back to article Brit accused of spying on 772 people via webcam CCTV software tells court he'd end his life if extradited to US

A Briton is reportedly fighting extradition to the United States after deploying webcam malware onto hundreds of women's laptops so he could spy on them undressing and having sex. Christopher Taylor, a 57-year-old labourer, appeared by video link at Westminster Magistrates' Court to contest an extradition attempt by the US …

  1. MiguelC Silver badge
    Black Helicopters

    Team America: World Police

    Will he be extradited to each of the 39 different countries (38 if we take out the UK) where his victims were?

    Then why extradite him to the US?

    He should tried in the UK (I'm assuming some of the victims were local, but even if not, it's where the crimes were committed)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Do foreign victims not count in the digital age then?

      It's not just about local justice systems, these are crimes in other countries too - they need to have justice there should those countries decide to prosecute.

      It's not pick and mix for the UK, it depends on the other countries.

      1. K

        Re: Team America: World Police

        All victims count, but typically a law is broken in the jurisdiction where the instigator is located, obviously online crimes murky this somewhat, but he is a UK citizen, and should answer for his crimes in the UK. His victims can still give evidence and see justice done - I do wonder if the UK is such as pushover, just to get rid of the problem and associated costs!

        My issue with the US's use of extradition is they try to apply their laws internationally, I recall a few years ago, they went after European (aka offshore) based gambling websites, as US citizens were placing bets on them - How is that the website operators problem?

        1. sev.monster
          Holmes

          Re: Team America: World Police

          There can be a trial and charges placed, but unless the defendant/accused is under US federal or state jurisdiction (depending on what court it is brought to), they cannot do anything to them. If said accused were to set foot on US soil, however, things change. There would still be various international niceities to wade through but they would likely be able to arrest.

          IANAL. Pitching, of course.

        2. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Typically a law is broken in the country where the crime has an effect. Which would be in the USA to a large extent, and fewer crimes in other countries. What country he is a citizen of really doesn't matter at all.

        3. Halfmad

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Most laws can be applied internationally, otherwise you wouldn't have international arrest warrants etc as they wouldn't be valid.

          Where a crime was committed is key here, the crime technically was committed on US soil FROM the UK (allegedly) that allows for extradition.

          1. Earth Resident

            Re: Team America: World Police

            I cannot agree. Had he contracted a murder in the US from the UK he would be tried in the UK. Don't extradite anyone to the US until the US starts providing some reciprocal favors.

            https://nypost.com/2019/12/20/us-diplomats-wife-anne-sacoolas-charged-in-uk-teens-death/

            1. TomG

              Re: Team America: World Police

              Not a good example since in this case Diplomatic Immunity applies.

              1. MrDamage

                Re: Team America: World Police

                Except she never qualified for D.I. in the first place, and any possible right to D.I. she did have, expired when she fled the country.

                American exceptionalism has to end.

                Besides, would it not be a gross violation of his human rights to send him to Nurglite Central?

            2. Jaybus

              Re: Team America: World Police

              Perhaps she told the US authorities she would kill herself if forced to face trial in the UK.

        4. macjules Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Would just hate to think of what would happen if a US pervert was caught looking at underage girls undressing in the UK. Of course, we would never, ever ask for them to be extradited to face trial in the UK.

          Oh, by the way Mr Pervert threatening to kill yourself does not really work as a defence. Claiming you were testing allegations that the software could activate someone's laptop camera remotely might, but unlikely.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Claiming you were testing allegations that the software could activate someone's laptop camera remotely might, but unlikely.

            Testing it on a couple of his own laptops fair enough, but 772 of them belonging to women across the world? Don't think so!

        5. shaunhw

          Re: Team America: World Police

          He was on UK soil when the crime was comitted, broke only UK laws (when located here we Brits are not subject to US law) and should face UK justice, along with up to the maximum UK penalty for the offence.

          1. sev.monster

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Just because he is not under US jurisdiction does not mean he did not break US law.

            Think of it like this. He threw stones into 30-odd windows, and all the owners of those respective windows have the right to be pissed; whether or not mommy will let one or all of those 30-odd pissed-off window-owners spank her kid is up to her to decide. In this case, she seems interested in placating the one with the biggest broken window, as laws allow her to do so.

            Breaking those windows is not only breaking the law where the widdle tyke is from, but also breaking the law where the window is and in the jurisdiction of the window's owner. Just because it happened elsewhere doesn't make the law any less broken, it just makes it difficult to do anything about it [unless extradition is involved].

            1. IceC0ld Silver badge

              Re: Team America: World Police

              SOMEONE has to say it, using WINDOWS as the analogy for a crime ffs, why not go for balance, and say he was stealing APPLES :o)

          2. TomG

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Was the crime committed when he placed the software on a remote computer ( in the US) or when he viewed the pictures on his computer (in the UK)?

          3. Jaybus

            Re: Team America: World Police

            I do not even think he has been charged in the UK. Why not, ffs? The FBI claim that 52 of the women are UK citizens. So of course they are claiming the Laurie Love defense. If he were already in a UK prison, there wouldn't be an extradition hearing or a story.

      2. Cederic Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        They're welcome to make a criminal complaint in the UK and seek justice.

        1. LDS Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          That would make seeking justice more expensive and while rich people could afford it, less rich one could not.

          1. Cederic Silver badge

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Nonsense. File a crime report online, provide a statement to police using video. Total cost: pennies.

            It'd cost them more to drive to their local US Sheriff.

      3. steviebuk Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        No its the US abuse of its power and thinking it is the world police. If this was flipped and he was American and had trick UK residents then they'd reject the extradition and say "He's staying in the US. His crimes were committed in the US so he'll be tried in the US."

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Team America: World Police

          > "His crimes were committed in the US so he'll be tried in the US."

          But that's because they need more slaves in their $1/hour prison work programmes.

          1. That 8 Bit Guy

            Re: Team America: World Police

            You can never have enough license plates.

        2. TomG

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Do you think the UK is powerless to refuse the extradition? BTW, per your example. the US would extradite the US citizen, after he had served his sentence.

          1. Thicko

            Re: Team America: World Police

            As I understand it the US has not ratified its half of the UK-US extradition agreement. Until this is sorted out we should not stick to the letter of the agreement as the US is having its cake on this.

            1. Neverwas

              Re: Team America: World Police

              "As I understand it the US has not ratified its half of the UK-US extradition agreement"

              How very odd given the US Senate ratified the new UK-US Extradition Treaty in 2006.

    2. John Sager

      Re: Team America: World Police

      He's allegedly broken US computer misuse laws and the US wire fraud laws, so they would be tried in the US. So far the UK authorities have not charged him with anything as I understand it.

      1. Cederic Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        As always though, if he's committed a crime in the UK then the UK authorities can and should prosecute him.

        If he hasn't, he should not be extradited anyway.

        At no point are his actions in the UK justification for extradition to another country.

        1. Confuciousmobil

          Re: Team America: World Police

          So you’d be happy for Chinese/American/Russian hackers to put ransomeware on your computer but not get prosecuted because they did it from their own country?

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Team America: World Police

          What a moronic take on this.

          He's not committed crimes here, therefor they do not count.

          Presumably if your family member was tricked into sending money and blackmailed from abroad you'd have no issue with the person not being pursued.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Team America: World Police

          it's commendable, and yet so disarming, that people here discuss the merits of extradition to the US, when in reality it's a (current) "political context" which dictates whether he goes there or not :(

          1. TomG

            Re: Team America: World Police

            realistically speaking, every thing is a "political context" regarding relations between nations.

      2. shaunhw

        Re: Team America: World Police

        John Sager wrote: "He's allegedly broken US computer misuse laws and the US wire fraud"

        Since when did we all start becoming subject to US laws whilst living in the UK? Does that mean I can now vote for the US president?

        1. Natalie Gritpants Jr

          Re: Team America: World Police

          That's precisely the point of extradition treaties.

        2. TomG

          Re: Team America: World Police

          As far as I can tell everyone is subject ( to some extent) to every nations laws depending on the victim location and the method of executing the crime. Extradition is another story. Voting for the President is also another story in that you have to be a citizen of the US. If you are a citizen of the US you can be living in Russia (for example) and vote for the US President. Humor alert (some people don't have to be alive to vote for a Democrat.)

        3. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          It falls under US laws if the crime happened in the USA. And the crime happened there. The tech to commit the crime was there, the victims were there, the damage was done there. Doesn't matter where you sit with your trousers down your ankles.

    3. RSW

      Re: Team America: World Police

      So where is the crime committed the location of the camera or the location of the screen?

      1. LucasNorth

        Re: Team America: World Police

        The location of the person clearly

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Which person? Alleged culprit or victim?

          1. Lockwood

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Yes

          2. TomG

            Re: Team America: World Police

            It is always the victim. Without a victim there can be no crime.

    4. Wellyboot Silver badge

      Re: Team America: World Police

      In theory he could be tried in all jurisdictions but many countries will be happy for him to serve time almost anywhere and the US habit of imposing multi century sentences may render that a moot point.

      Crimes were committed wherever local laws say they were, It’s quite possible that the US has the most victims within the 772.

      1. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        He will serve maybe 10 years in a minimum security facility. Believe me he is not going to a maximum security prison in general population. They are just grandstanding for sympathy!

        The crime is committed in the country of the victim. If there are Russian, Chinese or yes, maybe Turkish victims I'd be more than happy to let them have him!

    5. Scotthva5

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Agreed. Serves no useful purpose to extradite to the US when the crimes were committed on UK soil. This amounts to grandstanding by the US "Justice" Department.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Team America: World Police

        So if it was your daughter he was ,,,,, on the video, and the criminal was in another county, you'd tell her what?

        1. DavCrav Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          "and the criminal was in another county, you'd tell her what?"

          That he hopefully will go to jail in that other country?

        2. Claverhouse Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Think of the Child !

          1. hoola Silver badge

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Unless of course you are called Anne Sacoolas. The innocent person she hit died. He was somebodies child and currently the US authorities are stubbornly avoiding her returning to the UK where she left illegally to face charges.

            So in this case, no he should not be extradited until the US start behaving like normal responsible people instead of arrogantly believing that they are better than everyone else and are somehow "World Justice".

            1. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

              Re: Team America: World Police

              That is a "Diplomatic Immunity" case. Those are real sticky. We here in the US have to deal with them on a regular basis because of the UN being here. Frankly, I believe her immunity should be waived but these cases very seldom follow common sense. The "Diplos" freak out anytime their immunity is threatened.

            2. Natalie Gritpants Jr

              Re: Team America: World Police

              I think the UK has requested extradition but it is denied on a technicality. The fix for that is already implemented so it shouldn't happen again. Not great for the victim's family but not the black/white scenario you are attempting to paint.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Team America: World Police

      why extradite him to the US

      Why not? At least they have sentences that actually mean something. If you can't do the time don't do the crime, and how about considering the victims?

      1. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        At least they have sentences that actually mean something. 

        Yes, 5 years in prisom for smoking a joint. In the meantime meth-head Hunter Biden gets a $80k/month cushy job for having the right surname.

        The Land if the Free(tm) houses 25% of the world's prison population (number includes both India and Chine) while only having 5% of the world population.

        A pothead on the street doesn't make money for anyone, when behind bars, that same person will be making the prison industrial complex 50k/year plus all the slave labour he can provide.

        Been there. Never plan on (voluntarily) going back.

        1. Evil Auditor Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Been there. Never plan on (voluntarily) going back.

          Hardly anyone, at least that I can think of, plans to go -voluntarily- back to prison. Or did I miss something?

        2. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          We are working to fix that! Understand, it was Biden who co-sponsored that bill. He, with the help of "Super Predator" Hillary. If anyone thinks putting "Jim Crow Joe" in the White House will help black people you are clueless as to the long history of the racist Democrat party!

          Pre-1860s: Blacks in Chains

          Post-1860s-1960s: Jim Crow

          Post 1960s: Great Society Economic Servitude!

          1990s: Put those who won't bow to them in jail!

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Team America: World Police

        So you think prosecutors should be able to pick a country which is most likely to side with them and give the harshest sentences? Bit of a quagmire that one, especially if it's an offence which is only punishable in certain countries. What if he was openly gay? Would you push for him to be tried in Saudi Arabia purely because the sentence would be fatal?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Team America: World Police

          That's the way it works in the USA when there's a serial murderer who could be charged in several sates or in federal courts (murder a USPS or National Parks employee and its federal) ... the authorities plan it all out so that the first trial is held in a state ot federal court where either the death penalty is not avaiable or if not they give notice that they don't want to request a death penalty if the defendant is found guilty ... they then prosecute and get a guilty verdict without any danger of jurors oppposed to the death penalty refusing to reach a guilty verdict) and let the judge give a "life without paroile" sentence ...then they can go round all the other jurisdictions and seek the death penalty knowing that iin the unlikely event of getting a "unhelpful" juror or two that their defendant is already in jail for the rest of their life.

        2. SundogUK Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          If it is not a crime in the UK, the UK will not extradite.

        3. sammystag

          Re: Team America: World Police

          The UK doesn't extradite its citizens if they face the death penalty. Having said that I seem to remember May and Javid bending the rules on that

      3. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        He will probably get 10 years and serve 5 in a country club minimum security lockup.

    7. Dinanziame Silver badge
      Paris Hilton

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Indeed, I have no idea why he shouldn't be tried and jailed in the UK.

      1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        The evidence rules are different, and the evidence is USian.

    8. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Some Russians, Chinese and North Koreans have been accused of installing ransomware, spyware and malware to log internet banking passwords. If some of their victims were in their own countries is that where they should be tried?

      There are gross problems with the US prison service but I do not think you have found the answer.

      1. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        They should be tried in the country where they committed the crime (if it is a crime in that country).

        What's next? Someone in Saudi Arabia sees a the Charlie Hebdo picture of the prophet Mohammed and grts extradited to SA, because that person broke a local law there?

        Ridiculous.

        1. LDS Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          That's why there are courts deciding on extradition based on mutual agreements....

        2. SundogUK Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Straw-man bullshit.

        3. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          You are missing a really, really tiny point: You don't get extradited from the UK if your action is not a crime according to UK law.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Team America: World Police

        Yes they should be. Even if there are no victims in that country. The accused initiated and carried out the crime from a country and should be tried in said country. But if they are not, so be it. If they ever go to America or any other where their crimes affected, they can arrest them if they so like and they can be charged there.

        If someone goes to a country and commits a crime, then goes to another, then they should be able to extradite them.

    9. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Team America: World Police

      I thought this would be the subject of the first response. As usual, the answer to your second question of why extradite him to the US is that a US citizen was a victim of a crime in the US. So US police investigated. Their legal system allows for criminals to be charged where the victim is, so they have applied for extradition.

      (Slightly off-topic: perhaps some US readers can comment on this. Is this an extension of the principles about what happens in law when a victim and criminal are located in different states of the US? Is the crime generally prosecuted in the victim's state?)

      And to answer your first question, I don't see why the other countries can't do the same, if their legal systems allow it, and they have suitable extradition treaties in place.

      1. simkin

        Re: Team America: World Police

        The individual States extradite criminals to each other all the time, usually regarding criminals who have fled jurisdiction though.

      2. DavCrav Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        "Their legal system allows for criminals to be charged where the victim is, so they have applied for extradition."

        That's absolutely fine. I think the problem that I, and many others here, have, is where this is accepted by the UK court system.

        This one-way extradition treaty has to end.

      3. MachDiamond Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        "Is this an extension of the principles about what happens in law when a victim and criminal are located in different states of the US? Is the crime generally prosecuted in the victim's state?"

        It's always "it depends". If it's a Federal law, it can be tried in any Federal court. For State laws, it's generally tried in the state where the crime took place and extradition isn't an issue. In some cases, crossing a state line will invoke Federal Jurisdiction/Laws. The crimes in this article would likely be tried in Federal Court and I'm not sure how they would choose the venue.

      4. Sherrie Ludwig

        Re: Team America: World Police

        (Slightly off-topic: perhaps some US readers can comment on this. Is this an extension of the principles about what happens in law when a victim and criminal are located in different states of the US? Is the crime generally prosecuted in the victim's state?)

        The state where the offense occurred. There have been some legal issues when, say, a body is found in one state but it cannot be determined in which state the murder actually occurred. Where the murder occurred is usually the deciding factor.

    10. chivo243 Silver badge
      Holmes

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Too bad Justice can decide where the crime took place? You can be virtually anywhere. Law talking guys would have a field day.

    11. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: Team America: World Police

      He should tried in the UK (I'm assuming some of the victims were local, but even if not, it's where the crimes were committed)

      But is it? If the affected computers were in the US, and the spying activity took place in the US, you could argue that it was only ordered from the UK. Even if he were jailed in the UK for voyeurism the US could argue that he should still be extradited on release to answer the computer fraud and wire fraud charges.

      I do find it difficult to have much sympathy for him.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Team America: World Police

        By the logic of it was only ordered in the UK therfore no actual crime occurred in the UK because the hacking occurred in the US, means they should arrest that computer that was spying on them, as it was carrying out the crime.

        By the way ordering a crime to be carried out is a crime. Otherwise I could order hitmen to kill people I don't like all daylong.

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          By the way ordering a crime to be carried out is a crime. Otherwise I could order hitmen to kill people I don't like all daylong.

          Indeed so, and if you phoned hitmen'R'us from the UK to order the death of someone in Paris, you could be charged in the UK with ordering the crime, but the hitman would be charged in France with the murder itself.

          In this case the question is where the actual crime (as opposed to the arrangement of it) happened. That's undoubtedly why the US charges are wire & computer fraud.

      2. cbars

        Re: Team America: World Police

        The point is the UK should care what foreign laws are broken an not allow such loose treaties, otherwise a lot of people are going to have to get extradited to China for going on Facebook, to SA for drinking alcohol....

        I would argue if he's jailed in the UK, job done. If the US want to stop "wire fraud" from other countries (which other countries don't agree is fraud at all), they are free to protect their citizens and cut the wires.

    12. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Then why extradite him to the US?

      Why extradite him at all? Many countries never give up their citizens to foreign powers and the US itself does so very rarely and never if the crime was committed on US soil.

      Anne Sacoolas is an obvious recent example of American double standards.

      1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        Sacoolas isn't a good example, really. It's not like she actually faced jail time here, she fled for no reason. The tabloids blew it up into a big deal, but the only thing she really did wrong* was running away instead of answering questions.

        *Legally, that is. Mowing down cyclists is wrong, but not a (serious) crime unless you do it deliberately or recklessly.

        1. Evil Harry

          Re: Team America: World Police

          "Sacoolas isn't a good example, really. It's not like she actually faced jail time here, she fled for no reason. The tabloids blew it up into a big deal, but the only thing she really did wrong* was running away instead of answering questions."

          What a crappy comment. She killed someone's son and then ran for the border without going through due process. It doesn't get much lower

          1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Morally, I agree with you. But legally, the only important question is 'did you do it on pirpose?', and all anyone asked it has to do is say 'no'.

            1. Evil Harry

              Re: Team America: World Police

              She promised cooperation with Northants police and then legged it when someone (presumably working for Uncle Sam) thought better of it so legality doesn't come into it. She got away with without facing justice because of some piss poor loophole about diplomatic immunity which has now thankfully been closed.

              I have the utmost and genuine respect for our friends across the Atlantic but on this one, they seriously dropped the ball and so did we by not making an issue of it. A family is now without their son while she lives the American dream. Simply put, it sucks.

              1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

                Re: Team America: World Police

                You're still not getting it. If she hadn't legged it, you'd never have heard about the fatal crash. At worst she'd have got a community service order.

                So she'd still have been basically unpunished, and he'd still be dead.

                This is why extradition and diplomatic immunity and similar waffle is irrelevant to that case. We need to change the law and make killing cyclists a proper crime.

                1. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

                  Re: Team America: World Police

                  At worst she'd have got a community service order.

                  Dude. She was driving on the right hand side of the road.... in the UK.

                  That's reckless behaviour at the very least. You don't walk that off with community servuce.

                  1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

                    Re: Team America: World Police

                    Nope. This is all clearly explained on the relevant government pages. It's careless driving, and the punishment would normally be community service.

                    I completely agree that it's shockingly lenient, but that's the law.

                    https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/road-traffic-charging

                    1. DavCrav Silver badge

                      Re: Team America: World Police

                      Driving on the wrong side of the road for a length of time (i.e., not momentarily drifting) would be likely classified as dangerous driving rather than careless driving.

                      And legging it to another country is considered an aggravating factor in this case. I would expect the maximum (or close to it) sentence to be handed down, like Assange was handed 51 weeks (maximum 52 weeks) because of the egregious aggravating factor.

                      1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

                        Re: Team America: World Police

                        It's careless driving. There's caselaw.

                        Legging it is indeed an aggravating factor. Hence why I said that Sacoolas should have stayed, and then would have received a slap on the wrist.

                        Do note that it isn't a big aggravating factor, so we're still talking about a community service order - a longer one, that's all.

                        Not sure what your point is re Assange. They slapped him with a single minor charge so they could hold him while they decided what to do. If they don't extradite him, they'll prosecute the real charges - he's going to get a whole of life sentence if that happens, because it's one of the most serious cases of perverting the course of justice the UK has ever seen; witness intimidation is a life sentence on its own, and that'd be on top of a basic starting point of 'the maximum version of whatever sentence he was trying to wriggle out of'.

                        That's why the whole extradition fuss is rather silly. It's purely and solely about which jails he spends the rest of his life in. He will never walk free, given the clear danger he poses to the public.

        2. Slef

          Re: Team America: World Police

          I would suggest that driving on the wrong side of the road is somewhat "reckless"!

      2. Old Used Programmer Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        As an American, I think Anna Sacoolas should be extradited to the UK to answer the charges brought against her. "Diplomatic immunity" is a rather thin reed in the case. I suggest the UK see what happens next week or so and then re-apply to extradite her in the later half of next January.

        1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          And while we're about it, let's extradite people for unpaid parking fines.

          What's notable about Harry Dunn's death is everyone seems to think what happened should be a crime - but it is only punishable with a slap on the wrist.

          Forget Anne Sacoolas, how about we change the law so what she did is a serious crime?

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: Team America: World Police

            "Forget Anne Sacoolas"

            No.

            "how about we change the law so what she did is a serious crime?"

            That's a whole 'nuther kettle of worms. I have written snail mail[0] to my elected officials about the Dunn case, and Sacoolas's part in it. I'll drop them a reminder after the election. Have you similarly written to your elected officials about the law you would like to see changed? And sent reminders regularly?

            [0] They pay no attention to Internet forums or email. Snail mail is the only thing they pay any attention to.

            1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

              Re: Team America: World Police

              I've been campaigning for it for years. You might notice that I've brought it up here, and as usual everyone's shocked at the law.

          2. Slef

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Up to 5 yrs imprisonment for causing death by careless driving

            1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

              Re: Team America: World Police

              https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/magistrates-court/item/causing-death-by-careless-or-inconsiderate-driving/

              Yes, but there's no suggestion of any aggravating factors. If Sacoolas had answered questions, been charged with causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving, and plead guilty, she'd have got a medium level community sentence, reduced by a third.

              Note that this would have been dealt with by magistrates. We dont take it seriously.

              1. DavCrav Silver badge

                Re: Team America: World Police

                "Yes, but there's no suggestion of any aggravating factors."

                Fleeing the country is an aggravating factor.

                1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

                  Re: Team America: World Police

                  Yes, that's why I said how daft she was to flee. There was nothing to flee from. Absconding is by quite some margin the most serious offence she committed.

        2. jake Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Also as an American, I agree. The drunken coward should return to Blighty to face the music. But being a bint with absolutely zero integrity, she won't. Unless the British Government tries again sometime after January, and I certainly hope they do!

          1. veti Silver badge

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Get real. Even if Biden wins, his first official executive decision isn't going to involve handing an American citizen over to placate the British press.

            Heck, I don't even think he should. I know the British press, I used to be a (peripheral) part of it. If they're clamouring for blood, it would be a travesty to give their victim to the British courts.

        3. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          It might be "thin reed" but that is what these "diplos" do. They and their families commit crimes both small and large all over the world and then claim immunity. I agree in principle with the immunity but there has to be some kind of common sense here.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Team America: World Police

        >>>Why extradite him at all?

        Because the UK ratified a sweetheart extradition treaty with the US which allows the US to ask for any UK citizen. So long as a valid warrant is presented.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Team America: World Police

          And that is why there is so much anger on this thread ..... it's not the American's fault that they rarely extradite. It's our govt's fault for being so weak .....

      4. pop_corn

        Re: Team America: World Police

        I completely agree. They can have this douche bag when we get Anne Sacoolas. Extradition is as much about politics as it is about justice.

        Yes I accept the point that Anne Sacoolas fled for next to no reason. She may have been done for 'death by dangerous driving' or 'death by careless or inconsiderate driving' and likely wouldn't have served a jail term, probably got community service or a suspended sentence, but that's not the point. Justice wasn't served. Due process wasn't followed. Harry Dunn's family didn't get the closure of their day in court.

    13. Anonymous Coward
      Headmaster

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Extradition affairs (and not only with the big, bad US of A) have always been based on where the crime was committed. In the case of this Georgia Tech student, that would be in her residence in Georgia. That is the way it has always been, for every overseas offense. That is to keep someone from targeting people overseas, but not doing anything to PO the local cops and living their life normally at home

      And besides, it seems that this gentlemen in question has not been charged by the British government, and is home with his wife.

      And maybe as a rule, Britain prefers the cost of extradition proceedings to the cost of a criminal investigation, trial and incarceration.

      1. jake Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        "this gentlemen"

        Gentleman?

        Kind of a nice term for an intercontinental peeping tom, isn't it?

        1. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Kind of a nice term for an intercontinental peeping tom, isn't it?

          Yes. Let's focus on the unimportant things like how someone refers to this perv.

          Can you please play the 'You offend me sir' card somewhere else and focus on the meat of the story, which is about extradition.

    14. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Team America: World Police

      People have the right to be assumed innocent unless/until proven guilty. He hasn't been found guilty in court, so he has the right to be assumed innocent. (Yes, I know he confessed, so he *will* be found guilty, but it hasn't happened yet). Additionally, prison is not just about punishing people, part of the goal is supposed to be to rehabilitate people so after they serve their sentence they can be functional law-abiding members of society.

      If he was tried in the UK, he would be on bail until his trial, and he would be able to live a mostly-normal life, in his existing home, keeping working, with family & friends & NHS care from his existing medical professionals. He would probably qualify for legal aid to pay for a solicitor to represent him in court. He would then go to a UK prison, where his family & friends could visit him, and where calls to family & friends would be easier due to being in the same time zone. He would get NHS treatment in prison, which will probably be with different healthcare professionals, but should be comparable. At the end of his sentence, he would be released on parole and could go home and start to put his life back together.

      When he is extradited to the US, he will either be held in prison before his trial, or he will have to foot the bill for a bail bond, his own accommodation, his own health insurance, and his own living expenses, while being unable to work (no work visa) and having to continue to pay for his house in the UK. He will be unable to visit most family & friends, if they do want to visit they will have to pay the airfare to visit the US. He will only be able to get either US prison medical care, or whatever medical care he can pay for at US prices; either way he will be dealing with new medical professionals. He would have to either pay for his own lawyer, or accept the public defender that is allocated to him. He would then go to a US prison, where his family & friends could not visit him without spending a lot of time and money flying there, and where phone calls to family & friends would be harder due to being in a different time zone. At the end of his sentence, he might be released on parole, but couldn't go home or work, so not sure how he'd do that.

      There doesn't seem to be any real reason he has to be extradited. He committed a crime that can be punished under UK law. There's no problem with evidence, since he confessed. Heck, due to COVID, the witnesses may be giving evidence over video link anyway, so witnesses should be able to testify in a UK trial from the US.

      1. gnasher729 Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        I think you misunderstand the meaning of "innocent until proven guilty". If someone appears in court, the jurors must not assume he is guilty just because he is in court. They start assuming he is innocent, and then listen to the evidence, which will lead to "proven guilty" or "not proven guilty". But very obviously you can be taken to court when you are innocent. You should leave the court a free man some time later, but you can be taken to court.

        For extradition, the country asking for extradition (USA) must provide enough evidence that he would go to court in the UK if the UK had the same evidence. Not enough evidence to convict, but enough evidence to take him to court.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Team America: World Police

          (Note that I'm talking about what I believe the law *should* say, not what the law currently says. This guy is clearly screwed, he's going to be extradited).

          There are always people who are accused of crimes, taken to court, and found not guilty by the jury. I don't believe those people should have their lives messed up any more than is actually necessary. If you claim someone committed a crime, and whisk them off to a foreign jail for a year or two, that is a punishment before they've been found guilty. If they're found not guilty then you punished someone who shouldn't have been punished, and that is a horrible miscarriage of justice.

          OK, it's necessary to take measures to ensure that a suspect doesn't cause more damage while awaiting court, and they actually attend court. So people accused of crimes who are likely to reoffend before their trial, or people who are a flight risk, will have to be held in prison until their trial. People who are a slightly lower risk need bail conditions and monitoring, to allow them to be released while reducing the risks to an acceptable level. There's no perfect solution here, but we should try to do the best we can, and have the minimum impact possible on arrested-but-not-convicted people while also protecting the public.

          Perhaps in ye olden days, when extradition laws were first written, they made sense. If you physically went to the USA, committed a crime, then fled to the UK, it was reasonable for you to be hauled back to the USA for trial. You made a considered decision to enter the USA and accept USA law. Nowadays, with the Internet, people often don't even know what country hosts the systems they're interacting with. There's no considered decision to accept foreign criminal law.

          Additionally, historically, the judge, suspect, suspect's counsel, prosecutor and witnesses all had to be physically together so they could conduct the trial. So hauling the suspect off to the US where the witnesses are was the least-bad solution. Nowadays with video conferencing, there is no need for that. It's technically possible for witnesses in the US to use video conferencing to give evidence in a UK trial.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Team America: World Police

          >>>For extradition, the country asking for extradition (USA) must provide enough evidence that he would go to court in the UK if the UK had the same evidence. Not enough evidence to convict, but enough evidence to take him to court.

          Incorrect. With this treaty it is assumed the evidence exists due to the valid US warrant. No such evidence is presented during a UK extradition hearing under the UK/US treaty. If the warrant is issued via a grand jury process the evidence and process may be secret anyway.

          Bon voyage!

      2. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

        Re: Team America: World Police

        prison is not just about punishing people,

        You are obviously not a USian. People coming out of US prisons come out more hardened and without any form of rehabilitation recidivism is extremely high. No wonder if people who served their punishment to society still get punished for that well after they leave prison.

      3. JetSetJim Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Team America: World Police

        > Additionally, prison is not just about punishing people, part of the goal is supposed to be to rehabilitate people so after they serve their sentence they can be functional law-abiding members of society.

        Liberal lefty, Priti has a different opinion

        1. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

          Re: Team America: World Police

          Liberal lefty, Priti has a different opinion

          Reducing recidivism through rehabilitation has been proven to work in most countries that have these sort of prison systems.

          It has nothing to do with being a 'lefty', eveything to do with the desire of not making the problem worse and pouring more and more of my tax money in to selfsustaining downwards spiral that will eventually nor only morally, but also economically bankrupt the society I live in.

          People who do not investigate these things and resort to name calling if they fail to comprehend why certain things should be done in a certain way should educate themselves instead.

          1. JetSetJim Silver badge

            Re: Team America: World Police

            Perhaps I should have used the joke icon rather than get me coat icon :(

    15. osakajin Bronze badge

      Re: Team America: World Police

      Swap ya for the woman who killed the lad on his motorbike and fled justice...?

    16. JetSetJim Silver badge

      Re: Team America: World Police

      I believe extradition starts with "who asked first". e.g. there may have been a queue of 38 prosecutors from around the world asking, but the US was at the front of that queue.

      It's why St Julian is currently on the hook for going to the US, as the Swedes dropped their charges, which pushed the US to the front.

      Not sure how it works for "extradition request vs local prosecution". I'd have hoped it was domestic first before extradition.

    17. TomG

      Re: Team America: World Police

      The person accused should face his accusers wherever they may be located. If I follow your reasoning, if he never committed a crime against a citizen in the UK he would never be punished, even he committed crimes involving citizens in other countries.

    18. veti Silver badge

      Re: Team America: World Police

      The Americans are the ones who spotted the crime and applied for extradition. If the UK police had spotted it first, they could have had first crack. Or if some Australian or French or Japanese cop had spotted it, those countries could have applied.

      But they didn't, the Americans did, so here we are.

  2. Halfmad

    That's not a reason to stop.

    There are victims here, can he give evidence from the UK? If found guilty he's extradited?

    I'm not a fan of the rather one sided extradition treaty we have with the US but that's a lot of potential victims to deny justice due to a threat, which is all frankly it is at this point.

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: That's not a reason to stop.

      I'm not a fan of the rather one sided extradition treaty we have with the US

      It's not so one-sided as you suggest. The numbers of people extradited in each direction are roughly in line with the relative population sizes, and although the UK has refused to extradite people to the US there have been few, if any, cases where the US has refused extradition to the UK.

      1. I am the liquor Silver badge

        Re: That's not a reason to stop.

        Anne Sacoolas?

      2. Adrian 4 Silver badge

        Re: That's not a reason to stop.

        There is the Harry Dunn / Anne Sacoolas business

        1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

          Re: That's not a reason to stop.

          See above. Ann Sacoolas was stupid to run, because careless driving is the most she'd have been charged with. It's treated about the same as speeding on the motorway.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: That's not a reason to stop.

            Stupid? She's got away with killing somebody and not facing the slightest penalty. Would have been stupid to have stayed, when she knew she had the backing of Trump. "Running away makes me smart."

            1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

              Re: That's not a reason to stop.

              There is no significant penalty for mowing down cyclists accidentally. In my view there should be, but there isn't. Death by careless driving doesn't normally result in a prison sentence - or even an automatic ban from driving!

              1. DavCrav Silver badge

                Re: That's not a reason to stop.

                "Death by careless driving doesn't normally result in a prison sentence - or even an automatic ban from driving!"

                As she was driving on the wrong side of the road for some time, I would expect death by dangerous driving to be the correct charge on the docket.

                1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

                  Re: That's not a reason to stop.

                  Nope. Look up the charging guidelines.

                  1. I am the liquor Silver badge

                    Re: That's not a reason to stop.

                    Death by dangerous is what the CPS decided to charge her with. In fact the seriousness of the charge was cited by her lawyer as a reason for her not to be extradited from the US.

                    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-50870459

                    Presumably the CPS considered driving on the wrong side of the road to be "A brief but obvious danger arising from a seriously dangerous manoeuvre", a level-3 death-by-dangerous with a recommended sentence of 2-5 years custody and mandatory disqualification:

                    https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/offences/crown-court/item/causing-death-by-dangerous-driving/

                    Even for death by careless, disqualification is mandatory except in the most exceptional circumstances, and it is definitely not "about the same as speeding on the motorway."

                2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                  Re: That's not a reason to stop.

                  would expect death by dangerous driving to be the correct charge

                  That was the charge filed, but it isn't really relevant to this case. If she has diplomatic immunity she can't be extradited, that's a longstanding international agreement. In her case the question that has to be resolved first is whether her claim to immunity is valid. She may still be tried "in absentia".

              2. jake Silver badge

                Re: That's not a reason to stop.

                "There is no significant penalty for mowing down cyclists accidentally"

                Does being drunk have any bearing on the matter in British law?

                1. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

                  Re: That's not a reason to stop.

                  Yes, certainly. But I haven't heard any suggestion of that.

        2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

          Re: There is the Harry Dunn / Anne Sacoolas business

          Just stop all extradition cases until that one is resolved in the British Courts.

          We send far too many people into the hell hole that is the US Prison System.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: That's not a reason to stop.

        >>>The numbers of people extradited in each direction are roughly in line with the relative population sizes...

        Someone has fallen for the pro-US figures. Many of the US-to-UK extraditions are for non-US citizen. Remove those and the real onesidedness of the treaty is revealed.

  3. gargantua

    Legal Spinners

    These people sound like real winners. Rather than taking the suicide angle they should stump for a reality show of some kind when they get to the US.

    1. fattybacon

      Re: Legal Spinners

      Agreed. I particulally was intrigued that they'd return home in a coffin and the US guy was FBI agent Roderick Coffin.

    2. Hollerithevo Silver badge

      Re: Legal Spinners

      The wife even saying "you'll make our children orphans". Don't know if she was part of her husband's crimes, but they are certainly willing to try moral blackmail now that they've been caught. Perhaps their children would be safer in care?

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Well deserved

    He's admitted to committing a nasty crime. Clearly not the sharpest tool in the butter knife drawer, but if he's legally competent then it's off to choky for you sir. Not a big fan of Usaian judicial overreach, but in this case i'll make an exception.

    1. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

      Re: Well deserved

      in this case i'll make an exception

      Then I am glad you're probably not a judge. There should be no exceptions or justice is not served.

      Everyone should be subject to the same rules regardless of wheter they're a loathsome person or not.

  5. Yet Another Hierachial Anonynmous Coward

    Laptop shields

    It really is about time that every laptop had a little slide shield over the webcam. Not only to physically block the lens, but also disconnect the +v supply to the camera to double check that it is out of operation. Whilst at it, the same shield could disconnect the microphone.

    1. Adrian 4 Silver badge

      Re: Laptop shields

      I'd prefer that the OS reliably stopped it.

      The reasonable expectation is that you're only running the camera if you have a video application running. You shouldn't need to mechanically close it as well.

      If you have no reason to trust your software, a bit of tape or any small object is adequate. The problem is not the existence of a shutter, but remembering to use it.

      1. DS999

        Re: Laptop shields

        Should have an LED that goes on when it is active, like how the latest iOS puts a dot for the camera and a dot for the microphone, respectively, so you can know for sure if something has activated either.

        Yes, you have permissions for the app telling whether they can use them, but you can have apps you might give permission to use one or the other that they don't need all the time so you want to know if it (we're all looking at YOU, Facebook!) activates them during times when you would not expect it.

        You might still want a shutter, off switch, tape or whatever but if the LED was powered by the same circuit that provides power to the camera you'd know something was up if your laptop is "idle" but the LED is on.

        1. MachDiamond Silver badge

          Re: Laptop shields

          "Should have an LED that goes on when it is active,"

          There often is, but it's controlled by software.

          I put some blame on users. They buy and use a device that has a camera and microphone and leave them on when not in use. They can't even be bothered to close the laptop. The same people are the ones putting internet connected listening devices in all parts of their home to be even lazier.

          1. DS999

            Re: Laptop shields

            There often is, but it's controlled by software.

            That's a poor implementation, the camera and microphone require power to operate, and there is no reason to provide power to a camera or microphone that doesn't have anything connected to it. Design the driver for it so it only powers those up when they are being used, then the LED can be directly hooked into the power provided to them so there is no way (short of the LED failing) for it to not light up when they are being accessed.

            This would actually be simpler to implement than having an LED that's separately activated, and result in increased battery life. OK, maybe not a lot since cameras aren't super power hungry, but it'll help that laptop compare just a little bit better to others in battery life benchmarking.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Laptop shields

          "Should have an LED that goes on when it is active"

          We originally had the option to switch this on or off on our Google Nestcams. Then they changed it so that you could only dim it.

          I placed black insulation tape over the light on all external cameras. Now criminals don't know they are being filmed and in two cases in two years they has stared directly into the lens assuming the camera was off. Good result all around.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Laptop shields

            Ah but since you'd covered the light to show the camera was working they had an expectation of privacy so your video evidence is inadmissible and you're guilty of computer hacking.

            ;)

        3. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: Laptop shields

          "Yes, you have permissions for the app telling whether they can use them, but you can have apps you might give permission to use one or the other that they don't need all the time so you want to know if it (we're all looking at YOU, Facebook!) activates them during times when you would not expect it."

          A bit is still Apple's fault. In my app, you can activate stuff with a QR code. QR code needs a camera. I would happily ask for permission to scan QR codes but I can't. I have to ask for permission to access the camera. And once you scanned the QR code I still have the camera permission. Even though I don't want it.

          Other things are locations: I should be able to ask iOS if the user is at home or at work _without having general access to location data_. Obviously only if the locations are known to iOS. Instead, I need access to location data, read the location, and compare it with the known location. And know where you are, when I shouldn't know it, and when I actually don't care.

      2. DavCrav Silver badge

        Re: Laptop shields

        "I'd prefer that the OS reliably stopped it."

        Not possible, for the 'master mute/unmute button' issue. You cannot have a software feature that is above all other software features. Only hardware can do that.

    2. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Laptop shields

      >It really is about time that every laptop had a little slide shield over the webcam.

      A slide shield has been a feature of Thinkpads for some years now, I suspect from a small sample of colleagues that many people don't use them and have probably forgotten they exist.

      What I find a little surprising, is how people are treating laptops/desktops and where they have set them up.

    3. 759b954e-617b-408b-a2b1-f5a42c3688d4
      Thumb Up

      Re: Laptop shields

      Not only a sliding metal shutter, but laptops should be built without microphones, and you plug in a USB mic instead when you want to use one. It could be just a tiny dongle like a USB mouse receiver.

  6. msobkow

    Yeah, well, it isn't the Americans threatening your life, so go ahead and do your worst to yourself. Making threats against YOURSELF is hardly grounds for refusing an extradition.

    Besides, if you feel you'd rather end it all, I suspect that means you know you're guilty and will be convicted - all the more reason to ship you overseas.

  7. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

    "I'll kill myself if you extradite me"

    Blackmail as an extradition defense? It's novel, I suppose, but unlikely to be allowed to set a precedent.

    1. Kabukiwookie Silver badge

      Re: "I'll kill myself if you extradite me"

      Not blackmail. How about human deceny?

      Although with over a million Iraqis dead (and that's just one of the many wars the US is involved in and countries that they turned into failed states, it doesn't seem they know the meaning of the concept.

      I believe there is something called 'cruel and unusual punishment'in the US constitution.

      Is this guy a perv? Most definitely. Should he be rotting in a US jail for 20+ years where rape, beatings, poor nourishment and other abuse are considered 'normal'?

      No way.

      1. Mike Moyle Silver badge

        Re: "I'll kill myself if you extradite me"

        @Kabukiwookie

        "Cruel and unusual punishment" is not a doctrine that punishment shouldn't be cruel or unusual (It's rather hard to come up with something that its an actual punishment that would NOT be considered cruel or unusual in relation to the accused's likely daily life in freedom!). It's intended to mean that a specific punishment (or range of punishments) for a specific crime must be applied evenly across the board. The phrase might better be "MORE cruel than the norm and unusual in relation to that norm in that locality," but the term as it stands has been in use for a long time and is a, legally, well-understood phrase.

      2. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

        Re: "I'll kill myself if you extradite me"

        He would not server 20 years, he would get 10, serve 5 in a minimum security prison. Life would not be all that bad. He would be given a fine, which he will probably never pay, then returned to the UK where he will never be allowed back.

  8. iron Silver badge
    Mushroom

    Boo fucking hoo.

    If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

    Why has the wife not divorced this disgusting pervert?

  9. Barrie Shepherd

    + for MiguelC

    Meanwhile a motorist, who killed a UK national on UK soil, is protected by the same American Government who won't take action in the US or allow extradition.

    Have any US citizens ever been extradited to the UK (or anywhere) under this current Treaty?

    Where's the level playing field in this game of extradition Bingo

    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Meanwhile a motorist, who killed a UK national on UK soil, is protected by the same American Government who won't take action in the US or allow extradition.

      Not quite the same situation, she's hiding behind diplomatic immunity which makes any extradition situation complex, since it would seem to require that immunity to be waived before it could even get to court.

      Have any US citizens ever been extradited to the UK (or anywhere) under this current Treaty?

      Well, from wikipedia (I know, I know):

      "From January 2004 to the end of December 2011, 33 known UK citizens (including 6 with dual nationality) were extradited from the UK to the US. The US embassy in London reported that as of April 2013, 77 individuals had been extradited from the UK to the US. The US argued that this is not disproportionate, due to the US population being about five times larger than the UK population".

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        ISTR reading that the application of diplomatic immunity to her was not legally clear as it was her husband who was entitled to it. It needs to be tested in court. Until it is it might be a good idea to suspend pending cases. After all there needs to be, and to be seen to be, some degree of reciprocity.

        1. ExampleOne

          As both governments have agreed she had it, she had it.

          This is not justice, it's not nice, but sometimes the system is a bitch, and breaching that immunity would set a very chilling precedent which would endanger British diplomats all over the world.

          1. localzuk

            Diplomatic immunity is irrelevant - as the USA can waive it at their own leisure. It is not a permanent get out that the USA can say "ah, sorry, she had immunity and there's nothing we can do".

            Countries waive diplomatic immunity for their overseas diplomats all the time.

        2. Cliffwilliams44 Bronze badge

          Family members are also granted immunity.

      2. Barrie Shepherd

        ""From January 2004 to the end of December 2011, 33 known UK citizens (including 6 with dual nationality) were extradited from the UK to the US. The US embassy in London reported that as of April 2013, 77 individuals had been extradited from the UK to the US."

        So is that 110 or 77 sent to the US?

        I don't follow the US argument ".....that this is not disproportionate, due to the US population being about five times larger than the UK population". Mind you their President has threatened to invade the Netherlands if the International Court of Justice tries any US military man for crimes so their imbalanced views are to be expected.

        According to Wikipedia (probably the same page) only 38 individuals have been extradited from the US to the UK and apparently no US citizen was extradited for a crime committed while in the US.

        In other words they won't send theirs to us if the crime was committed in the US, but they want ours irrespective of where the crime was committed.

        In the case under discussion the crime was committed in the UK - the SW probably originated (or was modified) here, the perpetrator engineered it's download from here and the images were viewed here. Try him in the UK, by all means let any affected US citizen give evidence but it is a UK matter.

        I don't follow the US argument ".....that this is not disproportionate, due to the US population being about five times larger than the UK population".

      3. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        "33 known UK citizens (including 6 with dual nationality) were extradited from the UK to the US. The US embassy in London reported that as of April 2013, 77 individuals had been extradited from the UK to the US."

        Assuming that last stat was meant to read "from the US to the UK", I find it notable that the statement says "33 known UK citizens" but only mentions "77 individuals" from the US. "Individuals", not specifically "citizens". Considering the US preponderance to refer to their people as citizens in official statements, it sounds to me like a massaging of stats so as to tell the truth by not answering the question while trying to show themselves in the best light possible.

        1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

          ISTR that quite a large proportion of the US figure was people who weren't US citizens, but I don't have the figures to hand.

  10. BenJones1980

    American woman drives on the wrong side of the road in the UK and kills a motorcyclist - the USA refuses to extradite her.

    British man guilty of computer misuse - America - "EXTRADITE HIM NOW!"

    1. Cederic Silver badge

      Both crimes committed in the UK. Strange how the US think one isn't deserving of prosecution and the other warrants dragging someone an ocean away to expose them to a broken so-called justice system.

    2. simkin

      Yeah, well

      The American woman's husband is a US spy doing super-secret spy stuff. Can't annoy American spies.

    3. Dave314159ggggdffsdds Silver badge

      She's claiming diplomatic immunity, but it's just stupid. No crime serious enough to warrant extradition has been alleged.

      We ought to be complaining about the law here that makes it pretty much OK to do what you state, as long as you don't make a habit of it.

  11. Roland6 Silver badge

    Cammy seems to be a legitimate cloud-centric CCTV application

    "A Briton is reportedly fighting extradition to the United States after deploying webcam malware"

    Be interested to know more about how victims were tricked into installing a legitimate application and pass on relevant access information to a third-party ie. was it via a link in a spam email, hidden download from a website, phone 'support' call. Interestingly, if people thought they were purchasing/installing some form of CCTV surveillance service he may not have actually committed wire fraud...

    Looking at Cammy.com, it does look that these types of services will increasingly be targetted; either directly (service access account compromise) or as seems to be the case here, getting user's cameras to associate with your "security service".

  12. Claverhouse Silver badge
    Holmes

    Let The Sky Fall

    Although harsh; I'm going to suggest people don't get undressed in front of webcams.

    1. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: Let The Sky Fall

      People need to understand that a laptop is a camera and microphone connected to the internet that should be treated as if they are on all of the time the laptop is open. If you have large windows in your bedroom, you probably shut them when you are dressing or wandering about without your pants.

    2. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

      Re: Let The Sky Fall

      This, basically. Now that lots more of us are working from home due to coronavirus and making video calls... we are doing it with clothes on, aren't we? Is there such a number of hot people flashing their computers? I don't see the point except for mooning it sometimes when it really deserves that. Does I mean would that count?

  13. Version 1.0 Silver badge

    Spying on people webcams - a US standard

    Snowden documented that the US spies on peoples webcams using code developed in the UK. Maybe we should just give him a job with MI5 to figure out how the hack is observed?

    1. MachDiamond Silver badge

      Re: Spying on people webcams - a US standard

      "Maybe we should just give him a job with MI5 to figure out how the hack is observed?"

      Are you dead sure he isn't already?

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Sacoolas

    He might be a spying scumbag, but all extraditions to the US should be halted until they reciprocate and Anne Sacoolas is extradited to the UK.

    He spied on people, but she killed someone.

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Sacoolas

      "all extraditions to the US should be halted until they reciprocate and Anne Sacoolas is extradited to the UK."

      I would probably agree with this sentiment if such cases were acted on in a linear, FIFO manner ... but they are not. They acted upon concurrently. Creating an artificial backlog at each perceived miscarriage of justice would effectively put a halt to all International matters forever. Is that really what you want?

      "He spied on people, but she killed someone."

      I suspect you'll be changing your tune in a heartbeat if one of those people turns out to be your daughter.

      1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

        Re: Sacoolas

        You are entitled to your suspicions - I reserve the right to prove you wrong. Yes, invasion of privacy is nasty, but there is a strangely shaped curve to the seriousness - someone in my village equates with State spying on my private life because it can have a significant and permanent effect on my life. Some random person on the Internet - largely irrelevant (depending on dissemination).

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    American Justice

    The cruelest of oxymorons.

  16. Local Laddie

    Very one sided extradition process...

    So the UK extradites its citizens to the US when they're accused of US crimes, but the US doesnt reciprocate...

    Remember, remember: Anne Sacoolas - a US citizen who admited driving on the wrong side of the road in the UK, causing a car accident leading to the death of a UK biker is 'protected' from US extradition to the UK..

    How very unfair...

  17. First Light Bronze badge

    Sharp admins!

    Surprised no one has commented on the acuity of the admins who detected this crime. Bravi!

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Sharp admins!

      Agree, although I assume what was unusual about the traffic was the 24x7 outbound stream.

      The other aspect of this that draws attention is the contacting of the local police - did they do this before or after talking with the student.

      With Cammy being based in Oz with a UK office, there has been some international police co-operation to identify the individual who was operating the Cammy hub account(s). Which brings into question whether there has been some behind the scenes gentleman's agreement as to where the guy gets charged etc.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Maybe, I wouldn't have a problem with this...

    Oh, I don't know, if maybe the US extradited their citizens to the UK who are accused of killing UK citizens IN THE UK and then fleeing the country????

    Until that happens I don't give a flying f**k about any US requests to extradite UK citizens and impose ridiculous sentences on them

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I don't understand why he would go to so much trouble to spy on people. I mean if we wants to see women undressing and having sex, there are literally thousands of websites hosting millions of videos.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How about extraditing Harry Dunn’s killer Anne Sacoolas first? Hmm America or is this just one way?

  21. Sequin

    They can have him when we get Anne Sacoolas back here. What's sauce for the goose......

  22. Guy de Loimbard
    Coffee/keyboard

    Interesting commentary

    I do love El Reg readers and the broad experience and knowledge that everyone has.

    Web based crimes are always going to be intrinsically difficult to prosecute in line with differing moral, ethical and legal frameworks that we all have or feel aligned to, either by self awareness or by national laws.

    Having extensively travelled both sides of the pond, I'm somewhat on the fence.

    I suspect most of the UK based commentary, is perhaps more biased because it appears, and let's be honest, the evidence to date supports this, that the extradition laws are not balanced and the US, either rightly or wrongly, takes a more hard line stance on extradition, both from protecting their own citizens against extradition and by requesting alleged criminals be imported for some justice.

    The US Penal system does seem somewhat brutal in comparison to the UK and perhaps wider Europe for sure, however, without international consensus on how to deal with Web based crime it's hard to cry foul when the USofA is just doing what it does internally.

    Be interesting to see what the outcome is of this.

  23. J.G.Harston Silver badge

    Remember, the UK also has some of these extraterritorial laws. If a UK citizen resident and domiciled in the UK goes to Thailand and diddles with kiddies, they can be prosecuted in the UK for breaking UK laws.

  24. Danny 2 Silver badge

    When your state does it

    Apology for linking to a Guardian article. Secrets and lies: untangling the UK 'spy cops' scandal

    See, these cops really ruined lives far worse than this criminal. Some of them actually raised families with their innocent victims under false pretences. They claimed they had to have sex with their victims to maintain their cover, but that is a lie. Nobody in the peace movement was expected to have sex with anyone ever, if anything it was discouraged like in any other work place.

    I was targetted by PC Lynn Watson and to her credit, and her male colleagues discredit, she flirted but didn't try to seduce. I was seriously fucked over by three separate male police - well, I don't name them because I can't even be sure which were officers or infiltrators or agents.

  25. Lindsay T

    It seems to me that what he is alleged to have done must be a crime in the UK so let justice take its course here.

  26. Esme

    Zero sympathy

    If the accused is guilty, I have zero sympathy for them, irrespective of the sentence or their reactions to the possibility of it. Saying "sorry" doesn't make it all right, and shouldn't IMO have any effect on the severity of the sentencing. The victims lives have been negatively affected forever. And, if guilty, the accused has committed an offence in the UK, that of non-consensual voyeurism. That the victims were abroad has no bearing on the matter, so far as I am aware. I've no idea regarding the correct jurisdiction to try him issue. However, one of the things that has long annoyed me about UK law is that crimes against the person seem to attract lesser sentences than financial crimes, which I find an ethically loathsome state of affairs.

  27. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Call his bluff. He's a whinging little bastard who got caught.

  28. czechitout

    "Christopher Taylor, a 57-year-old labourer, appeared by video link"

    Oh the irony

    1. Ashto5

      Re: "Christopher Taylor, a 57-year-old labourer, appeared by video link"

      You have to hope he was clothed

  29. localzuk

    Equivalent crimes?

    Surely, as the UK and USA have equivalent crimes on their lawbooks - the UK Computer Misuse Act and the US's Computer Fraud and Abuse Act have similar punishments - why would the USA want to waste their time with this? The UK govt can prosecute and punish the guy to pretty much the same level as the USA would.

  30. FlamingDeath Silver badge

    Whats the bother?

    Pervert gets caught, claims they will kill themselves if sent to prison, so, let them, less drain on societies finances

    Wife claims she will kill herself too, because she doesn’t want to be a burden on her children. Shouldn’t of fucking had them then

    Yeah, I hold unpopular views, deal with it

    1. Intractable Potsherd Silver badge

      Re: Whats the bother?

      I defend to the death your right to have unpopular opinions. I also defend to the death my right to regard you as being over-simplistic with a view that doesn't deserve consideration - deal with it.

  31. VulcanV5

    React in Haste, repent at, er, um, well . . .

    No sympathy. He doesn't even know if Trump is going to be re-elected or not. . . and yet he's adamant he'll commit suicide if he has to go to to the USA.

    Me, I'm less than happy at the thought of having to go anywhere near America whilst the Fat Man is in The White House, but I am least prepared to wait until after November 2nd to decide whether my distaste for the place is sufficient enough for me to cash in my chips now.

    The guy needs to give Democracy a chance: Pervs' Lives Matter!!

  32. Martin-73 Silver badge

    He was not in the US

    Therefore he has committed NO crime there. He may have had VICTIMS in the US... but that does not mean he committed a crime in the USA. This creep of jurisdiction is, sorry for the crudity, utter bollocks. He has committed a crime in the UK, and should be punished under UK law. I am fairly sure the victims can be awarded compensation under UK law, from his own funds. He has been stupid, and a criminal, and should not get away with it. But the US is not known, globally, for being 'just' or following the rule of law. So yeah, I understand his position. screw merikkka till they start obeying the rules

    Wire fraud is not a crime in the UK for example... therefore is not extraditable, ever.

  33. Tempest
    Unhappy

    It Couldn't Happen in France.

    France, unlike the subservient British government, does not extradite French citizens anywhere.

    Time Britain manned up and told the USA to take a hike or, á the current US vernacular goes, Go Kick Rocks!

    1. Martin-73 Silver badge

      Re: It Couldn't Happen in France.

      I have always admired France's dedication to its own citizens. Pity the UK doesn't follow suit

  34. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    No more extradition to USA

    When the women who killed a teenager and then fled the country is returned to stand trail and do her time then the UK SHOULD NEVER SEND ANY UK CITIZEN TO ANOTHER COUNTRY FOR TRIAL

    Especially the corrupt US criminal system where your guilty if you can’t afford expensive lawyers.

    1. Martin-73 Silver badge

      Re: No more extradition to USA

      totally agree. I got moderated for my original response. But complete spurning of this treaty till the alleged killer is returned for trial is the least that we should ask

  35. FlippingGerman

    Throw him in prison

    but not in the USA. Extraditing people to for crimes they didn't commit there is insanity.

    And yes, I know it's the Internet, and it has a global impact, and the victim was in the USA. So what? If I post something online sitting in Blighty that makes fun of Kim Jung Un, should I be sent there to be tried for that?

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: Throw him in prison

      " If I post something online sitting in Blighty that makes fun of Kim Jung Un, should I be sent there to be tried for that?"

      If the UK had an extradition treaty with the fat elvis impersonator, then yes, that is exactly what would happen to you. Which is kind of the point.

  36. The Donk

    Why so long between arrest and extradition

    The FBI and the UK Police caught him in 2016 and interrogated him, in which he admitted everything. How come more then 4 years passed by before a decision was made over his extradition? Here in the Netherland it is max 8 months if the one requested to be extradited uses all means and courts he can

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021