Results 1 to 25 of 165

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Days Work Done! Norton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:00 AM
    Location
    Roiet
    Posts
    35,395
    Quote Originally Posted by bkkandrew
    Then you would be tried in the jurisdiction of where you committed the robbery. Why you are trying to compare the two examples is, however, odd.
    That would be in the US. Had he hacked into a computer in the UK he would be tried in the UK. The UK has no jurisdiction to try him. The UK has agreements with many countries including the US to arrest and detain hackers. Had it been someone in the US hacking into the Ministry of Defense computers, the US would be obligated to send the hacker to the UK for prosecution under UK law.

    This case has been going on for 5 or 6 years. When he was first arrested and confessed he did indeed hack the computer systems, the US offered a plea bargain where he would do 6 to 12 months in a minimum security prison and would be eligible for parole in 6 months. He turned it down and went for the appeal thinking he would get off scott free. He should have taken the plea bargain. He would have been home many years now. He over played his hand.

    His reasons for hacking into the systems is irrelevant. He did, he admits it and now he has to do the time

    All this rhetoric about Gitmo, his fear of having to go to the US, his inability to get work and his affliction are all aimed at garnering sympathy as is evident in the "Guardian" piece and many of the comments in this thread.
    Last edited by Norton; 28-08-2008 at 10:57 PM.
    "Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect,"

  2. #2
    bkkandrew
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Norton View Post
    That would be in the US. Had he hacked into a computer in the UK he would be tried in the UK. The UK has no jurisdiction to try him. The UK has agreements with many countries including the US to arrest and detain hackers. Had it been someone in the US hacking into the Ministry of Defense computers, the US would be obligated to send the hacker to the UK for prosecution under UK law.
    But you miss the point. At the time of the alleged offence, the defendant was in the UK. If he hacked into the computers he is said to have, he would have contravened the Computer Misuse Act 1990. A summary of the act is below:

    Computer Misuse Act 1990

    The Computer Misuse Act 1990 creates a number of criminal offences:
    1. Unauthorised access to computer material ('hacking') including the illicit copying of software held in any computer. This carries a penalty of up to six months imprisonment or up to a £5000 fine.

    2. Unauthorised access with intent to commit or facilitate commission of further offences, which covers more serious cases of hacking, with a penalty of up to five years imprisonment and an unlimited fine.

    3. Unauthorised modification of computer material, which includes the intentional and unauthorised destruction of software or data; the circulation of "infected" materials on-line; and the unauthorised addition of a password to a data file. This offence also carries a penalty of up to five years imprisonment and an unlimited fine.
    Now, UK law takes precidence when a defendant was situated in the jurisdiction of UK law, so he should be properly tried and punished in the UK (if convicted). That is what he has been asking for all along.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •