By John Leyden for The
Register.
This story has been reproduced with permission.
The Administrative Court (one of the High Courts) certified two
questions of being of public importance in the McKinnon case. The
first point ise the status of a diplomatic note confirming that Mr
McKinnon will not be treated as a terrorist under military
jurisdiction and the conduct of the US government in plea
bargaining negotiations.
The second is the claim that the US tried to twist McKinnon's
arm by saying if he failed to cop a plea and submit to voluntary
extradition he would lose the opportunity to be repatriated and
serve part of his sentence in the UK.
The House of Lords is not bound to consider McKinnon's final
appeal – for example it declined to hear the appeal of the NatWest
Three bankers. Tuesday's development clarifies the topics to be
explored if the Lords decide to hear McKinnon's case.
After losing an appeal in the High Court last month, only the
Law Lords now stand between McKinnon and a US trial for allegedly
breaking into and damaging 97 US government computers between 2001
and 2002. McKinnon caused an estimated $700,000 worth of damage, in
what US authorities have described as the "biggest military"
computer hack ever.
The former sys admin, who lives in London, admits he infiltrated
computer systems without permission but disputes the seriousness US
authorities attach to his attacks. The 41-year-old said he gained
access to military networks – using a Perl script to search for
default passwords – but describes himself as a bumbling amateur
motivated by curiosity about evidence of UFOs rather than a
cyberterrorist.
© The Register
2007
