I'm really surprised that the European Court of Human Rights haven't stepped in and overturned the HO's decision.
I guess that would be because his human rights aren't being violated.
I'm really surprised that the European Court of Human Rights haven't stepped in and overturned the HO's decision.
the US are using Anti terror laws to get him extrodited (I can't spell)
So if an American/Russian/Iranian/Chinese(ian)/bulgarian hacked uk military systems you'd be fine with the yanks trying him not us?
So if an American/Russian/Iranian/Chinese(ian)/bulgarian hacked uk military systems you'd be fine with the yanks trying him not us?
he apparantly was looking for technology that the US processed and were holding back that could help the 3rd world countries. he also said he found what he was looking for but was unable to save any of the information due to the way he was connecting to their systems.
MW
he apparantly was looking for technology that the US processed and were holding back that could help the 3rd world countries. he also said he found what he was looking for but was unable to save any of the information due to the way he was connecting to their systems.
MW
Secondly the US are using Anti terror laws to get him extrodited (I can't spell) which is completely out of line.
Good question. Probably not I would say, double standards.
You have to take it into context though, he had no malicious intent, misguided, yes. 70 years? No.
I'm thinking, but there is no way I can think of accessing any system without being able to save any of the information![]()
he apparantly was looking for technology that the US processed and were holding back that could help the 3rd world countries. he also said he found what he was looking for but was unable to save any of the information due to the way he was connecting to their systems.
MW
apparently their not. and as the servers/system he hacked where in America it could be argued he committed the crime in American territory.
But/and disregarding justice as it has historically been disregarded, it is currently of more political gain for the UK to deport him.
He knew he was doing wrong and his target was in the USA so rightly so he should be tried there,he turned down the offer of 3 - 4 years so if he does end up getting 70 years once again he only has himself to blame.
True surely anything he found was in his RAM and perfectly capable to be copied, even the lowliest pirates have used this fact to beat what is frankly amazing copy protection.
He didnt turn down the offer, he asked for it to be put in writing, which they wouldnt do.
Well it's what I heard and read a whille back, I'm happy to be proved wrong. I know he wasn't being charged with anything terrorism related just that the laws that they where extroditing with, where introduced to tackle terrorism. That was the arguement I heard from him any how.
Still it makes no difference to me, the crime was not committed on US soil. They can argue until the cows come home, but no way would a jury (with some knowledge of IT) believe any argumenets to say that this crime was committed in the US, it's a silly arguement.
I was following a rather more simple doctrine. If he could *see* that he'd found what he was looking for then he could have used his "Print Screen" buttonBut your point is certainly valid