chem1st Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 THE HIGH COURT indicated today that the government might have to block the extradition of Gary McKinnon to face hacking charges in the US because the process might shatter his mental health. The question will be decided in a Judicial Review to be held on the first available High Court slot after the 16th of March. It will consider whether extraditing someone with Asperger's Syndrome, a form of autism with which Gary was recently diagnosed, would constitute torture, or inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights. Justice Kay, presiding Judge, referred to clinical evidence that described the effect a foreign trial and imprisonment would have on someone with Asperger's Syndrome, the diagnosis of which in Gary's case was "unequivocal". He read part of the report that constituted Dr Thomas Berney's diagnosis of Gary with Asperger's Syndrome on 25 August 2008. "The presence of AS leaves Mr McKinnon vulnerable to the stress of social complexities as well as anything that is unfamiliar or novel to him. If he finds himself in circumstances where he is unable to withdraw from complex environments he is likely to develop pathological anxiety and given the presence of a developmental disorder he will be prone to develop an acute psychotic disorder," Justice Kay read to the court. I think locking anybody up is going to affect there mental health, and its degrading to be locked up, strip searched etc., maybe a few people might like the lifestyle, but im guessing if you did a survey of prisoners most would want to be released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Should we punish someone for having a disability? No, but we shouldn't favour them neither. You wouldn't care if the guy did not have aspergers/autism. And arguing that his condition is reason for him to be favoured does nothing to further your cause. If anything it will breed contempt for people with said condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted February 1, 2009 Author Share Posted February 1, 2009 No, but we shouldn't favour them neither. You wouldn't care if the guy did not have aspergers/autism. And arguing that his condition is reason for him to be favoured does nothing to further your cause. If anything it will breed contempt for people with said condition. I cant see how this can breed contempt.The email has been sent out from the National Autistic Society themselves, a world renowned charity that supports people with Asperger Syndrome like myself asking the public to support the plan to prevent Gary from being extradited. I guess that you have to be able to understand asperger syndrome before you are able to understand why he should be treat differently to someone who doesnt have it. Of course Jacqui Smith shows her inadequacies yet again by showing the public that she has no understanding whatsoever of the condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted February 1, 2009 Author Share Posted February 1, 2009 One question I would like to ask is, why does it to some mean that if he has autism, how does that stop him from being a criminal? Can someone with one of these disorders never be considered a criminal in that case? Of course it depends on the crime. In this case it could be proved by anyone with enough knowledge of Aspergers that having aspergers would mean that you could have a propensity to commit this kind of crime and have no real conviction to cause harm, but just to do it to see if you could do it.Curiosity can kill the cat cant it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted February 1, 2009 Author Share Posted February 1, 2009 An acquittal would surely send the message that what he did was ok. Not that what he did was OK, although he did do them a great favour, but that what he did was because of his neuorological abnormality, and that is a dsiabilty. It is always the case that if a disability is hidden then people cant seem to be able to make any allowances for it.It is much easier if someone is clearly disabled visibly for people to have sympathy although in some cases even this is hard for people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted February 19, 2009 Author Share Posted February 19, 2009 What about this fella? He's got Aspergers and is the worlds least cunning terrorist but he still got life. Yes. Many who have asperger syndrome would commit crimes. The prisons are full with people with it who do not get a diagnosis due to lack of awareness/funding or due to the fact that their parents didnt understand what to do to get help when they were children. Prisons will not accept this though as this would be really opening up a can of worms wouldn't it and a debate would ensue as to whether people with disabilities should be prosecuted for crimes that they committed which could be attributable to their disability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted July 21, 2010 Author Share Posted July 21, 2010 Latest update on the McKinnon case http://web.orange.co.uk/article/news/autistic_hacker_could_serve_time_in_britain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 That's better than what Clegg said in May: Halting McKinnon extradition not in our power, says Clegg http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/26/clegg_on_mckinnon/ In July 2009, he said: It's the basic duty of a government to protects its citizens. It's completely within Alan Johnson's power to enact amendments ... which would allow Gary McKinnon to be tried over here. But in May 2010 said: What I haven't got the power to do, neither has the home secretary, neither has even the prime minister, is to completely reverse and undo certain legal aspects of this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted July 21, 2010 Author Share Posted July 21, 2010 He ( Nick Clegg) did say that it was legally very complex. Anyway nothing has yet been decided has it? Its all speculation as to whether Obama wants to look at the laws again and decide whether the law is an appropriate one for someone like McKinnon when it was intended for terrorists. We shall have to wait and see.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Gary McKinnon's crime was not passing on secrets, it was making the Pentagon look stupid and inefficient. His prosecution is motivated purely from spite. If he got past their security single handed, then you can be guarenteed the Russiians and Chinese and maybe even the Caman Islanders have been doing regular virtual tours of their military installations. If anyone should be in the dock, it is the incompetents who designed and ran such a lax system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.