The defendant appealed an order for his extradition. He had used his computer in London to access remotely defence and other government computers in the USA, and deleted files and copied others onto his own computer. He had been offered a deal if he agreed to go to the US voluntarily. That offer had been withdrawn, and the defendant argued there was an abuse of process.
Held: Though an englsh court might disapprove of the offer made, this did not amount to an abuse.
Maurice Kay LJ, Goldring J
 EWHC 762 (Admin), Times 19-Apr-2007
Extradition Act 2003 108
England and Wales
Cited – In Re Levin; Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison, Ex parte Levin HL 10-Apr-1997
The applicant had been detained pending extradition to the United States on charges of fraud. He said the evidence would not have been sufficient to justify his committal for trial.
Held: The Francis case did not establish that the 1984 Act . .
Cited – Office of the King’s Prosecutor, Brussels v Cando Armas and others HL 17-Nov-2005
The defendant resisted extradition to Brussels saying that the offence had been committed in part in England. He had absconded and been convicted. Application was made for his return to serve his sentence. The offences associated with organisation . .
Cited – Norris, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 24-Feb-2006
The claimant challenged his extradition to the US saying that it was wrong for the US to continue to be listed as a designated country for extradition under section 84.
Held: The fact that the US had not yet ratified the treaty under which a . .
Cited – Bermingham and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office QBD 21-Feb-2006
Prosecution to protect defendant not available
The claimants faced extradition to the US. They said that the respondent had infringed their human rights by deciding not to prosecute them in the UK. There was no mutuality in the Act under which they were to be extradited.
Held: The Director . .
Appeal from – McKinnon v The United States of America and Anotherr HL 30-Jul-2008
The appellant sought to avoid extradition to the US. He had hacked into 97 US government computers. He argued that the punishment he might expect in the US was completely disproportionate to the offence, and that he had been misled into entering . .
See Also – McKinnon v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 23-Jan-2009
See Also – McKinnon, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Home Affairs Admn 31-Jul-2009
Assurances for Extradition
Extradition of the defendant was sought to the US to face allegations of hacking into defence computers there. He said this would infringe his article 3 rights, saying that he suffered Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Held: The application failed. US . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 May 2021; Ref: scu.250702