"Gary McKinnon hacks NSAS for proof of UFOs"

Post Reply New Topic

It seems to me that the factual basis demonstrates a prima facie case.

He knew, or ought properly to have known, that he was not authorized to access the network. So the only real question is, "Was their either justification or excuse for his behaviour."

(It's important to distinguish between justification--which is legal authority to take an action that is otherwise prohibitedl, or to forego an action that is otherwise mandatory--and excuse, which is a legal recognition that an otherwise illegal act or omission ought not to be punished.)

So what do we see by way of argument for excuse or justification?

1) The system was porous enough to let him get access.

So, if I leave my front door unlocked does that mean that a person is permitted to trespass?

2) It's a law that should not be obeyed.

Well, clearly this is an argument entirely devoid of legal merit, unless it can be demonstrate that the law is ultra vires the legislature that enacted it.

3) He's an Aspie.

Well, that alone is not an excuse. Is he so disordered that he cannot appreciate the nature of his actions? There is nothing to suggest that he is not criminally repsonsible for his actions--and certainly an AS diagnosis alone won't cut it.

Now, whether or not he should be extradited is an entirely different question, and the legal standards of excuse and justification do not apply--particularly as extradition is not a judicial action--it is an executive action, taken after the court has rendered an opinion.