Re: go public to avoid jail

[J Roger <securityhocus () gmail com>]

> There were excerpts in the Wired article, and there are more in the
> court record

One has to begin wondering:

A) Why did Gonzales keep logs of incriminating evidence against himself and
his friends in the first place?
B) What motivation did Gonzales have for rolling over on Stephen like that?
Given Stephen's minor involvement in the case, it seems like Gonzales
wouldn't get much by way of a plea deal by turning him in.
C) Another Wired article states that Gonzales was an informer paid an annual
salary by the Secret Service. This revelation apparently was brought to
light by Stephen himself. Did The_UT know this was the case before his
arrest or only after? If he knew these circumstances prior to his arrest
then why would he be willing to create a custom tool for a person he knows
is informing on people?


JRoger

On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Ed Carp <erc () pobox com> wrote:

> There were excerpts in the Wired article, and there are more in the
> court record - I'll see if I can find the link in my browser history.
> Quite interesting reading, actually...
>
> On 5/3/10, J Roger <securityhocus () gmail com> wrote:
> > > I can see that you have no experience with the legal system other than
> > > what you've seen on TV (which is, to say, none at all).
> >
> > I know this is the Internet but you don't need to be quite so rude.
> Perhaps
> > I just haven't been arrested (caught) as many times as you have.
> >
> > If you read
> > > the IRC logs presented by the prosecution, it is pretty clear what the
> > > motive was.
> >
> > I have not seen these IRC logs. Have you? Could you provide a reference
> for
> > them please?
> >
> >
> > JRoger
> >
> > On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Ed Carp <erc () pobox com> wrote:
> >
> > > I can see that you have no experience with the legal system other than
> > > what you've seen on TV (which is, to say, none at all).  If you read
> > > the IRC logs presented by the prosecution, it is pretty clear what the
> > > motive was.  Your "release it to the public and you have no liability"
> > > argument will land you in prison if you try it - go to any attorney
> > > and ask.  Your emotional "prove Stephen is a saint" attempt at
> > > twisting what happens in the legal system doesn't change the FACT that
> > > the burden of proof was easily met by the prosecution and that the
> > > defense's arguments, while designed to sway people more used to
> > > emotional appeals than logic, did little to impress the court, with
> > > very predictable results.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
> Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
> Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/