3 ms·

Are you suggesting someone has been actively trying to frame Marcus Hutchins for 7 years? I'm sorry but that sounds a bit too tinfoily for me without any eviden

Are you suggesting someone has been actively trying to frame Marcus Hutchins for 7 years? I'm sorry but that sounds a bit too tinfoily for me without any evidence. Not only that, but the key parts of this dox from 2010 have been confirmed by the media and now the FBI. What do you consider actual evidence? This is the kind of stuff they use every day in court, and there's lots of it if you bother to take 10 minutes to look on google. Courts aren't videogames, you don't win by outsmarting the computer. I suppose it's also worth pointing out that the reputation system on that site isn't very useful, when you get banned the staff usually wipes out all of your positive reputation as happened to the poster I screenshotted.

nthcolumn 9y ago
No I am not suggesting that. My subtle joke seems to have fooled you too unless you are... @dang (or maybe you really are @hitler)? The only reason for mentioning someone by name in this kind of forum would be a kind of 'I doxxed you/know where you live' pathetic threat - typical banned skid 'can u mak me a trojan/virus so I can hak mi skul cuz I am dumbasfuck'. What value do you place on the dox? He might have genuinely thought it was Marcus Hutchins but just because he says he is or I say you are @weev doesn't make it true. In any legal system that is not evidence unless they can get the guy who posted it and subpoena him to come and swear preferably with some actual evidence rather than his word. It is hearsay! It is entirely inadmissible! None of it has anything to do with @malwaretech and the guy it meant to be has already themselves posted on twitter and supplied samples of kronos. Google Detectives!