Give us back McKinnon says Brit government

So, according to Harridan, since everything happened in America, "that is the appropriate place to put him on trial"?

By that argument, since everything happened to the military, it would seem appropriate to try him before a court-martial, no?

And if they sentence him to be shot at dawn as a spy or traitor (or both), will this sentence be carried out if he is returned to the UK?

I mean, its so important to make an example of these people, isnt it?

The guy has been living in a sh*tstorm of fear for the past 7 years. Potentially both countries have spent millions in fees/costs and been made to look stupid in the process.

Cant we just drop it now? I think he's probably learnt his lesson but it appears the authorities havent.

I thought it was the duty of the government to stand up for the rights of its citizens not pander to the 'special relationship' perpetuated by the foreign diplomats...

This is just plain wrong; it smells wrong; it looks wrong and it reads wrong. Fix it and get on with trying to sort out the rest of the mess the world is in.

In any civilized country your extradict your citizens.

If you piss off America and are stupid enough to go there on holiday then yes... you'll have a welcoming party at the airport with cufs.

But if any country just gives there citizens away, what is then the difference between goverment and a slavemaster?

At the very least the UK should garantee his return after the trail just to save they're own international reputation that slowly begin detroyed because of this.

UK != US

Have you ever seen somebody lick the chutney spoon in an Indian Restaurant and put it back? This would never have happened under the Tories.

Cyberman, I suggest you review the history of the special relationship and see if you can differentiate between Labour & Tory governments.

If you check through the past 70 years or so the special relationship with the USA has mainly consisted of this -

The UK needs help or has something of value the USA wants/doesnt have. The UK then has to bend over and take it hard under the guise of Uncle Sam telling us its for our own good and that we should be grateful.

The sooner we start to move away from the US and start working with our euro allies the better. By all means be friendly and cordial but stop the special relationship, its nothing more than wife-beating.

A UK citizen who commits a crime on UK soil is tried in the UK.
This whole thing has been a huge farce, and just shows how far up the US backside our government is.

Time to get you're F**ing nose out of there, and start looking after the people who (supposedly) vote for you (Gordon Brown...) and who pay your taxes.

If you fine with saying that because he was in the UK he should be tried in the UK then the same should apply to any internet activities?

You do the crime, you do the time. Time to move on.

It is amusing to see so many people with no knowledge of the law clucking like hens over an extradition. Let the wigged (or wigless in America) ones handle it.

I'd guess he'd more likely get 5 year or less.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_convicted_computer_criminals

Especially if he pleaded guilty and cooperated. The way he's going about it now, maybe they will try to screw him.

Well he admited doing it as soon as he was arrested, but its hardly cooperating is it.

Hopefully McKinnon will spend the next 25 or more years in a prison in the U.S., for his crimes and arrogance.

@ED6 - The lesser half of the crime occured in the U.K. (sending unauthorized commands to a computer system resulting in damage) and the greater half of the crime (breach of security and destruction of files) occured in the U.S., the theory is similar to him sending a bomb to someone in the U.S. which kills the recipient, in the U.K. the crime would be 'sending a bomb' and in the U.S. the crime would be 'murder'. The jurisdiction of such cross-border crimes in not solely determined by where the criminal was when he initiated the criminal act, it is also determined by where the victim of the crime was and where the actual damage occured. That said I imagine McKinnon will be sentenced to less than 5 years and will be allowed to serve the time in the U.K.

If Neville Chamberlain had stood up to those Nazis, none of this would have ever happened.

whose wife shall he be in heaven, anyways?

If you get him back, then I'm going to immediately go outside and start looking for flying swine. Seriously, you should not have given him up, the law be damned.

The US government wants to make an example of him. If the US government wanted to make an example of me, i would be trying to leave the country(I'm an American) as quickly as possible.

We haven't been the land of the free in a VERY long time. Trying googling the definition of a peon.

The bleeding hearts need to pull their heads outta their arses. Gary hacked, got caught and now he's going to prison. End of story. Get over it. All criminals belong in prison.

jason, "The sooner we start to move away from the US and start working with our euro allies the better. By all means be friendly and cordial but stop the special relationship, its nothing more than wife-beating."

LOL

"euro allies" - that'll be the Krauts and the Frogs, oh and let's not forget the Italians.

You must be a Kraut in disguise!

Gary be gone to prison. Hack and spend your life in prison where you belong. Every inmate will tell you how they have been wronged. Buy a clue.

I wonder what the US Govts' reaction would be if a US citizen had hacked British Intelligence servers etc. and the UK wanted that person extradited to stand trial in the UK?

Anyone hazard a guess?

@Al U.K. extradition treaties exist to protect the interests of the U.K. and its citizens. The U.K. does not want to be preyed upon by international criminals without recourse (i.e. without the ability to take them into custody if they have harmed U.K. citizens while the U.K. citizens were on U.K. soil). In order to protect its citizens from being preyed on indiscriminately by cross border criminals the U.K. has entered into treaties which give foreign countries access to international criminals or fugitives residing in the U.K.. McKinnon's crime occured in two locations, at the source where illegal remote commands were sent and at the destination where the illegal commands took effect and resulted in damage. The U.K. does not want to set a precedent that it believes computer crime is only subject to the laws of wherever the criminal currently is or issued the commands from (otherwise an international computer criminal could steal U.K. citizens money and identities, etc. and the U.K. would have to just sit back and tell its citizens or businesses 'no laws were broken, so no investigation or arrest... so sorry'). It is obvious extradition treaties covering computer crime are in the U.K.'s best interest.

Anyone with a clue would want all hackers prosecuted be they in the U.K., U.S. or anywhere else in the world. If you thinking hacking is OK, maybe we can get Gary and his friends to hack your bank account or credit card number?

It is amusing to see so many people with no knowledge of the law clucking like hens over an extradition. Let the wigged (or wigless in America) ones handle it.

Its amusing to see many people with no knowledge of the legal system assuming that McKinnon is going to get a fair trail. You don't understand how our system works so don't hand over your citizens unless you've negotiated -- from a position of strength. At the very least the charges should have been negotiated down to a misdemenor and the maximum penalty pegged. Instead they just screw him over, throw him to career prosecutors who've got a vested interest in maximizing the hype.

Wait till its your turn.....

If you can't do the time then don't do the crime. Whining after you've admitted hacking and then fighting extradition is a good means to get a harsher punishment for your crime. They should give Gary a fair trial and then send him to prison for 50 years.

Some of you who are commenting have some really screwed up morals.

You would quite happily send a hacker - who didn't hack your bank details etc - to prison for 50+ years, but at the same time it's people like you, who would give a peadophile three years in the clink... then let him out after a year for good behaviour, to go and ruin more peoples lives.

Sadists, the lot of you.

McKinnon's crimes were minor but they were not misdemeanors. He will obviously not get 50+ years, it amazes me why people believe that when people rarely serve more than 5 years, in the U.S., for computer crime. There are second degree murderers that get less than 25 years so I think people that really believe he will receive 50+ years are either paranoid or are just saying that for the shock value.

You lot make me laugh,you want ONE individual locked up period for a little hacking into a gov't computer network,yet, in this country YOUR slimy sleazeball Prime Minister,at a cost of £Billions,decides that his(not ours)gov't, can hack into our phone calls,emails & every single bank transaction,journey abroad, & anything else it deems fit to snoop into,...are you for REAL???

Absolutely, he can be convicted in the US, incarcerated in Scotland and he will undoubtedly serve his whole prison term as promised. Honest; you can trust us...