• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gary McKinnon's mother 'overwhelmed' as extradition blocked

Andalublue

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,359
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The perpetrator of what US authorities called, "biggest military computer hack of all time" has won his battle to avoid extradition to the US from the UK. The Home Secretary, Theresa May has changed the process by which the much-criticised 2004 extradition agreement between the two countries operates. Gary McKinnon's counsel argued that he could be tried in the UK and therefore should not be extradited.

US authorities have not yet commented on the decision but some commentators argue that the entire 2004 extradition agreement should be reviewed.

Any thoughts?

Original report
 
I don't know the details of the US-UK extradition treaty so I can't really give an opinion on the legality of the matter...but as a matter of principle I think the British government is right not to extradite him. Generally speaking, I'm more comfortable with people who commit cybercrimes being tried in their own country if at all possible. I don't like the idea of people being whisked away to a country they may not have ever even visited in order to be imprisoned.
 
Kandahar said:
I don't know the details of the US-UK extradition treaty so I can't really give an opinion on the legality of the matter...but as a matter of principle I think the British government is right not to extradite him. Generally speaking, I'm more comfortable with people who commit cybercrimes being tried in their own country if at all possible. I don't like the idea of people being whisked away to a country they may not have ever even visited in order to be imprisoned.
Click to expand...

That's a great point. I don't have a problem with it. Let the UK try him under their laws. If they weren't going to try him, that might be different. But why import criminals into the United States and automatically give them the protections our Constitution affords if we don't have to.
 
MaggieD said:
That's a great point. I don't have a problem with it. Let the UK try him under their laws. If they weren't going to try him, that might be different. But why import criminals into the United States and automatically give them the protections our Constitution affords if we don't have to.
Click to expand...

Frank Gaffney, Reagan's Under-Sec of Defense, was just on BBC Radio being outraged. He obviously doesn't have a lot of confidence in the British judicial system, but meh. I think the guy has spent a large part of the last 10 years under arrest and house arrest. He's a very ill bloke and I believe the high risk of suicide was given as being the main reason for the decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom