OK - Here's a really dumb decision which shows how willing the courts are to shred the Constitution. Just to make sure that Puritans don't have to worry that someone, somewhere, is looking at a picture of someone under 18, and touching themselves improperly. http://news.com.com/2100-1029_3-5058835.html Apparently, criminals can break into your home, and look for evidence of illegal activity and thoughtcrime, and if they find it or even plant it themselves, they can give it to the police, not be prosecuted for breaking in, and it can be used as evidence against you. No problem with obtaining those pesky search warrants from the handy rotary tear-off dispenser in the Judge's chambers any more. No indeed. ----- Judges OK evidence from hacker vigilante By Lisa M. Bowman Staff Writer, CNET News.com August 1, 2003, 10:22 AM PT [Comments in [] are mine. -emc] A federal appeals panel ruled this week that the government did not violate search and seizure laws when it used evidence that a hacker gathered to establish a child pornography case. The opinion reverses a lower court ruling in which a U.S. District Court judge in Virginia suppressed the evidence, saying the government had violated a defendant's rights. The decision stems from a case in which a hacker uploaded a file to a child porn newsgroup that made it possible to track who downloaded files from the service. The uploaded file contained the SubSeven virus, which the hacker used to remotely search people's computers for porn. [Notice how the claims by the "hacker" are reported as fact here. For all we know, the hacker could have broken into the computer, and planted the alleged child porn himself. Once the hacker had access, the PC was no longer under the exclusive control of the owner, and I don't see how he could be prosecuted for anything on it. It's not like these child porn crusaders don't lie. Mike Echols lied about child porn for years, and through the posting of his list of the personal information of those he falsely claimed were child pornographers on yet another Web hosting service, by the remnants of his sham organization, he continues to lie from beyond the grave. History has proven that Lying Feminist Cunts and Religious Nutballs will do anything to silence their critics, including planting porn on their computers. How dumb and naive can the courts be?] The hacker then played the role of a cybervigilante, sending anonymous tips to law enforcement officials that alerted them to child porn files the hacker had found on people's PCs. [Again, the files the hacker "claimed" to have found on peoples PCs, but which in reality, could have been planted because the hacker didn't like the subject's public comments about Vigilante Hackers, Bon-Bon Munching Holsteins, and other loathesome creatures.] The attorneys for one of the men nabbed in the hacker's sting sued, saying that the hacker was acting as an agent of the government and therefore needed a warrant before conducting a search of someone's computer. A federal court judge ruled that the government had indeed violated the man's Fourth Amendment rights protecting him from unreasonable search and seizure. [This certainly seems to be the correct interpretation of the law.] However, an appellate panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that decision because, among other things, most of the major exchanges between law enforcement and the hacker took place after he had searched the man's computer. As a result, the judges said, the government had not established a relationship with the hacker prior to his search that would have made him an agent of the government. "In order to run afoul of the Fourth Amendment, therefore, the government must do more than passively accept or acquiesce in a private party's search efforts," the judges wrote. "Rather there must be some degree of government participation in the private search." However, the appellate judges warned that law enforcement "operated close to the line" in the case. [This is clearly bullshit. We are now privatizing illegal searching, as long as the vigilante group doesn't run to the police until after they break into your home and discover/plant evidence? Someone needs to confiscate these judges' crack pipes.] -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"
On Saturday 02 August 2003 04:23, Eric Cordian wrote:
Apparently, criminals can break into your home, and look for evidence of illegal activity and thoughtcrime, and if they find it or even plant it themselves, they can give it to the police, not be prosecuted for breaking in, and it can be used as evidence against you.
Sounds like an opportunity, not a problem. Anybody know John Asscruft's home IP address? -- Steve Furlong Computer Condottiere Have GNU, Will Travel "If someone is so fearful that, that they're going to start using their weapons to protect their rights, makes me very nervous that these people have these weapons at all!" -- Rep. Henry Waxman
participants (2)
-
Eric Cordian
-
Steve Furlong