SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The UK high court has finally ruled on the extradition of Lauri Love, the Finnish-British student accused of cracking U.S. government websites. He will not be extradited to face trial in America. The court accepted both of the main arguments that there is no reason he cannot not be tried in England and that he might suffer serious damage to his health if he were extradited.
Source: Hacking Suspect Lauri Love Wins Appeal Against Extradition to US
Previously: Lauri Love to be Extradited to the U.S.
Lauri Love's Appeal Will be Heard in the UK on November 28th and 29th
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Cracking Suspect Lauri Love Wins Appeal Against Extradition to US
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 44 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Besides, REAL computers have a rename() system call. :-)
-- Larry Wall in <7937@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
(Score: 5, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Monday February 05 2018, @11:18PM (4 children)
How many Americans are extradited to shithole countries around the world? If I hack an Iranian site, and I'm exposed, is the US going to send me to Iran for trial? I don't think so.
How many Americans have been surrendered to the World Court for alleged "War Crimes"? (Jesus H - that would be a real mess - starting with that collateral murder video, which shows not one single war crime, we would be surrendering dozens of people!)
Have we extradited ANYONE to North Korea?
If you expect for nations around the world to surrender random citizens to us whenever we demand, then we must reciprocate by surrendering our citizens upon demand. Fair is fair, right? Treaties and agreements are supposed to be reciprocal, right?
This particular dilrod has never been to the US. He has never crossed our borders. He has never made a statement to US Customs authorities. He has never eluded our Border Patrol. He hasn't even spit on our sidewalks, never mooned a preacher in the US, or flipped the bird to a US Senator/Congressman during a parade. HE IS SIMPLY NOT SUBJECT TO US JURISDICTION!!
Maybe he committed a crime. If so, he should stand trial - within the jurisdiction where he allegedly committed that crime.
Justice is served with this decision. The American sense of indignant vengeance is not served.
I don't think much of the British justice system. For starters, I don't recognize any lord of anything, not even the lordy-dude who made this decision. But, in this case, he got something right.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Tuesday February 06 2018, @12:54PM (3 children)
> For starters, I don't recognize any lord of anything, not even the lordy-dude who made this decision.
You do realise that Lord Chief Justice is an appointed position? In the same vein, the Prime Minister is "First Lord of the Treasury".
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday February 06 2018, @11:16PM (2 children)
What I may or may not realize about appointed positions has no bearing on my contempt for the use of the word. I recognize only one Lord, and he would be the Lord of Creation. And, I have my doubts about him sometimes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 07 2018, @07:55AM
Think of it this way, in the UK (and somewhat in Aus and Canada as well) the word lord in an appointed position is not religious, it actually means that there is no superior position in that organisation.
The "lord blah blah of whoop-de-doo" may be overruled by parliament, or in some cases by the monarch, but otherwise is in charge of that organisation.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday February 07 2018, @11:58AM
Okay no problem. Just don't go eating any Pasta for I only recognize one Pasta and he would be the Pasta of creation. Spaghetti is right out.