Jim Bell Trial: Second Day

[Declan McCullagh]

She wasn't a lawyer; your PR clone suspicion is correct.

She was not a technologist. Her function was only to testify that 
an IP address matched an account.

Bell's lawyer on cross-examination never raised the point that a message
posted to cpunx goes through multiple servers (including the majordomo
ones), all of which have the opportunity to add false headers to the
message.

-Declan


On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 10:30:25AM +0100, Ken Brown wrote:
> auto211076 at hushmail.com wrote:
> > 
> > Second Day:  Jim Bell trial
> 
> [...]
> 
> 
> > The next witness was Hilda Wong Muramoto who is a subpoena manager for @Home
> > Corporation.  In direct testimony she stated that Bell had a cable modem
> > account, that the "DNS designation and sub-domain" as well as the IP address
> > were hard-wired, and that the account did not cover dial-up connections.
> >  She said that the IP address was 24.16.209.166 and that the DNS number
> > was C1099371-A.  The DNS name that was captured in the e-mail that Bell
> > allegedly sent to cypherpunks was encrv1.wa.home.com.  She claimed that
> > those "numbers" could not appear on anyone else's e-mail.
> 
> "subpoena manager"? What in Tacoma is a "subpoena manager"? Do subpoenas
> need managing? 
> 
> It sounds like they employ someone just to get sued.  Presumably that
> means she is a PR clone or a lawyer. Why should a PR type know anything
> about DNS & SMTP, any more than I (or Choate)  should be an expert on
> the law?
> 
> If I was a grumpy judge and a company sent me a "subpoena manager" I
> would be very tempted to send them right back & get someone who knew
> what they are talking about.
> 
> Ken
>