Salter's Standing So Low After 'Solo' Debacle

Anger is mounting against the soon-to-depart MP for Reading West, Martin Salter, after he has been publicly shamed by a national newspaper for saying one thing and then doing the exact opposite - again.

This time it regards the case of Gary McKinnon who has been fighting extradition to the USA on politically-sensitive charges of computer hacking, which may result in a prison sentence of up to 60 years. While US authorities consider the actions he took under the online pseudonym 'Solo' deliberate and malicious, he describes any damage he may have caused as 'accidental' and a result of the US Military's 'amateur' IT security systems.



Mr McKinnon suffers from Asperger's Syndrome and a cross-party coalition of supporters argued that if any trial is to be held then the UK is a safe location for it, while it would also minimise disruption to his defence and reduce distress caused to his family.

74 Labour MPs (including Mr Salter) eventually signed Early Day Motion 2388 to express their opposition to the proposed extradition, but when the matter was voted on in the House of Commons 59 (including Mr Salter) actually voted in favour of the extradition.

Cllr Swaine is clearly disgusted by the behaviour of Mr Salter, highlighting the fact that the words 'cowardly', 'rank hypocrisy', 'failed', 'betrayal', 'turncoat' and 'lack of integrity' were used in connection with him. He also recalls that Mr Salter displayed the same attitude when signing an EDM in support of the Gurkha Justice campaign but failed to turn up when it mattered.

Jane Griffith's is almost gleeful in her by-now traditional 'told you so' mode.

Mr McKinnon now faces extradition where he faces two years in a maximum security facility before a preliminary hearing can be arranged.

The case highlights injustices resulting from a UK-USA treaty (signed into law as the Extradition Act 2003) designed to capture terrorists, but which has previously been used to extradite the NatWest Three and others on more general charges.

The treaty has caused massive controversy among civil liberties campaigners due the lowered burdens of legal proof and enshrined legal inequality between nations. Human rights campaigners are also unhappy that reduction in entitlements to legal aid affects the right to an adequate defence in areas often without legal precedent.