Updates to this story
Adrian Lamo, a man once hunted by the FBI for hacking the New York Times, who was institutionalised for Aspergers Syndrome claims that it is no defence for hacking.
Lamo, who was recently sectioned after he was discovered out of it by cops, was diagnosed as having the mild form of Autism. He said he never really knew about it until he was transferred to the Woodland Memorial Hospital near Sacramento, for nine days.
The staff evaluated him and gave him some medication and discharged him a couple of weeks ago.
Asperger’s is rapidly becoming the hacker's defence against conviction.
In December, a defence psychiatrist concluded that credit card thief Albert Gonzalez exhibited behaviour consistent with Asperger’s. A government-appointed psychiatrist rejected the claim, and Gonzalez got 20 years. A Los Angeles computer intruder involved in a lucrative fraud scheme received a slightly reduced sentence because of his Asperger’s, which his lawyer argued made him vulnerable to manipulation by the ringleader in the scheme.
British hacker Gary McKinnon was diagnosed with Asperger’s at the age of 42, shortly after losing a legal challenge to an extradition order.
Lamo thinks while Asperger’s might explain his knack for slipping into corporate networks, Wired says that he scoffs at the notion that Asperger’s should mitigate the consequences of illegal behaviour.
He said that Asperger’s might help explain his success in hacking, but not his willingness to do it, he told Wired.
“If, in fact, the diagnosis is accurate, it had zip to do with my actions at that time,” he said.
Bad news for you Gary.
* Lucid speech before age 4 years; grammar and vocabulary are usually very good.
* Monotonous, rigid or unusually fast speech.
* Conversations revolve around self.
* Engaging in one-sided, long-winded conversations, without noticing the listener's reactions.
* Unusual nonverbal communication, including lack of eye contact, few facial expressions, awkward body postures or odd gestures or tics.
* Poor coordination or clumsiness.
* Odd posture or rigid gait.
* Obsessing on one or two specific, narrow subjects.
* Above normal range in verbal ability and below
average range in sports.
* Dyslexia, writing problems, or difficulty with mathematics.
* Lack common sense.
* Socially aware but inappropriate reciprocal interaction.
* Appearing not to understand, empathize with, or be sensitive to others' feelings.
* An inability to "read" other people.
* Often described as eccentric.
It is like we tell Inspector Knacker of the Yard, "Macavity's a Mystery Cat,... you do the maths, and you wait for it."
And when the Foreign Office finds a Treaty's gone astray,
Or the Admiralty lose some plans and drawings by the way,
There may be a scap of paper in the hall or on the stair--
But it's useless of investigate--Macavity's not there!
And when the loss has been disclosed, the Secret Service say:
"It must have been Macavity!"--but he's a mile away.
In fact, if you didn't have Asperger's you would not be hacking obsessively or doing anything obsessively - obsession and extreme focus are the defining features of Asperger's.
Also, the writer should have the correct information before judging: McKinnon's lawyers are NOT using Asperger's as mitigating circumstances. They are (and are legally allowed to and so they should be) are stating that the secondary condition that McKinnon developed as a result of his Asperger's undiagnosed and unsupported - which is clinical depression and suicidal ideation - will make it inhumaneif McKinnon is extradited. Where he will receive no support for his depression (which he'd suffered from since BEFORE he was caught hacking - THAT, the depression is what made him act like a desperado, him leaving messages on US gov. computers was an act of someone with a death-wish which is common for seriously depressed people.
McKinnon sould be helped and supported and after doing time in British jail - if he ever has to do time because he may not even be convicted by jury.
if he REALLY had aspergers, this would be the exact opposite!
when you have aspergers you are in your world experiment and try ect with you interest so it WOULD BE subliminally the willingness and NOT the success.
he is talking BS!
Yes, being on the range can involve deep interests and OCD behaviors, meaning that someone can get deep into an interest and do it obsessively, enjoy it, and last long after a normal person would experience mental fatigue or think of other needs. That doesn't equate into lack of control and (and!) decision making abilities though. It does not equate into a damaged/missing sense of right and wrong.
Having A.S. doesn't mean one isn't capable or imaginative enough to put interests and talents, even obsessive/deep ones, to ethical use instead of criminal.
My grandson...now he might not understand social rules and legal systems, heck, he'll still pull his pants down in public and other things hard for the normal person to fathom. Because he truly doesn't get it. He understands how to operate devices but doesn't understand the hazards. He understands much of the physical world around him, but he's unaware of what's poisonous, why he shouldn't poop on the floor, and so on. He's had early diagnosis, early intervention (the best) and he continues to get 20 hours of therapy a week outside of school. But he remains severely autistic. He has the social maturity of a 7 to 9 month old. Despite a consistent environment and rules, he isn't going to get what's legal or not and why.
But people with A.S., if they aren't slow, do. The A.S. defense is a fallacy, it's a damaging one and with all that autism awareness has to deal with, I resent it even more because I realize how difficult claims like this make the uphill battle for so many dealing with the autism range.
Many people with A.S. are often **more** rule-oriented ethics minded and can't figure out why people break so many rules. I'm one of them. I didn't learn how to drive until I was 35 and why most people go 5 to 12 miles over the speed limit, routinely drive a bit in other's lanes (especially when going to turn or driving around corners), don't use their blinkers...these behaviors continue to frustrate and bewilders me. I may not understand why people aren't routinely boldly honest on a timely basis, but I know what's right and wrong, I understand ethics (in fact, they fascinate me and I study ethics like someone else would enjoy TV or golfing), and not only live within the law but aim higher than legalism.
So, yes, A.S. might help explain the fascination (narrow but deep interests, OCD type of behaviors) but it doesn't explain law breaking and other poor choices. One can be paid very well for their hacking knowledge, get deep into it, but not commit any illegal acts. My husband, who could and often does work on computer systems for 12 to 16 hours a day, sometimes longer, is in the computer field and we've discussed this sort of thing. One of the things he's responsible for is making sure no one can hack in, so he has the knowledge but he chooses to put it to beneficial and legal use...and he gets paid well to do it. He didn't pull the idiotic get arrested for it and then hope some one will hire you stunt.