Jump to content
Janey

What makes me really mad.

Recommended Posts

Now here's an interesting question to all of those who support the extradition.

 

If a hacker hacked into computers in five different countries simultaneously (or at least within a few hours of each other) and the governments of all five countries wanted to extradite him and incarcerate him in their own jails, then which country should take priority? Although it will be possible to stand trial in five different countries, it is only possible to be incarcerated in one place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As you say, it doesn't say much for their security!

K x

 

I suspect they mean 'any idiot' in the 'more computer skills than sense' sense... If he had been that good he wouldn't have been caught. I'm sure even American defence strategists aren't dumb enough to think that a computer hacker who gets caught should be viewed as an asset...

I'd also suggect that letting your legal defence rest on the possibility that enough sympathy could be aroused from people's ignorance of Asperger's to overlook the crime was equally idiotic when seemingly genuine arguments against the extradition were not being fully pursued...

 

L&P

 

BD :D

 

Hi canopus - Just seen your above post as I posted... No answer to the interesting question - but just wanted to say that 'those who support the extradition' is a bit of an overstatement for many of the opinions being expressed. I don't 'support extradition' - I just don't agree with the opinion that the convenient AS diagnosis is a justifiable reason to oppose it. If other valid reasons exist for opposing the extradition they have been overlooked/overshadowed in pursuit of a 'sympathy vote'. That's an injustice for all autistic people, and if genuine reasons did exist it's also an injustice for GM - but one enacted by his own defence team, not the British or American governments/legal sytem...

 

BD

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a hacker hacked into computers in five different countries simultaneously (or at least within a few hours of each other) and the governments of all five countries wanted to extradite him and incarcerate him in their own jails, then which country should take priority? Although it will be possible to stand trial in five different countries, it is only possible to be incarcerated in one place.

You serve them in order (either of crimes committed or sentences given). As the Meerkat says, simples. :D (but I also want to say as BD has pointed out and why I've taken that bit off quoting your comment there is a world of difference between concern about the use being made here of ASD and supporting extradition).

 

I suspect they mean 'any idiot' in the 'more computer skills than sense' sense...

If any idiot could do it and I can't because I haven't a clue about computers does that by default make me not an idiot? :unsure::whistle:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If any idiot could do it and I can't because I haven't a clue about computers does that by default make me not an idiot? :unsure::whistle:

 

No - it just means you're an idiot in the area of computer hacking, whereas GM is an idiot in the area of computer hacking and not getting caught! I'm sure there's some 'fuzzy logic' involved somewhere but I'm too big an idiot in the area of fuzzy logic to be able to spot where. :)

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure even American defence strategists aren't dumb enough to think that a computer hacker who gets caught should be viewed as an asset...

 

Has it ever occurred to you that the computer systems that Gary McKinnon hacked into could have been decoys, rather than real working systems, deliberately installed as a trap for hackers? Not many people seem to have mentioned this possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has it ever occurred to you that the computer systems that Gary McKinnon hacked into could have been decoys, rather than real working systems, deliberately installed as a trap for hackers? Not many people seem to have mentioned this possibility.

your defences are based on hypotheticals with no factual background in this or any other case.

 

i just find it very frustrating that by him assosciating his crime/punishment with AS makes everyone else with AS look like they have the potential to also commit such a crime when most of us are decent law-abiding people who respect the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
your defences are based on hypotheticals with no factual background in this or any other case.

 

UK legislation relating to hacking does not distinguish between real working systems or decoys known only by their owner to be decoys. A reputable networks specialist told me that he is 99.9% convinced that the computers Gary McKinnon hacked into were decoys and the whole Gary McKinnon affair was deliberately orchestrated by the US government years in advance. The same networks specialist also stated that if Gary McKinnon had hacked into real working systems then the US government would almost certainly have kept very quiet about it then tightened up security, unless something happened which was clearly obvious to the general public.

 

i just find it very frustrating that by him assosciating his crime/punishment with AS makes everyone else with AS look like they have the potential to also commit such a crime when most of us are decent law-abiding people who respect the rules.

 

I'm convinced that the masses of media coverage of Gary McKinnon is the result of the extradition to the US and NOT his AS. He would have got almost as much media coverage if he were NT simply because extradition is a highly controversial, or possibly unpopular, penalty with the general public. The NAS would almost certainly have stepped in if Gary McKinnon was destined to be prosecuted and imprisoned in Britain rather than extradited, but I severely doubt that he would have got anywhere as much media coverage, and even less likely to get support from the media or politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UK legislation relating to hacking does not distinguish between real working systems or decoys known only by their owner to be decoys. A reputable networks specialist told me that he is 99.9% convinced that the computers Gary McKinnon hacked into were decoys and the whole Gary McKinnon affair was deliberately orchestrated by the US government years in advance. The same networks specialist also stated that if Gary McKinnon had hacked into real working systems then the US government would almost certainly have kept very quiet about it then tightened up security, unless something happened which was clearly obvious to the general public.

 

 

 

I'm convinced that the masses of media coverage of Gary McKinnon is the result of the extradition to the US and NOT his AS. He would have got almost as much media coverage if he were NT simply because extradition is a highly controversial, or possibly unpopular, penalty with the general public. The NAS would almost certainly have stepped in if Gary McKinnon was destined to be prosecuted and imprisoned in Britain rather than extradited, but I severely doubt that he would have got anywhere as much media coverage, and even less likely to get support from the media or politicians.

 

 

Hi canopus/all - I'm not going to linger on this topic as it's a bit of a wooslum bird (destined to go round and round until it vanishes...), but as the first is directly linked to a question to me... No, it didn't occur to me, but it's a moot point. Whether the sites he hacked were real or decoys, his intent was to hack into American civil defence computers, and he did that knowingly... in fact, if they were decoy sites then they were part of the defence system with a specific defence 'role'. I don't think that's any sort of entrapment, because he wasn't lured or tricked into accessing those decoys - he discovered them while deliberately targeting defence computers...

As for the second point you make I disagree entirely. If extradition in itself was controversial and unpopular enough to garner him this level of media attention and support then why has his own defence made such an issue of AS, and why is so much of the media/political support based on the projection of him as a 'victim' because of his AS? I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the legal system is flawed, but I'd have that any day over 'trial by media' or defences offered by vote-mongering politicians who probably have even less knowledge about the realities of autism than GM's defence team!

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the GM case my view is that it is the American biased extradition laws that David Blunkett stiched us up to that are the problem, had there been a more balanced policy this might not have made the headlines in quite the way it has.

 

GM's AS was only diagnosed last year aged 40 something, now without wishing to offend some of our members diagnosed during adulthood, if you have managed to make it to middle age and held down jobs and relationships as in GM's case my guess is that you are not too far along the spectrum to have no understanding of right from wrong. What the press are inferring with all the original cases that I listed is that Autism or AS is the reason that these people carried out their crimes.

 

It is also not clear why Garry has so much celebrity endorsement of his plight. Sting and Peter Gabriel have long track records of campaining for human rights not ASD where were they when Barry George was wrongly convicted? Emma Noble and Keith Duffy are well known ASD campaigners. There is a bit of a mixed message being generated which in my opinion is being portrayed in the press as celebrity pity for this ASD "sufferer." Most worrying of all though is the NAS's support for GM. The very people who are campaining for a better understanding and acceptance of ASD are pandering to the presses ignorant view of the condition and tarnishing ALL our ASD friends and relatives, the complete opposite of their intentions.

 

What can we do?

 

Janey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If extradition in itself was controversial and unpopular enough to garner him this level of media attention and support then why has his own defence made such an issue of AS, and why is so much of the media/political support based on the projection of him as a 'victim' because of his AS?

 

I'm just as intrigued as you are. I'm wondering if Gary Mckinnon's lawyers know something we don't...

 

Personally I regard the timing of the crime and imposition of the extradition treaty a much stronger defence than having AS. Has ANYBODY ever been prosecuted under a law imposed AFTER the crime had taken place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has ANYBODY ever been prosecuted under a law imposed AFTER the crime had taken place?

 

Retrospective prosecution is not unknown, although not very common. The terrorist legislation was all written specifically to allow retrospective prosecutions tho. There have been a number of child abuse/secual assault cases that were prosecuted restrospectively (ie: under the new law in force at the time of the prosecution rather than the law in force at the time of the act).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oooohhh, don't get me started on Gary M!! :angry:

 

I posted this in the Off Topic thread about his case, and my sentiments have been sunsequently reinforced by an article in the Telegraph I read when I was away!

 

He was a systems analyst for pity's sake, he knew hacking was illegal, and according to the article I read left fatuous comments on the sites he hacked into of the 'ner-ner-ner-ner-ner' variety.

 

He was not some naive teenager with AS, or someone on the autistic spectrum who lacked the cognitive ability to know that what he was doing was wrong.

 

Agree with the comments here about the NAS, too.

 

*breathe* *breathe*

 

Bid :wallbash:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something strange surrounds the whole Gary McKinnon affair. Is there a reason why the case lingered on for 7 solid years? Is there a reason why the US government is so determined to extradite somebody who, quite frankly, is a harmless but curious lone wolf as opposed to somebody with malicious intent such as those involved in organised international terrorism? Has Gary McKinnon been deliberately hand picked for a reason whilst other hackers have been let off scot free by a US government who chooses not to pursue them? Has his diagnosis of AS made the US government even more determined to extradite him than if he wasn't diagnosed or was NT? Is the US government taking advantage of his diagnosis of AS to tarnish the image of people with AS in the minds of the public by associating them with hackers?

 

These questions may never be answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is there a reason why the US government is so determined to extradite somebody who, quite frankly, is a harmless but curious lone wolf as opposed to somebody with malicious intent such as those involved in organised international terrorism?

thats your opinion. personally, i think anyone that chooses to hack into military computers, leave messages, and then shamelessly defend himself by suggesting that he is better than them so they shouldn't punish him (bow down to his will) is plenty dangerous enough for me. its no better than someone who murders someone, then announces 'well they had it coming'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has his diagnosis of AS made the US government even more determined to extradite him than if he wasn't diagnosed or was NT? Is the US government taking advantage of his diagnosis of AS to tarnish the image of people with AS in the minds of the public by associating them with hackers?

 

These questions may never be answered.

 

Hi canopus - absolutely no idea as far as your conspiracy theory goes, but if that was the American govt's intent then Gary McKinnon, his legal team and supporters (including the NAS) have done all the work for them. No such association was being made until GM and his team entered it as a defence.

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gary McKinnon is a harmless but curious lone wolf as opposed to somebody with malicious intent

Gary McKinnon not only hacked into these files, but deleted some files. Deleting files seems malicious to me, and not something you would do just out of curiosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi canopus - absolutely no idea as far as your conspiracy theory goes, but if that was the American govt's intent then Gary McKinnon, his legal team and supporters (including the NAS) have done all the work for them. No such association was being made until GM and his team entered it as a defence.

 

There's always the possibility that the US government is trying to kill two birds with one stone. Capturing a hacker that has AS was almost certainly an unexpected find by the US government as no evidence exists to suggest otherwise. It may also be a bonus for them, so they are taking advantage of the situation.

 

Many unanswered questions surround the Gary McKinnon affair. His lawyers almost certainly know crucial stuff that is not in the public domain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's always the possibility that the US government is trying to kill two birds with one stone. Capturing a hacker that has AS was almost certainly an unexpected find by the US government as no evidence exists to suggest otherwise. It may also be a bonus for them, so they are taking advantage of the situation.

 

Many unanswered questions surround the Gary McKinnon affair. His lawyers almost certainly know crucial stuff that is not in the public domain.

 

Do you think you might have paranoid tendencies? I imagine there may be many people on autistic spectrum working in US government computer departments.

Edited by Mandapanda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think you might have paranoid tendencies?

 

Paranoia today often turns out to be reality tomorrow.

 

I was discussing the Gary McKinnon affair with my boss at work (who I believe is NT) and he mentioned that it isn't a straightforward prosecution and that there is something very sinister and suspicious surrounding it. He definitely thinks that the US government is trying to make a statement and it intrigues him why AS has become such a prominent issue as he agrees with me that timing is the more powerful defence. Another concern is how much money this 7 year long legal wrangle has cost the US taxpayer and whether they are happy to see what he considers to be a petty criminal jailed for 60 years at THEIR expense.

 

I am wondering if there is some obscure legislation in the US penal system that exempts people with AS and certain disabilities from harsh punishments, such as 60 years in a supermax, and Gary McKinnon's lawyers know something about this.

 

My experience of things are that most people only like questions than can be answered and have a tendency to want to brush unanswerable questions under the carpet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conspiracy theorists are in a win-win situation with this case. If things had been resolved very quickly, people would be saying 'extradition normally takes years and years - this got resolved so quickly there's something sinister about it'. But when it does take years, conspiracy theorists have the chance to speculate on why the USA is so anxious to get hold of this guy. And anything that doesn't agree with a conspiracy theory can be attributed to govt suppression of the 'real facts'.

 

I believe it's safe to say that if there was a clear and present threat to security, you'd never have heard a whisper of this case in the media. This doesn't mean that the law wouldn't be obeyed in dealing with the matter, simply that a DA notice would have been slapped on it preventing any media coverage. As a minor example of this, several times over my life I've seen/heard an item on the lunchtime news about an explosion or arrest connected with terrorism that by the evening news has disappeared, never to appear again.

 

As for the rights and wrongs of this case, I would like to see a full unbiased collection of the facts, but I fear that the media reporting I've encountered has been rather partisan and I for one cannot fathom what is really at the heart of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another thing that intrigues me is why the Daily Mail is supporting Gary McKinnon when it is generally a newspaper that is tough on crime. I could understand a liberal newspaper such as the Indepedent screaming that he was only being curious and deserves a slap on the wrist, but it seems a bold move for the Daily Mail unless there is some underlying motive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jesus christ , listen to you all ! who made you all judge and jury ? Lets hope none of your aspergers/autisitc children once adults ever have a run in with the authorities . If my low functioning autistic son, with no social awareness, pulls down his trousers and underpants in public, ( because of an itch, too tight/ too loose clothes/ or any sensory reason we can not identify), should be held accountable ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jesus christ , listen to you all ! who made you all judge and jury ? Lets hope none of your aspergers/autisitc children once adults ever have a run in with the authorities . If my low functioning autistic son, with no social awareness, pulls down his trousers and underpants in public, ( because of an itch, too tight/ too loose clothes/ or any sensory reason we can not identify), should be held accountable ?

The difference is in understanding and intent (at least as far as we can be aware from the media coverage). GM knew he shouldn't be doing what he was doing, he knew he was breaking the law, and what's more despite being quite able to show remorse, he has not done so.

 

This is very different from the case you give (which BTW my brother did and was arrested for then sectioned when he didn't understand what the policemen where doing) where there is no understanding that it is wrong, no intent to harm (GM deliberately deleted films and wrote insulting messages) and no capacity to show remorse as the actions were not understood as wrong in the perceptions of others.

 

There is a world of difference between the two. I am not being 'judge and jury' (although perhaps you are of me in suggesting I am being?)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, Lisa, but I know my 20 year old with AS, ADHD and dyspraxia has the cognitive ability and computer-awareness to know that hacking is illegal, and he would get short shrift from me if he did anything like this.

 

An individual with moderate or severe learning difficulties is a very different scenario, as I have made clear in my comments about this case.

 

Bid :)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The difference is in understanding and intent (at least as far as we can be aware from the media coverage). GM knew he shouldn't be doing what he was doing, he knew he was breaking the law, and what's more despite being quite able to show remorse, he has not done so.

 

I personally don't see what was wrong with prosecuting Gary McKinnon in the UK under the Computer Misuse Act BEFORE he had his diagnosis of AS. If that had happened then he would have received a few articles in the papers back then and would now have faded into obscurity. Anybody remember Paul Bedworth?

 

Instead what has resulted from a decision to extradite him is a 7 year long legal wrangle; a diagnosis of AS; bringing AS into the picture - for the better or the worse of anyone; and high profile media coverage almost promoting him to a celebrity status.

 

Coming out with statements like "he shouldn't have broken the law" is disingenious because at the time NOBODY could have forseen the long term consequences. Anybody suggesting a future scenario similar to the Gary McKinnon affair back in 2001 would almost certainly have been labelled a paranoid nutter. The accepted consensus back then was that a hacker would be prosecuted under the Computer Misuse Act unless there were changes in the law and the hacking took place AFTER the law was changed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coming out with statements like "he shouldn't have broken the law" is disingenious because at the time NOBODY could have forseen the long term consequences. Anybody suggesting a future scenario similar to the Gary McKinnon affair back in 2001 would almost certainly have been labelled a paranoid nutter. The accepted consensus back then was that a hacker would be prosecuted under the Computer Misuse Act unless there were changes in the law and the hacking took place AFTER the law was changed.

 

To me this is entirely pertinent!

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look. Maybe I'm a bit dim, but is hacking into the defence system of a foreign power 'computer misuse'? I don't think that's what they call it in James Bond films etc. This is not the same as 'guessing' someone's password to an internet forum or letting someone else in your office log in under your name. Obviously it ain't 'International espionage' either, but technically...

 

Lisa C. Nobody here is acting as 'judge and jury', but some people aren't willing to embrace the idea that GM is the 'victim' purely because he got diagnosed with Asperger's last year. A small child waggling his willy in public bares (;)) no comparison with the wilful hacking of a foreign power's defence computers, whatever the intentions of the hacker.

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another thing that intrigues me is why the Daily Mail is supporting Gary McKinnon when it is generally a newspaper that is tough on crime. I could understand a liberal newspaper such as the Indepedent screaming that he was only being curious and deserves a slap on the wrist, but it seems a bold move for the Daily Mail unless there is some underlying motive.

because the Daily Mail has switched to Labour bashing and spends all its pages running stories to show how terrible the government are/what a terrible state society is in, whatever the case/facts (not saying i support labour, but we get the DM and its driving me mad at the moment with its constant silly stories)

 

it has also become fashionable for newspapers to run 'we support X' stories, there have been many in recent months suggesting you should sign an online petition to support whatever case/cause.

 

as for the constant conspiracy theories, we just can't argue against them. they have almost no basis in any evidence/fact presented to the public (and yes, i know thats the point but it also means they are only as real as the fairy story i just read the little one) and personally i prefer to use evidence rather than make things up.

 

dismising his crime as 'nothing important' as he is trying to do is insulting to every person who works hard to follow the law (it was still illegal then, whatever the sentence)

Edited by NobbyNobbs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Look. Maybe I'm a bit dim, but is hacking into the defence system of a foreign power 'computer misuse'?

 

Under UK law, yes. It is possible to be prosecuted for other crimes carried out as the result of hacking such as theft and fraud. Say for example, a hacker hacked into the computer of a bank and transferred money from your account into his own, then he will be prosecuted for both hacking and theft. I believe it is possible to be prosecuted for criminal damage for deleting or corrupting files but proof of this must be in a format that will stand up in court.

 

dismising his crime as 'nothing important' as he is trying to do is insulting to every person who works hard to follow the law (it was still illegal then, whatever the sentence)

 

I'm not dismissing his crime as nothing important. I'm quite happy, along with millions of other people in the UK and abroad who oppose his extradition, for Gary McKinnon to be prosecuted and jailed in Britain under the Computer Misuse Act. I would find it very questionable if he were let off scot free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. None of you have any proof that he didnt know the consequences of his actions. Where is the innocent until proven guilty? If it was an NT man, English people would probably find his 'cheek' quite amusing , yet you all seem to be trying to make an example of him , how dare he have AS and show us all up!!! NT people do worse things every day ! Show a bit of solidarity why dont you, go on , i dare you .

Also, so what if his mum sees the dx as a bit of a lifeline for him. Wouldnt you? He hasnt murdered anyone !

Edited by lisac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify, the purpose of this thread was to discuss the rights and wrongs of the medias constant need to announce a person's ASD whether they are guilty or not and the inference that ASD and crime is linked. Although Garry McKinnon is a pertinent case at the moment we seem to be drifting off the point and discussing the rights and wrongs of Garry McKinnon.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jesus christ , listen to you all ! who made you all judge and jury ? Lets hope none of your aspergers/autisitc children once adults ever have a run in with the authorities . If my low functioning autistic son, with no social awareness, pulls down his trousers and underpants in public, ( because of an itch, too tight/ too loose clothes/ or any sensory reason we can not identify), should be held accountable ?

 

My apologies if you think we're sitting in judgement, but that isn't the intent. The issue is a very serious one for many folks here - namely, how far does possession of an atypical behaviour pattern that is 'hard wired' excuse a person's actions? Given that people with ASD are almost certainly over-represented in the prison population (I say 'almost certainly' because more work is urgently needed in this area) this debate goes beyond this specific case in the question of legal culpability. And more generally, it affects a great many people here in 'milder' examples (e.g. to what extent should NT 'outsiders' be expected to tolerate the behaviour of people with ASD?).

 

FWIW, I've occasionally lectured on the issue of legal responsibility in cases of people with mental illness/atypical behaviour in general, and to cut an hour's lecture down to one phrase - there are no easy answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jesus christ , listen to you all ! who made you all judge and jury ? Lets hope none of your aspergers/autisitc children once adults ever have a run in with the authorities . If my low functioning autistic son, with no social awareness, pulls down his trousers and underpants in public, ( because of an itch, too tight/ too loose clothes/ or any sensory reason we can not identify), should be held accountable ?

 

My apologies if you think we're sitting in judgement, but that isn't the intent. The issue is a very serious one for many folks here - namely, how far does possession of an atypical behaviour pattern that is 'hard wired' excuse a person's actions? Given that people with ASD are almost certainly over-represented in the prison population (I say 'almost certainly' because more work is urgently needed in this area) this debate goes beyond this specific case in the question of legal culpability. And more generally, it affects a great many people here in 'milder' examples (e.g. to what extent should NT 'outsiders' be expected to tolerate the behaviour of people with ASD?).

 

FWIW, I've occasionally lectured on the issue of legal responsibility in cases of people with mental illness/atypical behaviour in general, and to cut an hour's lecture down to one phrase - there are no easy answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not dismissing his crime as nothing important. I'm quite happy, along with millions of other people in the UK and abroad who oppose his extradition, for Gary McKinnon to be prosecuted and jailed in Britain under the Computer Misuse Act. I would find it very questionable if he were let off scot free.

because the Computer Misuse Act in itself dismisses his crime as nothing important, illustrated by the sentence he would get here, compared to the one he will get in the US.

 

Lol. None of you have any proof that he didnt know the consequences of his actions. Where is the innocent until proven guilty? If it was an NT man, English people would probably find his 'cheek' quite amusing , yet you all seem to be trying to make an example of him , how dare he have AS and show us all up!!! NT people do worse things every day ! Show a bit of solidarity why dont you, go on , i dare you .

Also, so what if his mum sees the dx as a bit of a lifeline for him. Wouldnt you? He hasnt murdered anyone !

personally i dont want to show solidarity with any criminal, whether they have AS, ADHD or are NT. the media are attempting to manipulate public perception by using his AS to imply that he should be treated better than any other person who did that crime. the poor reporting of AS makes it seem to those who know little/less about ASDs that he was unable to understand and control his actions.

 

recently there have been a number of mothers who have turned their own child in after they learned they committed serious crimes, i'd rather show my solidarity with people who like them who have strong moral views. if i broke the law i wouldn't expect my mother to try to get me out of my punishment, i would expect her to be there for me when i had served the appropriate sentence and learned my lesson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because the Computer Misuse Act in itself dismisses his crime as nothing important, illustrated by the sentence he would get here, compared to the one he will get in the US.

 

Rubbish. Hacking into foreign military computers clearly and squarely violates the Computer Misuse Act and carries a maximum sentence of 5 years behind bars.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Misuse_Act_1990

 

Do you really think a 5 year prison sentence is 'nothing important'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol. None of you have any proof that he didnt know the consequences of his actions. Where is the innocent until proven guilty? If it was an NT man, English people would probably find his 'cheek' quite amusing , yet you all seem to be trying to make an example of him , how dare he have AS and show us all up!!! NT people do worse things every day ! Show a bit of solidarity why dont you, go on , i dare you .

Also, so what if his mum sees the dx as a bit of a lifeline for him. Wouldnt you? He hasnt murdered anyone !

 

Hi lisa - I think you've completely misread what people are saying here. I for one am not at all 'angry' at the fact that he's AS and setting a bad example and showing up people with AS; I'm annoyed at the defence being offered that as an AS person he is/was incapable of understanding the implications of his actions (which despite the back-pedalling since did include his own/the NAS's and his defence team's admission that he did, was the initial thrust behind the most recent appeal). No, I would not admire his cheek if he was NT - I'd take exactly the same view that he had behaved like an idiot. 'Solidarity' has got nothing to do with backing someone you believe knowingly committed a crime. That's patronisation at best. Most people here have acknowledged that they would be tempted to take the same line as GM's mum were they to find themselves in a similar position. Parent's (with the exception of those who would lie to protect their children/partners who have killed/harmed others) can get away with that, but 'my boy's a good boy, really, he just gets a bit carried away' isn't a reasonable legal defence...

 

Canopus - yes, i'm sure that hacking into foreign military computers does violate the computer misuse act, but probably not ONLY that(?)

Killing somebody with a car in a hit and run accident while under the influence of alcohol would violate the 'driving without due care and attention' laws, but someone guilty of the former would not be sentenced according to latter...

 

Janey - I do appreciate what you're saying and it's maybe unfortunate timing that you posted just as GM's case was being e-mailed left right and centre by the NAS :oops:

Yes, media speculation about autism in connection to schoolyard seiges and the like is really dangerous. Even more dangerous is the fact that defence teams representing people who have commited such crimes see autism as a potential defence, and will find expert witnesses to testify/diagnose. It's a modern day equivalent of the 'insanity' plea, and follows on from the popularity of ADHD/Social Deprivation/Abuse as mitigating circumstances. [Which is not to say that those things can't be mitigating circumstances; just that they are regularly exploited by defence teams who have little else to offer.]

Having said that, the fact is that - as in the GM case (sorry!) - many, many parents/carers/professionals/support workers and even autistic people themselves are equally happy to exploit those stereotypes, and will often actually court media attention to perpetuate them. As the *lovely* t-shirt says - 'I'm autistic - what's your excuse'. :wallbash: If people really want to challenge those stereotypes/preconceptions they have to challenge them across the board and not just when it suits them. that includes major lobby groups/charities like the NAS who still know there's gold in them thar hills if they play the sympathy card.

 

Hope that helps to widen things out a bit again!

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lol. None of you have any proof that he didnt know the consequences of his actions. Where is the innocent until proven guilty? If it was an NT man, English people would probably find his 'cheek' quite amusing , yet you all seem to be trying to make an example of him , how dare he have AS and show us all up!!! NT people do worse things every day ! Show a bit of solidarity why dont you, go on , i dare you .

Also, so what if his mum sees the dx as a bit of a lifeline for him. Wouldnt you? He hasnt murdered anyone !

The issue is not with him, it is with the use of AS in this case. If you read through this thread you might understand this.

 

Janey - I do appreciate what you're saying and it's maybe unfortunate timing that you posted just as GM's case was being e-mailed left right and centre by the NAS :oops:

Just because I'm curious (and if others are going to go for conspiracy theories I thought I might join in :D) how many individuals here who have a DX of ASD (but I suppose for the sake of my question are not parents of children with ASD) received such an email? I didn't and I was most upset that I couldn't complain to the NAS about contacting me regarding this!! Was I just missed out accidentally or was there a select audience which received them (as I get other emails from the NAS... :unsure:)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just because I'm curious (and if others are going to go for conspiracy theories I thought I might join in :D) how many individuals here who have a DX of ASD (but I suppose for the sake of my question are not parents of children with ASD) received such an email? I didn't and I was most upset that I couldn't complain to the NAS about contacting me regarding this!! Was I just missed out accidentally or was there a select audience which received them (as I get other emails from the NAS... :unsure:)?

 

Hi mumble - my own e-mail came because i registered for info on 'think differently' campaign... I think the e-mails came out under that 'umbrella' rather than the regular NAS news letter. However, your question is interesting because I know there was an 'open letter' written by one of the bigger aspie sites (wrong planet, maybe?) complaining about the NAS's involvement. It would be quite shocking if the organisers of the campaign deliberately avoided contacting people registered with them as AS/ASD for any reason...

sorry again, janey - a slight diversion but only to comment on a direct question.

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In answer to lisac's points, I believe we are totally justified in discussing this for several reasons.

 

People with asd vary tremendously and can have very different levels of understanding and ability, including understanding of consequences of actions. If someone with asd says they knew something was wrong/illegal but did it anyway, it may be because 'they wanted to do it, so they did it'. Just as my son, when younger - about 8yrs I think, collected Hot Wheels cars, so when he saw one at the doctor's surgery, he took it. He knew stealing was wrong, but he wanted it so much it overrode that conscious thought. Asd children particularly will react emotionally to situations rather than with conscious thought. Now, however, my son is 15 he would not do the same thing again. His emotional reactions have lessened and the conscious thought has a certain degree more control. Is this because of how we dealt with earlier situations and taught him, or is it just because he is growing up? This is a very important point where crime and a defence of AS is concerned. If GM had a different upbringing would he act/think differently, or should growing up have curbed his thoughts/actions? Or is his AS more severe that he is more 'disabled' than my son - although that does not appear to be the case from hearing him talk.

 

Media coverage leads to building up of stereotypes in people's minds, whether it be about terrorists, gay people, catholic priests - whatever. This is not in any of our interests.

 

I am sorry to use this 'simile?' but I can't think of another one at the moment, but a woman crying rape when she has agreed to it devalues the true claims of raped women. A person crying AS when it is not sufficiently impairing to them to 'cause' their crime devalues the very real situations some people with AS can find themselves in - truly through no fault of their own. This is why this is so hotly debated by us all.

 

lisac - just because your son does what he does now, it does not mean he will still be doing equivalent things when he is grown up. It may take a lot of discussing with him, using pictures/social stories, but he can probably learn not to do it, either that (or as I wonder above), maybe he will just grow up and not do it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...