Cease extradition of Mother's young son to USA. 'The Fight of Her Life' Julia O'Dwyer, Richard O'Dwyer.r

[Vesta2]

Fellow Mum's please could you support this mother in her campaign to cease extradition of her young son to the USA. Please visit her blog juliasblog-the-fight-of-our-lives.blogspot.com/og. Thankyou

[abendbrot]

Vesta it might be better to start a new thread with proper links etc. This one seems to have got off to a bad start.

[Vesta2]

abendbrot I am new to this, how do I do that?

[ThatVikRinA22]

pick your topic and just hit the link at the top which says start a new thread in this topic.

Chat topics disappear after so many days.

might be better to start one elsewhere - maybe 'in the news' and try not to pm anyone or get defensive. it doesnt help your cause.

[Vesta2]

Thankyou for both advice and instructions, I will try that.

[spenditwisely]

When you post a link, click the 'convert links' button - and make sure the link is accurate. Try to put as many links in the OP as possible (well not millions but 3 or 4) and explain clearly about the issue in the original post.

[ThatVikRinA22]

i would link that BBC news report aswell - it expains what has happened better than the blog link.

[Vesta2]

spenditwisely Thanks again, have tried starting new discussion in 'news' but posted links wrong, am trying to remove this so can re- restart.

[Vesta2]

vicarinatutu Thankyou, am trying to remove previous discussions so can restart with new working links including to bbc, thanks again.

[ChitChatInChaos]

My thoughts on that? What Sarah Ferguson did over there is not only not illegal here, but is very much LEGAL. Hence the differentiation to me. If what he did was not illegal here, it was only not so by the thinnest of whiskers IMO.

When you dance at the edge of legality, these things happen. The first case of a successful prosecution of Rape in Marriage was considered wrong by some because at the time of the offence the law held that Rape in Marriage did not exist, because consent to sex was given at the time of marriage. So according to your argument he should not have been convicted, yet he was dancing at the very edges of legality, and he and everyone knew that.

Poviding access for people to pirated software is DEFINITELY on the edges of legality.

[Vesta2]

chitchatinchaos I see you accept that all of the internet and cyber space should belong to the laws of the USA. That's your prerogative.

[ChitChatInChaos]

And I see that you just ignore any part of a post which you don't know how to deal with.

[Vesta2]

chitchatinchaos, I got the impression you agree with the USA's extradition request, despite the alleged offense not being illegal here.
I further got the impression that even if the alleged offense was illegal here that you still agree with the USA's extradition request, rather than the offense being tried here, thus giving the USA control over the internet.
Did I misunderstand you?

[ChitChatInChaos]

I said that I don't particularly agree with the US extradition laws, but that in THIS case I don't have all that much sympathy, and I have explained why.

[Vesta2]

chitchatinchaos am I right in thinking then,that despite not agreeing with the extradition laws, you do however, think that this case should not be tried in the UK but instead in the USA due to your lack of sympathy?

[ChitChatInChaos]

I suppose you could say that. Would it interest you to know that US internet companies are obliged to follow EU privacy laws as they are stricter than the US ones? These companies are allowed to be prosecuted in the EU if they breach our laws even if all of the servers etc are in the US.

[Vesta2]

chitchatinchaos
re EU law, thankyou, yes that is of huge interest, do you have any evidence? links? etc to support your statement.
re sympathy, this may or may not help, www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16556777

[spenditwisely]

Vesta try and take the 'young' bit out of the thread title. He's a young man, yes, but 'young son' implies an under 5.

[PaintedToenails]

I will admit I was painfully ignorant of the Sarah Ferguson/Illegal Taping malarkey.

But I've had a look and you are right. They same rules should be applied to both cases. Extradite them both.

She filmed in an orphanage, covert filming is illegal in Turkey, she committed the crime. Again, ignorance is no defence. I'll say it again. Extradite them both to stand trial in the respective countries.

And no, I have no sympathy for either of them.

[ChitChatInChaos]

Start your search here, Vesta. Europa web page

[Vesta2]

spenditwisely - OK.

[Vesta2]

chitchatchaos oh, right. I was under the impression from your statement that you actually knew the laws and could provide specific links, evidence to support your statement.
So whilst I thankyou for your good effort I'm afraid it's no more than myself as a lay person or any other lay person might be able to do.
In the meantime if you do find any specific links to support your statement please feel free to post them on this discussion thread.

[ChitChatInChaos]

Erm, no, why should I? If you're that interested, you follow through!

[Vesta2]

paintedtoenail thankyou for your contribution to this discussion thread, but please be aware this thread is to raise awareness of the campaign to cease the extradition of Richard O'Dwyer, and as you are obviously not in support,as is your prerogative, whilst you are free to post in this thread again if you feel so moved to do so, it is unlikely that I will reply to any further of your posts.

[McPie]

When you post on a public forum you should expect to get people who see it both ways and no matter how many pm's you send to us who have disagreed with your OP you will not change our minds. He was in the wrong, end off. He is 23 and should be man enough to take his punishment and not hide behind his mother.

[SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius]

Vesta - you are doing your case no good and plenty of harm by your rather aggressive and combative attitude. Anyone who disagrees with you gets a sarcastic comment - eg:"xxxx I see you accept that all of the internet and cyber space should belong to the laws of the USA. That's your prerogative."

And unfortunately, though you have started the thread with the aim of publicising the campaign against the extradition of Mr O'Dwyer, this is a free website, and people are able to post whatever they want on it, provided that they do not break the rules of the site - so in essence, you can start a thread, but you cannot control how it progresses. That is freedom of expression.

To add my point to the thread - if the aim of the extradition laws is to facilitate the prosecution and imprisonment of terrorists, then I have no problem with that. Nor do I have a problem with any country seeking the extradition of a UK citizen who has commited a crime whilst in that country (though I do see how the UK cannot extradite the Duchess of York to Turkey - and I applaud her aim in filming the dire conditions at the childrens home). However, this case does not fall within either of these catagories, and is definitely in a grey area, as far as I am concerned. If he provided links to sites where pirated material was available, then he should be prosecuted for that - film/tv/music piracy is a really serious issue, in my opinion, and those who support piracy should face the consequences. But it is not clear to me whether Mr O'Dwyer linked to any pirated material, or simply provided links to websites where people can watch/listen to material that is freely and legally available - in which case he should not be extradited, as he would not have committed any crime that I can see.

There is an argument for saying that websites like his are parasitic - making money from people in an invisible way - like insurance price comparison websites, which cost nothing to use, but which make their profits by charging the insurance companies commission when a sale is made via the site - and these commission costs will be handed onto the customers, rest assured. In the same way, Mr O'Dwyer wasn't providing something unique, or giving people a portal to resources that were not available to them directly, if they searched for them - and the revenue he raised was from advertising, and as we all know, advertising is built into the price of what we buy, so indirectly we are paying for sites like this, but invisibly. Is that a good thing - I am not sure.