I have been thinking about the Gary McKinnon case and I have worked out the best defence he should run.
In all the testimony of Gary McKinnon that he has given in media interviews and police transcripts under caution he has mentioned three important things ;
1) That he downloaded from secret NASA files images of UFO's above the earth taken from secret US sy satellites
2) That he downloaded US navy pay files and fleet deployment listings that revealed the US has an off earth space fleet run by the US navy
3) That he saw other files that revealed the existence of UFO related technology being used by the US military.
Now this leaves prosecution case in a perilous position.
In order for McKinnon to be held guilty, then at the time of the criminal offences he committed he must not have been 'insane' or suffering from a mental abnormality that affected him to such an extent he was not aware of what he was doing.
But the testimony of McKinnon is so 'absurd' and so 'insane' ( as everyone knows that UFO's dont exist, that the US navy does not have an off earth space fleet and that the US military does not have UFO technology and energy systems ) that at the time of the offence he must have been insane.
In order for the prosecution to prove the case they must also prove his sanity at the time he did the offences. The testimony reveals that McKinnon was clearly insane.
In order for the prosecution to prove that McKinnon was not insane then they must admit that ;
1) The US has an off earth space fleet
2) That they have UFO technology and energy systems
3) That NASA does have photographs of UFOS's above the earth
Therefore the prosecution have to admit that the testimony of McKinnon was correct, in order to prove that he was not insane at the time he committed the offences.
In fact McKinnon must still be insane right now - as he still believes that he saw those things he downloaded from the US computer systems.
Therefore as he was insane at the time he committed the offences and he must still be insane now, as he still believes he saw those 'insane' things he said he saw, then he clearly should not be allowed to go to trial.
It appears that the judges who heard this appeal did not understand the nature of the linkage between McKinnons mental health and his capacity to stand trial nor the lawfulness of such a trial when he is clearly still 'insane'.
McKinnon must clearly be insane.
The fact he said those 'insane' things means he has to be insane - rational people who are responsible for their actions do not see such things as McKinnon said he saw on the US computer files.
The US must also, if it wants to win the case, prove that the material McKinnon saw was classified material.
If they cannot prove the material he saw was protected under defence laws, then they cannot assert the damage to 'national security' occured.
Therefore the US has to admit both that the files McKinnon said he saw were real, and that they are the most highly classified documents in the US military, or they cannot prove their case in relation to the charge that he damaged US national security.
What McKinnon must do is make this a crusade for UFO disclosure.
In order to convict him the US must in effect admit UFO's are real.
This case means McKinnon can take on the military industrial block in public - and force the US to expose the secret it has been keeping.
If he explains the moral aspect of his actions, to find out if the US is hiding advanced energy systems that could save the planet, and that he was motivated not to damage US national security interests, but to simply expose the truth about UFO's - then the jury will not convict him.