CDR: Re: Jim Bell

Alex B. Shepardsen abs at squig.org
Tue Nov 28 04:14:48 PST 2000


On Mon, 27 Nov 2000, Tim May wrote:

> More than spice, I think. I think _this_ time they plan to make AP 
> part of their case.

[snip]

> Granted, they will not try to claim that Bell was running a real AP 
> lottery. But they may make claims that he was planning an 
> assassination. Some jurors might be swayed by the language in AP and 
> by the (alleged) utterance:

[snip]

> This time they may try to make it a more central part of some case. 
> Hence my comment that some of us may be called by the defense to 
> explain why AP could not possibly be an operational system at this 
> time.

It should be obvious, should it not, that AP isn't deployable at the
present time? I would be quite surprised if AP was brought into the case
with any greater role than "proof" that Jim was engaged in that most
dangerous activty known as thought, focused on the concepts of
revolutionary action.

"Look, this guy is so dangerous, he even developed an untraceable method
for commissioning contract killings!"

The prosecution won't want to make AP a major part of their case. It will
distract from the cyber-stalking issue, which is what they'll get him on.

Besides, free publicity for AP isn't going to make Jeff Gordon sleep any
better at night.


Alex





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list