Fwd: The US authorities are so desperate to extradite my son that they have changed the law. Now he faces 60 years in jail

[n3td3v <xploitable () gmail com>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: newsgroup <newsgroupnewsgroup () googlemail com>
Date: Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Subject: The US authorities are so desperate to extradite my son that
they have changed the law. Now he faces 60 years in jail
To: n3td3v () googlegroups com



Any day now, my son, Gary McKinnon, could face extradition from
Britain to the United States, where he would stand trial for hacking
into US government computers and could face a sentence of up to 60
years.

Gary has recently been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, which is
why I and his family and his many friends and supporters around the
world are arguing that he should be allowed to stay in the UK and face
the courts in the country where the offence – if offence there was –
was committed.

The US authorities waited two years to call for Gary's arrest because
of a then-unratified, unsigned extradition treaty between the two
countries, which would make it easier for them to have a British
citizen sent for trial in the US. Yet, when he was first arrested in
London, six years ago now, Gary was told he would probably get a
sentence of community service for his hacking activities.

He naively admitted computer misuse before he had engaged a lawyer and
without a lawyer even being present. We were still unaware at that
time that he had Asperger's syndrome.

Gary gained no leniency for his honesty and on the contrary, his
extradition has been relentlessly pursued by the British and American
authorities, despite the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) declining to
prosecute him in Britain. This attitude will hardly encourage British
citizens to come clean regarding any crimes they may have committed.
If no leniency or consideration is given when a person accused of a
crime immediately and openly tells the truth, there is little point in
them admitting to anything.

The CPS's decision not to prosecute Gary here was clearly made to
allow the Americans to arrest him two-and-a-half years later, once the
one-sided extradition treaty was introduced and then made
retrospective.

In addition, in order to indict Gary, the US authorities had to claim
a specific amount of financial damage. Gary has always denied causing
damage and without proof of such, the US could not prosecute him. Just
a month ago the US prosecutors stated in an interview that once Gary
was extradited, the most difficult thing to prove would be the damage!

Several weeks ago the goalposts were moved yet again when the US
introduced a new law whereby no proof of damage was required where
military computers were concerned. For the American law to then have
been conveniently changed at such a crucial time does little to give
us any faith in such a legal system.

There is a London demonstration outside the US embassy, scheduled for
4pm on September 28 in Grosvenor Square. See the campaign website for
more details.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/22/hacking.usa

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/