Trial | ICT magazine

Posts Tagged ‘trial’

Tories to force Commons vote on hacker case

July 15th, 2009 | No Comments

Shadow home secretary says he hopes MPs will send a message to the government that hacker should be tried in UK not US

The Conservatives will today use a Commons vote to signal their opposition to the proposal to extradite Gary McKinnon to the US to face trial for hacking into American military computers.

Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, said he hoped MPs would “send a message” to the government that McKinnon, who has Asperger’s syndrome, ought to be put on trial in the UK and not in the US, where he faces a sentence of up to 60 years.

McKinnon is still using the courts to try to block his extradition and MPs will not vote directly on his case. But the Tories have tabled a motion expressing “very great concern” about the way the extradition system is working and calling for the Extradition Act 2003 to be reformed “at the earliest opportunity”.

The Tories are hoping that the Liberal Democrats and some Labour MPs will support them when the Commons votes on the motion this afternoon.

Ministers claim that the act, which affects extradition between the UK and the US, has benefited both countries and that the government does not have the power to stop McKinnon being sent to face trial in the US.

McKinnon, who is being backed by a high-profile Daily Mail campaign, yesterday asked the high court to overturn the refusal of Keir Starmer, the director of public prosecutions, to put him on trial in the UK on charges of computer misuse. If there were no UK prosecution, McKinnon would inevitably be extradited to stand trial in the US, the judges heard.

The court reserved judgment and said it hoped to give a decision in writing by the end of July.

McKinnon has admitted computer hacking and leaving a message in US military systems saying “I will continue to disrupt”, but his lawyers said his intention was only to cause “temporary impairment”, not lasting damage to the system.

They argue that his extradition would lead to “disastrous consequences”, including possible psychosis and suicide, because of his medical condition, which is on the autistic spectrum.

This morning Grayling told BBC Radio 4′s Today programme: “People on the autistic spectrum find it very difficult to deal with a big change in surroundings. To extradite somebody in that position to the US to a strange environment is undoubtedly going to cause health issues for Gary McKinnon. In the past, where there have been similar cases, we have seen trials take place in the UK.

“There is no doubt that an offence has been committed; Gary McKinnon has admitted that. But why on earth is this trial not taking place in the UK?

“I hope the House of Commons will send a message to the government that really this is not what the extradition system is supposed to do. These new rules were set up for very serious offences, for terror offences. I don’t believe parliament ever intended them to be used to extradite somebody with autism issues to face a charge like this.

“There are some suggestions that the home secretary has more powers to intervene than have so far been used.”

But the Home Office dismissed this claim. It said that the home secretary did not have the power to block McKinnon’s extradition.

“The case of Gary McKinnon remains before the courts. As such it would not be appropriate for us to comment on it in detail, except to say that this case has been subjected to the closest attention and to the greatest possible procedural fairness. The home secretary [then Jacqui Smith] gave very careful consideration before deciding in July 2006 to order extradition,” the statement said.

“It is important to be clear that, under the terms of the Extradition Act 2003, the home secretary must order extradition unless certain limited conditions are met. The courts have already said that those conditions are not met in Mr McKinnon’s case; and his attempts to defeat the US request have since been dismissed by the high court, the House of Lords and the European court of human rights.

“The information that must be provided by both the United States and the United Kingdom is effectively the same. The United Kingdom must demonstrate ‘probable cause’ to the United States courts, while the United States must demonstrate ‘reasonable suspicion’ to ours.

“Extradition is a key crime-fighting measure in our increasingly globalised world and, within what the law permits, we give maximum assistance to all of our extradition partners.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Paul LeGendre: The Ilan Halimi Murder Trial: Moving Beyond Hatred?

July 15th, 2009 | No Comments

On Friday, July 10, the leader of a Paris gang was sentenced to life in prison for torturing and murdering a young Jewish man, Ilan…

Drew Peterson’s Murder Trial Delayed

July 14th, 2009 | No Comments

Drew Peterson won’t be taking the stand anytime soon, as his trial was pushed back Tuesday beyond its scheduled August 24 start date.

Peterson’s attorney Joel Brodsky told Judge Stephen White Tuesday that the defense team needs more time to r…

CBS Joins Comcast’s “On Demand Online” Web Trial

July 14th, 2009 | No Comments

Yet another addition to the growing list of programmers signing on to Comcast’s “On Demand Online.” CBS will join the cable providers trial program, which will allow subscribers to get Web access to shows they get on TV.

Hacker’s human rights ‘ignored’

July 14th, 2009 | No Comments

Gary McKinnon

Human rights arguments against extraditing a British man accused of hacking into US military networks were not "confronted," a court has heard.

Gary McKinnon, 43, from Wood Green, London, wants to overturn a refusal to put him on trial in the UK on charges of computer misuse.

Edward Fitzgerald QC accused the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer QC of misapplying the law.

Mr McKinnon, who has Asperger’s Syndrome, faces trial in America.

Mr Starmer decided there was "insufficient evidence" to support a UK prosecution under the Computer Misuse Act.

If there is no UK prosecution, Mr McKinnon would inevitably be extradited to stand trial in the US, the judges heard.

Lawyers for the DPP are arguing the decision not to prosecute was "entirely rational" and was "manifestly not one which is susceptible to judicial review".

Mr McKinnon, who was arrested by British police in 2002, has already appealed unsuccessfully to the House of Lords and the European Court of Human Rights to avoid extradition.

Mr McKinnon is accused of hacking into 97 government computers belonging to organisations including the US Navy and Nasa during 2001 and 2002.

The US government says this caused damage costing $800,000 (£500,000) at a time of heightened security in the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks.

He claims he was looking for details of UFOs.

"Psychological suffering"

Mr Fitzgerald told two High Court judges in London that extraditing Mr McKinnon would lead to "disastrous consequences" because of his medical condition, including possible psychosis and suicide.

Mr Fitzgerald also said Mr Starmer had failed to confront the new evidence concerning Mr McKinnon’s medical condition and deal with the human rights issues it raised.

If sent to the US, Mr McKinnon was likely to receive a substantial prison sentence and was unlikely to be repatriated to serve his sentence, Mr Fitzgerald said.

And the process of extradition, trial and sentence would expose Mr McKinnon to "an avoidable and unnecessary risk of serious psychological suffering" with "all of the attendant disastrous consequences," he added.

This application for judicial review at the High Court in London is the second recent legal challenge in Mr McKinnon’s case.

In the first, Mr Fitzgerald accused the home secretary of reaching a "flawed" decision, following medical evidence of the severe mental suffering that extradition would cause.

The judges are expected to give their ruling in both legal challenges later this month.</p

This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

Courting defiance

July 14th, 2009 | No Comments

By Adam Mynott
BBC News, The Hague

After years of preparing for his trial, Liberia’s former president, Charles Taylor, has stood up in court to give evidence at his war crimes trial.

Ex-Liberian President Charles Taylor

This is the first time he has spoken in public since he was brought to The Hague in June 2006 to face charges of terrorism, murder, rape and torture.

For two years he has sat impassively behind his legal team in the Special Court for Sierra Leone, part of the International Criminal Court.

He has listened to a catalogue of horrific testimony supporting the prosecution charges that he masterminded and directed a campaign of terror and atrocity in Sierra Leone in the late 1990s and early this century.

On Tuesday, Charles Taylor, in a dark suit, white shirt and grey tie and wearing tinted spectacles, started by swearing an oath to tell the truth.

He then took his seat in the witness stand in front of the judges.

It is a historic moment – the first time an African head of state has been charged with crimes against humanity, charges he has strenuously denied.

The judges, court officials, barristers from the defence and prosecution teams and a packed public gallery focused on his every utterance.

‘Misinformation, disinformation’

Charles Taylor sat down and was asked to give the court his name: Charles Ghankay Taylor, the 21st President of Liberia, and he was asked by the chief defence counsel, Courtenay Griffiths, how he responded to prosecution claims contained in 11 counts which allege that "you are everything from a terrorist to a rapist".

Charles Taylor paused for several moments, then said: "It is quite incredible that such descriptions of me should come about… and unfortunate that the prosecution because of misinformation, disinformation, lies, rumours, would associate me with such descriptions.

A girl in Sierra Leone who had her leg amputated by RUF rebels (2000)

"I am none of those, have never been and will never be, whether they think so or not."

This is the start of what will be a lengthy period of testimony by Mr Taylor, anticipated to last several weeks.

Initially he will be led through his defence by his legal team.

Mr Griffiths asked him about what he described as the "signature" of the Sierra Leone conflict – amputations.

Charles Taylor said it was impossible for that to have ever been ordered by him.

He said there had been no evidence from any of the witnesses brought to court to show that such atrocities had been carried out in Liberia.

"I would have never ever accepted that in Liberia and we would have never encouraged that in Sierra Leone," he said.

Mr Taylor was also asked whether he had supplied weapons to the rebel movement, the RUF in Sierra Leone.

He denied that he had given the RUF military assistance except, he said, for a brief period between August 1991 and May 1992 when he said he did supply some weapons and ammunition to RUF soldiers in order to bolster security along the border between Liberia and Sierra Leone.

He said this was limited assistance and ceased completely in May 1992.

The defence has made it clear that its strategy is to show the court that it was impossible for Charles Taylor to have "micro-managed" a rebel operation in a neighbouring country while he was trying to run affairs of state in his country Liberia, which had – as Charles Taylor put it – "problems of its own".

Court delays

The former Liberian president was brought here to The Hague for trial three years ago.

The hearing started just over two years ago and at the time it was expected that the trial might last 12 months, but Charles Taylor initially refused to accept the jurisdiction of the court.

He then dismissed his legal team and the prosecution case has been very lengthy, taking testimony from more than 90 witnesses.

The defence has said it has a list of 249 witnesses they may call to give evidence.

It is very unlikely that all these witnesses will appear, but nonetheless the trial looks as though it may extend well into next year.</p

This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.

Charles Taylor: war crimes case built on lies

July 14th, 2009 | No Comments

Former Liberian leader says accusations that he supported rebels in Sierra Leone war are based on lies and rumours

The former Liberian president Charles Taylor has taken the stand in his own defence at his war crimes trial and says the case against him is built on lies.

Taylor, the first African head of state to be tried by an international court, is charged with 11 counts of murder, torture, rape, sexual slavery, using child soldiers and spreading terror. Prosecutors at the United Nations-backed special court for Sierra Leone say he supported rebels in that country to help gain control of it and strip its vast mineral wealth.

He told the court the allegations against him are based on “disinformation, misinformation, lies, rumours.”

Some of the 91 witnesses called so far have claimed Taylor shipped weapons to rebels in rice sacks in contravention of an arms embargo, and in return received “blood diamonds” mined by slave labour.

Taylor, 61, has pleaded not guilty. His lawyer, Courtenay Griffiths, said the former leader would today begin what is expected to be several weeks of testimony because he wanted to set the record straight.

Griffiths said Taylor would testify about his “strenuous efforts to bring peace in Sierra Leone”.

He urged the judges to give Taylor a fair hearing, and not to be overwhelmed by the parade of misery presented by the prosecution since the trial opened 18 months ago.

One prosecution witness who took the stand had stumps where his hands had been hacked off. A woman testified that she was forced to carry a sack full of severed heads, including those of her children. One of Taylor’s former aides told judges he was with Taylor when the president ate a human liver.

“No one who has seen the procession through this courtroom of hurt human beings reliving the most grotesque trauma would have been unmoved,” Griffiths, who is from Britain, told the three-judge panel. “We are human too, even while we declare this accused man to be not guilty of the charges he faces.”

Taylor’s trial has been hailed as a ground-breaking example of making an autocrat face responsibility for the human rights violations that occurred on his watch.

Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir, has refused to answer a summons by the international criminal court, which is based in The Hague, to respond to charges of crimes against humanity in Darfur. Most African leaders have supported Bashir in his defiance and refuse to arrest him.

Taylor completed an economics degree in the US and military training in Libya before rising to power as a rebel warlord in Liberia and being elected president in 1997.

He is accused of supporting the Revolutionary United Front in Sierra Leone in its fight to depose President Joseph Momoh and his successors. Prosecutors say Taylor trained in Libya with the front’s leader, Foday Sankoh.

About 500,000 people are estimated to have been victims of killings, systematic mutilation and other atrocities in the civil war that lasted from 1991 until 2002. Some of the worst crimes were carried out by gangs of child soldiers, who were given drugs to desensitise them.

In an emotional opening statement, Griffiths cast Taylor as a peacemaker who was too busy defending democracy in Liberia to “micromanage” atrocities committed by rebels in Sierra Leone.

Griffiths said Taylor was not behind the use of children in conflict. “Child soldiers were not a Charles Taylor invention,” he said.

The former president sat impassively in court wearing a brown double-breasted suit, brown tie and dark glasses.

Taylor is being tried in a courtroom rented from the international criminal court because of fears that trying him in Sierra Leone could spark renewed violence.

At the court’s headquarters in the Sierra Leone capital, Freetown, the public galleries of two courtrooms were packed with survivors, students, police and community leaders who watched a live satellite broadcast of the opening statement.

In Liberia, a civil rights advocate, Boakai Jalieba, said the case was being closely followed there.

“We in Liberia have to take keen interest in the trial because the wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone had too many similarities, they had some common identities; Liberians were recruited to go to Sierra Leone and Sierra Leoneans fought here,” he said.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds