Re: Weev's collateral damage.

[Daniel Clemens <daniel.clemens () packetninjas net>]

On Nov 21, 2012, at 11:20 AM, J. Oquendo wrote:

> How many individuals here have either 1) Sat on a jury for
> a tech case 2) been involved in a tech case that went to
> trial? ... *crickets*


Raises Hand ( 1 ) . 
A few times.... 

In one case that I can share I was sitting through the Jury selection process. 
It was interesting since this ended up being a child exploitation case and the defendant was stating that somehow a 
'virus' has systematically downloaded , organized and labeled his collection. I didn't make it through the second round 
of selection after they asked if anyone had 'forensic experience' or 'malware analysis experience'. 
They somehow thought that since I had a clue then this wasn't good for the weirdo even if their defense was weak. 

Takeaway;
We have to remember each side has a role to play.


> The reality behind going to a trial on the federal level is,
> no matter what the charges are, the jury's bias is and will
> always be: "well the FBI was involved, therefore it must be
> serious." Couple this with the fact that a jury of any kind
> of peer is and can never be expected. In fact, during the
> jury selection, you can expect the prosecution to seek to 
> dismiss anyone with any kind of technical background from
> the jump.


I think it has more to do with the the record that if you have federal charges brought against you, they will win 99% 
of the time. 
They generally don't pick up cases they will loose easily. 

> So while you see a portion of his case online, I am sure
> there was likely more that came into play that did not help
> weev. E.g., boasting on IRC about shorting AT&T's stock.
> Really?
>
> Tech cases that go to trial are a rarity. Period. You could
> likely count all cases that went to trial in the past ten
> years on both your hands. Most times prosecutors are happy
> to throw out a month or two punishment if one cops out as
> opposed to someone blowing trial. I can tell you from my
> own experience... One CANNOT win trial against the gov.
> I could speak of "FBI Computer Experts" that stated they
> did not know what an IP address was and so forth, things
> that would make techies breathe a big WTF, but at the end
> of the day... Jury of 12 peers who 1) won't understand an
> iota of technology no matter how its explained 2) jury of
> 12 peers who would rather be rolling in broken glass than
> sitting in court 3) Skewed and distorted information as
> well as evidence that never sees the light of day.


The threat of ignorance by the our population is a greater threat than the `computer experts`. 


> If someone did nothing, they have ABSOLUTELY EVERY RIGHT
> to fight their case no matter what kind of deal is being
> offered. If someone DID DO SOMETHING, here is some advice:
> You will get pounded period. Don't be an idiot and try to
> fight any power. Weev and his lawyers can appeal until
> their faces turn blue, they will get nowhere.

One would have to disagree.  Each case is different. 
While we can agree that they will have a hard time statistically, we can't say the end will always be despair.
In the end our justice system doesn't suffer fools lightly. This goes both ways for idiots as well as those who would 
attempt to corrupt the system through common 3rd world methods. 

| Daniel Uriah Clemens
| Packetninjas L.L.C | | http://www.packetninjas.net
| c. 205.567.6850      | | o. 866.267.8851 
"Moments of sorrow are moments of sobriety"

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description:

_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunityinc com
https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave