Teenage Alleged "Lulzsec Hackers" Arrested in Dublin Today-Extradition case being planned?

[C. Flower]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/ju...-odwyer-160000

A lot of support for Richard O'Dwyer

A petition launched by Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales to halt the extradition to the US of Sheffield Hallam University student Richard O'Dwyer has garnered 160,000 signatures in less than five days.

O'Dwyer, 24, faces up to 10 years in US prison for alleged copyright offences relating to TVShack.net, a website that provided links to places where users could watch TV shows and films online.

Wales's petition, which calls on the home secretary, Theresa May, to revoke her permission to extradite O'Dwyer, has picked up more than 75,000 signatures in the last 24 hours alone after being circulated among US supporters of Change.org.

The petition is now the fastest-growing Change.org petition in the UK. In the Guardian article that launched the campaign, Wales said the extradition represented a battle between the film industry and general public.

"Given the thin case against him, it is an outrage that he is being extradited to the US to face felony charges for something that he is not being prosecuted for here," Wales said. "No US citizen has ever been brought to the UK for alleged criminal activity that took place on US soil."

[fluffybiscuits]

Cant seem to find any information on this but surely if there is no equivelant law in the UK then extraditing him to the US cannot be pursued? I read somewhere people can only be extradited for a crime where that crime is a crime in the country they are being extradited from?

Edit:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...rs-chains.html

In the UK he didnt download any pirated material himself hence why he was let off...

[Kev Bar]

Cant seem to find any information on this but surely if there is no equivelant law in the UK then extraditing him to the US cannot be pursued? I read somewhere people can only be extradited for a crime where that crime is a crime in the country they are being extradited from?

Edit:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...rs-chains.html

In the UK he didnt download any pirated material himself hence why he was let off...

I think the answer to yr questions lies in the body of the text.


The case of Mr O’Dwyer, like that of Mr McKinnon, raises important questions of principle. It seems undeniable that the 2003 Extradition Act is sometimes being used by the American authorities in a way that was neither envisaged nor intended, and that the British Government is feebly accepting this unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Ensnare

There was a good case for the 2003 Act, signed by Tony Blair and President George W. Bush at the height of their disastrous mutual infatuation. It was designed to deal with terror suspects at a time when the British Government was anxious to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Mr Bush in his ‘War On Terror’.

But the Act was never meant by Parliament to ensnare people such as Mr O’Dwyer, as Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Liberal Democrat leader, pointed out on Sunday. Nonetheless, that is exactly how it is being extended by the American authorities.

Moreover, the system is seemingly biased against Britain. The U.S. requires ‘sufficient evidence to establish probable cause’ before agreeing to extradite anyone to the UK, while Britons are denied the same protection.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...#ixzz1zOo49XSI

[fluffybiscuits]

I think the answer to yr questions lies in the body of the text.


The case of Mr O’Dwyer, like that of Mr McKinnon, raises important questions of principle. It seems undeniable that the 2003 Extradition Act is sometimes being used by the American authorities in a way that was neither envisaged nor intended, and that the British Government is feebly accepting this unsatisfactory state of affairs.
Ensnare

There was a good case for the 2003 Act, signed by Tony Blair and President George W. Bush at the height of their disastrous mutual infatuation. It was designed to deal with terror suspects at a time when the British Government was anxious to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with Mr Bush in his ‘War On Terror’.

But the Act was never meant by Parliament to ensnare people such as Mr O’Dwyer, as Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Liberal Democrat leader, pointed out on Sunday. Nonetheless, that is exactly how it is being extended by the American authorities.

Moreover, the system is seemingly biased against Britain. The U.S. requires ‘sufficient evidence to establish probable cause’ before agreeing to extradite anyone to the UK, while Britons are denied the same protection.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...#ixzz1zOo49XSI

Thanks for the links Kev. Just read through the article there and it does state that O Dwyer committed no crime and is not going to be afforded the same protection as is afforded to American citizens. Is there anything in interational law that protects him? The crime was committed on British soil thereby making it outside the jursidiction of the US surely?

[Kev Bar]

Thanks for the links Kev. Just read through the article there and it does state that O Dwyer committed no crime and is not going to be afforded the same protection as is afforded to American citizens. Is there anything in interational law that protects him? The crime was committed on British soil thereby making it outside the jursidiction of the US surely?

No I don't think he has any protection bar a public clamour for decency and moves towards the renegotiation of a dangerous act which was the fruit of Blair's adulation of Bush's war on terror coated ideological supremacy.

"In opposition, Mr Cameron said some fine things about protecting Gary McKinnon and standing up for the rights of British citizens, which he appears to have forgotten in government. It is time he remembered them and time he repudiated this humiliating, and needless, role we love to play of being America’s half-witted poodle."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...#ixzz1zP7C0bix

[Count Bobulescu]

Part of the issue here is that this is uncharted territory, he acted from the UK but his actions had effect in the US, and governments everywhere have an interest in seeing how far they will be able to go with extradition treaties, particularly if they face a situation where the shoe is on the other foot. The accused then simply become pawns to be pushed around as various legal theories are tested on a case by case basis. So don’t expect either the US or UK or other countries to stop testing the limits of what is possible.

[fluffybiscuits]

Part of the issue here is that this is uncharted territory, he acted from the UK but his actions had effect in the US, and governments everywhere have an interest in seeing how far they will be able to go with extradition treaties, particularly if they face a situation where the shoe is on the other foot. The accused then simply become pawns to be pushed around as various legal theories are tested on a case by case basis. So don’t expect either the US or UK or other countries to stop testing the limits of what is possible.

So this means , using legal terminology (knew watching some episodes of Suits came in handy!) this is going to be a prima faciae case? I was skimming over some documents and I came across the following one (http://www.publications.parliament.u.../15605.htm#a17) which discussed the situations where extraditions to non EU countries could be stopped if the receiving country could be stopped. If the defence of O Dwyer and the rest can prove that there is a case that he could be treated unfairly in terms of trial by media and perhaps argue that the situation in US prisons is such that it would be against his human rights to be serve a sentence there (http://www.hrw.org/news-all/2365?page=2) as per the Human Rights Watch report then there could be a likelyhood perhaps he may get off. CB or anyone, do you know if there is any defence from his solicitors? If so what is it?

[Count Bobulescu]

So this means , using legal terminology (knew watching some episodes of Suits came in handy!) this is going to be a prima faciae case? I was skimming over some documents and I came across the following one (http://www.publications.parliament.u.../15605.htm#a17) which discussed the situations where extraditions to non EU countries could be stopped if the receiving country could be stopped. If the defence of O Dwyer and the rest can prove that there is a case that he could be treated unfairly in terms of trial by media and perhaps argue that the situation in US prisons is such that it would be against his human rights to be serve a sentence there (http://www.hrw.org/news-all/2365?page=2) as per the Human Rights Watch report then there could be a likelyhood perhaps he may get off. CB or anyone, do you know if there is any defence from his solicitors? If so what is it?

I don’t know anything more than I read in the Guardian etc. It does seem as if O’Dwyer is in a different category than the LulzSec people, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be prosecuted for other alleged crimes, but you’d hope that they would leave him alone an go after the LulzSec people. I think there is zero hope of avoiding extradition on the basis of a human rights violation. I’m glad to see Jimmy Wales is taking up his case. He can be quiet influential on these matters.

Still no word from Ecuador on asylum for Assange. I think the longer it drags on the less likely he is to get asylum.

[fluffybiscuits]

I don’t know anything more than I read in the Guardian etc. It does seem as if O’Dwyer is in a different category than the LulzSec people, but that doesn’t mean he can’t be prosecuted for other alleged crimes, but you’d hope that they would leave him alone an go after the LulzSec people. I think there is zero hope of avoiding extradition on the basis of a human rights violation. I’m glad to see Jimmy Wales is taking up his case. He can be quiet influential on these matters.

Still no word from Ecuador on asylum for Assange. I think the longer it drags on the less likely he is to get asylum.

Jimmy Wales holds a lot of sway. He is one of the pioneers in terms of how information is spread on the web. Fingers crossed Assange gets asylum.

[Kev Bar]

So this means , using legal terminology (knew watching some episodes of Suits came in handy!) this is going to be a prima faciae case? I was skimming over some documents and I came across the following one (http://www.publications.parliament.u.../15605.htm#a17) which discussed the situations where extraditions to non EU countries could be stopped if the receiving country could be stopped. If the defence of O Dwyer and the rest can prove that there is a case that he could be treated unfairly in terms of trial by media and perhaps argue that the situation in US prisons is such that it would be against his human rights to be serve a sentence there (http://www.hrw.org/news-all/2365?page=2) as per the Human Rights Watch report then there could be a likelyhood perhaps he may get off. CB or anyone, do you know if there is any defence from his solicitors? If so what is it?

The extradition has already been approved:

A Home Office spokesman said Mr O’Dwyer’s extradition had been approved because there were only four specific reasons why the Home Secretary could legally refuse, such as if a defendant could face the death penalty. He said Theresa May had no choice but to approve the extradition.

The only options open to O'Dwyer outside

The campaign to put pressure on UK politicians to amend the extradition 2004 agreement with the US is one avenue of hope for O'Dywer

His is just the latest in a string of controversial extradition cases involving the Unitied States, following the introduction in 2004 of a treaty that mean British suspects may be sent across the Atlantic without any test of the evidence against them.


Outside of the court of public opinion, he has a couple of legal options left open to him

Mr O'Dwyer could now appeal to the High Court and eventually to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...V-website.html

[Kev Bar]

Jimmy Wales holds a lot of sway. He is one of the pioneers in terms of how information is spread on the web. Fingers crossed Assange gets asylum.

Assange getting asylum doesn't solve his problem of how he physically goes to the country in question.

I am not sufficient well versed in Swedish law to know how justified his fear of alleged US extradition plans are.

Certainly his attempt to smear the Swedish women involved as US stooges setting up a honey trap seems to fly in the face of all credibility

The girl who was putting up Assange on his lecture visit seemed more of an infatuated political groupie than a cold character assassin.

I would certainly like to see Assange safe and protected from all attempts at legal/political retribution from the US.

Outside of exposing him to the above, however, there seems no credible reasons why he should be shielded from the Swedish justice system.

There is nothing just, dissident or revolutionary about sexual misconduct.

Being the General Patton of the information wars may be a licence to cyber pillage but it is not a licence to rape.

[fluffybiscuits]

The extradition has already been approved:

A Home Office spokesman said Mr O’Dwyer’s extradition had been approved because there were only four specific reasons why the Home Secretary could legally refuse, such as if a defendant could face the death penalty. He said Theresa May had no choice but to approve the extradition.

The only options open to O'Dwyer outside

The campaign to put pressure on UK politicians to amend the extradition 2004 agreement with the US is one avenue of hope for O'Dywer

His is just the latest in a string of controversial extradition cases involving the Unitied States, following the introduction in 2004 of a treaty that mean British suspects may be sent across the Atlantic without any test of the evidence against them.


Outside of the court of public opinion, he has a couple of legal options left open to him

Mr O'Dwyer could now appeal to the High Court and eventually to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...V-website.html

The lack of evidence could be in breach of human rights. The case of a lack of evidence or tampered evidence was shown in a recent case of Andrew Seymou.

http://www.liberty-human-rights.org....tion/index.php

Andrew Symeou is a British student who was extradited to Greece in 2009. He was accused of manslaughter following the tragic death of another young British man whilst he was on holiday in Greece. Evidence against him included statements given by two witnesses who say that Greek police officers pressured them to give false statements, which they retracted immediately after their release from police custody. Mr Symeou denied the charge and available evidence strongly indicated that he was innocent, yet a British Court never considered whether there was a prima facie case against him. Following his extradition Andrew spent over 10 months in appalling Greek prison conditions In June 2011, Andrew Symeou was cleared of manslaughter by a Greek jury and returned home to the UK.

Assange getting asylum doesn't solve his problem of how he physically goes to the country in question.

I am not sufficient well versed in Swedish law to know how justified his fear of alleged US extradition plans are.

Certainly his attempt to smear the Swedish women involved as US stooges setting up a honey trap seems to fly in the face of all credibility

The girl who was putting up Assange on his lecture visit seemed more of an infatuated political groupie than a cold character assassin.

I would certainly like to see Assange safe and protected from all attempts at legal/political retribution from the US.

Outside of exposing him to the above, however, there seems no credible reasons why he should be shielded from the Swedish justice system.

There is nothing just, dissident or revolutionary about sexual misconduct.

Being the General Patton of the information wars may be a licence to cyber pillage but it is not a licence to rape.

I agree with the idea that being king of cyber world of info is not a licence to rape young women but the charges do come at a time very conveniently for when the US wants him for prosecution. There seems to be no case law for the asylum in Ecuador and what happens if he sets foot on British soil while under the protection of the embassy so the whole thing is test cases again. The lawyer for the prosecution has given a very good robust of things here in the Guardian. There was some warning apparently to Assange that his behaviour to women could end him up in a whole heap of trouble.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010...pe-allegations

[Count Bobulescu]

Just took a look at the court records in NY for the cases against Martyn and Ó Cearbhail. Seems it has been consolidated into one case titled USA v. Ackroyd with five defendants. One of the defendants Jeremy Hammond has additional charges against him and he seems to be the only one who has engaged private attorneys. The others are being represented by the public defender’s office. The last entry on the docket is for a pre-trial conference set for September 24, but I think it affects only Hammond.

There have been no filings in any of the ten cases to which Sabu/Monsegur is a party since March 6, 2012.

[Kev Bar]

Just took a look at the court records in NY for the cases against Martyn and Ó Cearbhail. Seems it has been consolidated into one case titled USA v. Ackroyd with five defendants. One of the defendants Jeremy Hammond has additional charges against him and he seems to be the only one who has engaged private attorneys. The others are being represented by the public defender’s office. The last entry on the docket is for a pre-trial conference set for September 24, but I think it affects only Hammond.

There have been no filings in any of the ten cases to which Sabu/Monsegur is a party since March 6, 2012.

You would despair though when you see idiots getting arrested for poor taste tweets.

Take out the tech and it means we'll have to open detention camps in every playground.

[Kev Bar]

Pirate Bay founder arrested in Phnom Penh

For extraditon back to ....Sweden.

It's all the rave these days.

http://www.khmer440.com/k/2012/09/pi...penh-cambodia/