Quote Originally Posted by IAN 2411 View Post
Ok I misunderstood your meaning, but i do believe that there should be a certain criterion that all countries should abide by when extraditing a person from his native country. One being standard of mentality or fitness. The attitude of we want him and will stop at nothing less is not good enough reason, unless it is for murder, terrorism, treason whatever.
Thank you - I agree there, and indeed both countries have provisions for preventing even a domestic trial from going ahead: 'insane in bar of trial' or 'unfit to plead'. Up here, the definition is 'a mental alienation of some kind which prevents the accused giving the instruction which a sane man would give for his defence or from following the evidence as a sane man would follow it and instructing his counsel as the case goes, along any point that arises', which seems like rather a verbose way of describing the test the US uses of whether the accused has the "ability to consult rationally with an attorney to aid in his own defense and to have a rational and factual understanding of the charges".

Most relevant to this particular case, UK extradition law sets a test, that if "the physical or mental condition of the person is such that it would be unjust or oppressive to extradite him" then the extradition process must be either suspended until the condition no longer applies, or terminated entirely. It is not that the extradition process disregards his medical condition at all, simply that a series of court hearings on that specific issue considered it at length and ruled that his Asperger's does not meet the criteria set down by UK law. If you or I were facing extradition to the US, or indeed Australia, France or even Ireland, and were either physically or mentally ill, that would be considered by the judge, who would not approve extradition unless and until the court was satisfied we were medically fit for extradition - as the High Court ruled that McKinnon is, after considering evidence from the specialists who diagnosed him.

David Allen Green, a lawyer, studied the case closely and wrote a series of very detailed blog posts about the case (last update here - http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2010/...-mckinnon.html - with links back to the previous parts). Most interesting, and depressing, is the huge gap he observes between the documented reality and evidence produced - by both sides - and the media coverage and public campaign.

(Sorry, I wrote this post several days ago, and only just found the unposted draft sitting here.)