21 Jul 2010

McKinnon: White House felt ‘bounced’

All pretty smooth-running on the US trip with one exception.

I hear the White House is feeling a bit “bounced” by the suggestion that Gary McKinnon, accused of hacking into the Pentagon computers, might be allowed to serve his sentence in a British jail.

David Cameron was notably more restrained in commenting on the case when he did interviews early this morning but in his BBC Radio 5 Live interview recorded last night he raised the prospect of Gary McKinnon serving “some of his sentence” in a British prison.

Tweets by @garygibbonblog

4 reader comments

  1. Claire Simmons says:

    As I understand it, the issue is not about him serving part of his sentence in the UK (that was always going to happen). The issue is about stopping this unwarranted and unjust extradition.

    The allegations of damage, while serious, have been shown in court to be false. Without those allegations, what Gary McKinnon did is not an extraditable offence. And I note that Obama expects his team to ‘follow the law’ from now on. This would translate as a withdrawal of the extradition request since it has been shown to be unfounded.

    There is only one just and lawful outcome here, and that is to try Gary McKinnon in the UK. If you heard the evidence presented in the High Court last July (though curiously omitted from the transcript) you will no doubt be well aware of this.

  2. CliffSull says:

    I must say that I agree with Claire on this – its not about ‘where’ Gary serves any or all of any possible Jail term.
    This is about the removal of Civil Rights and Liberties from citizens of the British State ….
    UK trial or NO Trial.
    Its not just Gary Mckinnon – one must also consider (amongst others) the cases of Liz Prosser, The Howes family and ….the list goes on.
    What this ‘biggest military hack ever’ really amounts to is a misdemeanour and has been grossly over-exaggerated by the US Legal department in their attempts to make a man with Aspergers syndrome carry the can for their own Military Network Supervisors failures and gross negligence.

  3. Kevin Gregg says:

    Sorry for being dim on this particular term, but what does it mean that the White House feels “bounced” by this?

  4. Y.S. says:

    I thought if we elect am MP, a party , a Government, then they are accountable to us the U.K. electorate in the Houses of Parliament.
    So why does our MP,s and Ministers have to testify to a forign Government?
    Is U.K. not an independent country? and if they do testify what problems will it cause in the future. Is the U.S. Government a higher authrity then our own Government?
    It feels like we have gone from a Special Relationship to a Junior partner to a poodle to a Servent?

Comments are closed.