UK Court Says Lauri Love Can Be Extradited To Face Hacking Charges In The US
from the big-brothers-gotta-stick-together dept
Lauri Love, the British hacker the DOJ has been dying to get its hands on, has just been handed over to the US by his own government. The decision issued today [PDF] basically states that honoring extradition agreements is more important than any concerns issued about Love's health and well-being once handed over to US federal agents.
Mr Love’s Article 8 rights are clearly engaged. In balancing the factors for and against extradition I am satisfied that the very strong counter-balancing factors required to find extradition would be disproportionate are not found in this case. Mr Love faces extremely serious charges for offences of computer hacking over a period of one year from October 2012 to October 2013. I accept Mr Love suffers from both physical and mental health issues but I have found the medical facilities in the United States prison estate on arrival and during any sentence if he is convicted available to him, are such that I can be satisfied his needs will be comprehensively met by the US authorities.
I am satisfied Mr Love’s extradition would be compatible with his Convention rights and I send this case to the Secretary of State for her decision as to whether or not Mr Love should be extradited.
Once in the US, authorities have promised to address Love's mental and physical health concerns by placing him in "segregated housing" while determining if he's capable of being housed in the general population. As anyone who's followed prosecutions of whistleblowers and hackers knows, "segregated housing" is just a colorful term for "solitary confinement" -- not generally known to improve the mental well-being of people who've already expressed suicidal thoughts.
On top of a trip to solitary, Love will be facing charges from three jurisdictions related to the alleged hacking of multiple government/government contractor websites and databases.
Mr Love is accused in three indictments in three districts as follows:
(i) Southern District of New York – Mr Love faces two counts on Indictment, one of computer hacking (maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment) and one of aggravated identity theft (maximum sentence of 2 years imprisonment to be imposed consecutively to the sentence for count 1).
(ii) The New Jersey request details two counts on one indictment. One count is conspiracy to access a computer without authorisation and obtain information from a department or agency of the United States (maximum sentence of 5 years imprisonment) and one of accessing a computer without authorisation and obtaining information from a department or agency of the United States (maximum sentence of 5 years imprisonment).
(iii) The Eastern District of Virginia request contains nine counts on an Indictment, count 1 – conspiracy to cause damage to a protected computer and to commit access device fraud (maximum sentence of 5 years imprisonment); counts 2 -7 – causing damage to a protected computer and aiding and abetting (maximum sentence of 5 years imprisonment); count 8 – access device fraud and aiding and abetting (maximum sentence of 10 years imprisonment) and count 9 – aggravated identity theft and aiding and abetting (maximum sentence of 2 years imprisonment).
There's little to be gained by adding up the maximum possible jail sentence facing Love. Rest assured, if convicted, it will likely be over a decade. Consolidation of the cases and charges is likely, but more than one of the charges carry possible 10-year sentences.
Meanwhile, back in the UK, Love has managed to escape being jailed for refusing to turn over passwords and encryption keys to law enforcement. UK investigators fought hard to force Love -- who they've never formally charged -- to crack open multiple seized devices for them. This attempt was shot down in May by a judge who viewed this as an end run around protections built into RIPA, the laws governing law enforcement's investigatory powers.
The final decision on Love's extradition is in the hands of Elizabeth Truss, the recently-appointed Secretary of State for Justice. Truss' previous government work doesn't really provide much guidance on which side she'll come down on this, but her voting record tends to indicate she's more sympathetic to national security/law enforcement interests than those of her constituents. Considering the UK and US have a very cozy surveillance relationship, it stands to reason Truss will likely decide to appease the DOJ, rather than overturn the court's decision.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cfaa, extradition, hacking, lauri love, uk, us
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Say what?
I am not familiar with this case, what happened, the seriousness of the charges, etc. But I have to scratch my head on this one. So if a "criminal" expresses concern about their health and well being, they shouldn't be tried, convicted and imprisoned?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Say what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Say what?
The prison system is inhumane. The international norms for human rights can kiss my fucking ass despite that. The "international" community is a Globalist one that serves ONLY the ultra rich.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Say what?
Even if it's the worst of the criminals, going down to his/her level does no good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Say what?
What I do know is we would have empty prisons if all you have to do to stay out of them is threaten suicide.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Say what?
It beats me how someone who has never visited the US can be guilty of a crome under US law. It looks like the US wants to impose its laws on everyone else in the world.
Since people in th UK don't have a say in US laws this would seem to be one step worse than the complaint that started the AMerican revolution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Say what?
If treating a prisoner in a certain fashion is illegal in the 'source' country, and there's good odds that if extradited they will be treated like that in the other country, extradition is supposed to be refused as extradition in that case is enabling illegal treatment of a prisoner.
As an example: If County A doesn't allow prisoners to be put into solitary confinement, and Country B does allow that, then if it can be reasonably expected that someone extradited to Country B from Country A will be subject to solitary confinement then the extradition should be refused.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
USA, land of the free, home of the brave. (read with intense sarcasm)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"the cowardly slave"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's been implied that he is a suicide risk.At what point is keeping someone alive by force while in prison for say 99 yrs (max sentence for his alleged offence), supposing that thay are of sound mind and decide they want to die, and that they are not a risk to society, at what point is that torture or 'cruel and unusual punishment'. Force-feeding drugs to keep a person alive until they die naturally seems an odd way of meeting a person's 'needs'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Hmmm, for lifers this would be a great way to cut down costs and prison violence. Neat little jars, all in a row, each brain in a solution of nutrients and a little probe to give a quick but exquisitely painful ZAP in the event of a deviant thought. Ban birth control, require annual breeding, .... profit !!!! I'm dreaming of the IPO already.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All the while
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rape in the US
I'd say we don't like women much, but I think we are just so embarassed about rape that we'd rather not admit it at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: All the while
Regretting sex after getting intoxicated and passing out with another is not rape.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
False accusations of rape
(Sexual assault incidents in 2014 were 1.1 per 1000 people, which is way down from 1993 in which it was 4.3 per 1000.)
I'm sure that the rare sociopath will fake rape to ruin lives, but I'd expect the frequency of offenders to be about as rare as sexual killers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: False accusations of rape
More often than we'd like to admit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: False accusations of rape
This is serious business. Paranoia and ambiguity don't fly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Besides all the other ridiculousness of this case, this statement alone is just utter bullshit and anyone that has even just read anything about the state of our prison system and the way people are treated there knows that it's completely false. Then add in the fact of what he's accused of doing and it gets even worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Both "available to him" and "his needs" are determined by the state. Or more likely, the for-profit institution running the prison.
He won't need cancer medication, because energy drinks and prayer are enough to see him through.
But then, it's no garden of roses on the other side of the pond, either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]