows a fairly savvy, faintly narcissitic, definatley obsessed individual. I think he should be tried publically in the US for the nature of his crimes. I think his mental considerations should be taken into account, but I do not feel they should be used to excuse his actions, as I don't believe he was fully unaware of his actions and consequences.
I feel for anyone who gets caught doing something stupid, but diagnosis or no...I do not think he is wholly as innocent or a victim as he claims.
Archangel M
Senior Master
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2007
- Messages
- 4,555
- Reaction score
- 154
Yeah..but the anger is over turning this guy over to us damn Americans....
Live True
Brown Belt
If I'm reading the 6/2005 CNN post, that damage estimate includes the cost of tracking and damages. So, I would imagine it includes the cost of fixing and bring the systems back up that crashed, tracking him down, repairing the files he deleted and copied, and changing security systems.
That is whoooooooolly a guess though, as I am not a computer guru.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #30
Is that how you read it then, most people here and I've seen it on the news, think that Gordon Brown is to blame for letting it happen. Whatever goes on here you have to bear in mind that the governments to blame for it, it's how things are here, we pay our government and they are supposed to sort things, that's their job, that and take the blame.
Besides he hasn't been turned over yet, there a judicial revue coming up which if people who read my other posts on British justice system explains nicely the steps we can take. He's been to the House of Lords they turned his appeal down then he went to the European Court of Human rights and again was turned down so if nothing else he's demonstrating nicely by previous points.
Of course his supporters are making the most of whatever they can, that's what his barristers etc are paid for and his mum bless her is a mum and wouldn't we all do that for our kids however guilty they may in something like this? They will be trying to show that he won't get a fair trial etc and his condtion precludes him from being able to leave the country.they will also play on the long sentence thing. I don't think Dr. Baron-Cohen has commented anything other than give the diagnosis, on whether going to America will make him suicidal or not. Still Dr Baron-Cohen's cousin does well in America though he upsets a lot of people lol!
I think one of the reasons the crimes are being dismissed is because many of us don't understand computers, when it says he left a message on a computer to me that doesn't seem very bad because it basically just sounds like one of those pop up thingies, annoying but not dangerous. We have IT people where I work who just come along and fix computers if there's anything wrong and it seems easy. Notice I said 'seems'! A lot of the time you phone up, say theres a problem and they fix it without leaving their office, I'm told they can take over the computer and do it that way but have no idea really. So his crimes seem petty to many of us dinosaurs. It may take a trial to show us the damage that's been done.
One thing for sure is that it's costing the British taxpayer a fortune, I'm guessing from things he's said he's on legal aid therefore we are paying for his side as well as the Crown side and barristers fees aren't cheap. I don't know how they'd pay for legal representation if he stands trial in America.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #31
Just Googled and found a fair few blogs, forums etc and they confirm what I thought that people think the government is being spineless in saying no to extradition. A couple of sites were funny though, one blames NASA for not coming out with the 'truth' before he had to hack into the computers and another was full of admiration that he did it all on dial up from his bedroom.
Amongst the allied nations, each others law should be upheld and supported by each other.
If I visit my cousins in Northern Ireland or Scotland and commit a crime, I should be punished under UK law. Period. If Im home when they realize what Ive done, they should ship me back to stand trail.
Maximum sentences in the States are higher then in the UK or here in Canada, but he will at least get a fair trail, unlike sending him to 100 other places. If he actually has a medical condition, that will come out in the trail. They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt he is guilty, (He should have shut up about it all, all those years ago), they will take any medical information into account at his trail.
If his crime was committed in 2002 and they want to extricate him under a 2003 law, thats wrong. He should be sent back based on the 2002 law.
We have issues up here with Canadians committing murder in the States, then when they are about to be executed all sorts of folks raise a stink. Well if you murder someone in Texas, you gotta pay the piper in Texas.
American deserters come up here and claim refugee status, after a few years of legal and political battles, eventually they get sent home. You signed a contract to be in the US military, knowing your country is at war, and you didnt know you would be told to fight?!! Youre too stupid to be here, get out.
If we stop supporting each others sovereignty they whole system gets ****ed up too much to run properly.
If I visit my cousins in Northern Ireland or Scotland and commit a crime, I should be punished under UK law. Period. If Im home when they realize what Ive done, they should ship me back to stand trail.
Maximum sentences in the States are higher then in the UK or here in Canada, but he will at least get a fair trail, unlike sending him to 100 other places. If he actually has a medical condition, that will come out in the trail. They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt he is guilty, (He should have shut up about it all, all those years ago), they will take any medical information into account at his trail.
If his crime was committed in 2002 and they want to extricate him under a 2003 law, thats wrong. He should be sent back based on the 2002 law.
We have issues up here with Canadians committing murder in the States, then when they are about to be executed all sorts of folks raise a stink. Well if you murder someone in Texas, you gotta pay the piper in Texas.
American deserters come up here and claim refugee status, after a few years of legal and political battles, eventually they get sent home. You signed a contract to be in the US military, knowing your country is at war, and you didnt know you would be told to fight?!! Youre too stupid to be here, get out.
If we stop supporting each others sovereignty they whole system gets ****ed up too much to run properly.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #33
I think this is the nub of the legal argument to be honest rather than whether he's fit to stand trial etc, it's certainly the bit that bothers me rather than anything else. However the Appeal courts didn't seem to think theres a problem.
If you commit a crime in Northern Ireland or Scotland it won't be UK law you stand trial under, it will be the laws from those countries. Scottish law in particular has pecularities not found anywhere else. If you go to trial in Scotland there's three possible verdicts, guilty, not guilty and not proven. The last means they think you did it but the prosecution haven't put forward enough evidence, means you get off but with suspicion hanging over you for the rest of your life.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #35
I don't know that law but suspect that many things were added to the list of offences that were extraditiable after 9/11 which wouldn't have been thought of as 'terrorist' related before that date. I suspect it wasn't an extraditable offence being 'computer' crime but the new act made it a terrorist one. I thik too thats where the defence is getting the 60 years imprisonment thing from, that he's not being tried for hacking but on terrorism charges. I don't think, though I may be wrong, that the US hasn't laid the exact charges against him yet so people are thinking he's being done as a terrorist hence the campaign too.
