5 ms·

> Further, a crime isn't just a crime. A journalist attempting to protect their source is an essential part of their freedom of the press What Assange is accus

> Further, a crime isn't just a crime. A journalist attempting to protect their source is an essential part of their freedom of the press What Assange is accused of is not that. > Even if you disagree with my assessment of Assange's actions, it should be clear that justice does care about the context. It doesn't. Protecting a source is not a crime, hence a journalist cannot be prosecuted for that. Nobody is forced to reveal a criminal activity, people have the right to remain silent. Another thing entirely is if someone actively participated in committing the crime (for example helping a thief to hide their fingerprints) Also, I don't believe Assange should be extradited, but from a legal point it doesn't matter if he looked for gloves because Manning wanted to hide her fingerprints or a gun, if (and it's a big if) he said "I'll help you" that's a problem.

h_anna_h 6y ago
Assange is accused of basically running hashcat. I am sure that a fair percentage of HN would be criminals under this logic.
- africanboy 6y ago
  I'm very sad to say this, but HN as a Place to discuss is not up to the standards people say it is. I'm being downvoted for basically stating the obvious and, worse than that, by people that do not stop a second to think about what other people wrote. I'm not putting Assange on trial, I'm not a judge, this is not a tribunal, I was just clarifying what he's been accused of! Having said that: yes, if you are the driver in a Bank robbery, you can get arrested for "basically driving a car" The crime is not driving, is helping other criminals to commit the crime. Which is what Assange is accused of. He's not accused of running hashcat. Even if he did the decryption with pen and paper and failed he would be an "accessory to the crime" (allegedly, because he's only accused of doing it) To put it in other words, he is accused of being > a person who knowingly and voluntarily participates in the commission of a crime. Regardless of the crime, the simple fact that he (allegedly) helped is a crime.
  - h_anna_h 6y ago
    Sure but I don't know how this is relevant to what I said. > Having said that: yes, if you are the driver in a Bank robbery, you can get arrested for "basically driving a car" Driving in a bank robbery is different to basically just doing some calculations. It might be a crime but it should not be one. Regardless though I would claim that even if he tried to physically get into buildings and steal documents in order to expose warcrimes I would say that they should let him free.
    - africanboy 6y ago
      Driving is driving Doing some calculations is doing some calculations Driving for bank robbers or doing some calculations for the mob can be a crime, if driving or doing calculations was helping them to commit a crime and you knew it. > even if he tried to physically get into buildings and steal documents in order to expose warcrimes I would say that they should let him free. That's your opinion. I'm not saying you are wrong in principle, but that's not how law works.
      - h_anna_h 6y ago
        Sure, and it is your opinion that assange should have refused to help manning.
        africanboy 6y ago
        I think there's a (big) misunderstanding here. My opinion __is not__ that Assange should have refused to help Mannings, Assange is an adult, he can chose to do whatever he wants. What I'm saying is that Assange should have refused to be accessory to a crime. Journalists are protected when they receive classified informations, even if obtained illegaly, as long as the journalist didn’t do anything illegal He knew he was helping with something illegal (at least he should have known) and that by doing it he would lose the kind of protections guaranteed to the press.
        6y ago
- detaro 6y ago
  I doubt a fair percentage of HN has used hashcat to break passwords to attempt to steal US government documents. The tool is not the point of the charge.
boomboomsubban 6y ago
I don't want to try and change your opinion on Assange's actions, many journalist have said the "I'll help" you see as a problem is a routine procedure, but you clearly disagree. A crime still isn't just a crime though. A less ambiguous example, unauthorized possession's of classified information is a crime, yet no journalist has been charged for it.
- africanboy 6y ago
  I'm honestly expressing no opinion on Assange's actions. "I'll help" is not a problem, if they are not helping someone to commit a crime (clarification: when I say "it's a problem" I mean it's a problem for whoever says "I'll help" because they are being accessory to a crime). What routinely escapes from the prosecution of the law is irrelevant. The fact that I have downloaded copyrighted material without any consequence doesn't make it legal. A crime is a crime by the law, the court has to decide if you either committed it or not (regardless if you did it for real, if the court can prove you did it, you did it). That doesn't mean that killing a baby and downloading an episode of a TV show illegally is the same thing, it means that if I helped you to download the content and you are accused of downloading that content and the court can prove it, I am accessory to the crime even if people routinely get by. > unauthorized possession's of classified information is a crime Are you referring to this? > Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both. What journalists do is not retain them, it's publish them, which AFAIK is not illegal.
  - Talanes 6y ago
    >What journalists do is not retain them, it's publish them, which AFAIK is not illegal. Unless you are just immediately releasing all documents you receive unedited, you will have to retain them for a period first. Would a journalist raided the second before he could click publish be committing a crime, while a second later he would not be committing a crime and have never been committing a crime.

h_anna_h 6y ago

Assange is accused of basically running hashcat. I am sure that a fair percentage of HN would be criminals under this logic.

africanboy 6y ago
I'm very sad to say this, but HN as a Place to discuss is not up to the standards people say it is. I'm being downvoted for basically stating the obvious and, worse than that, by people that do not stop a second to think about what other people wrote. I'm not putting Assange on trial, I'm not a judge, this is not a tribunal, I was just clarifying what he's been accused of! Having said that: yes, if you are the driver in a Bank robbery, you can get arrested for "basically driving a car" The crime is not driving, is helping other criminals to commit the crime. Which is what Assange is accused of. He's not accused of running hashcat. Even if he did the decryption with pen and paper and failed he would be an "accessory to the crime" (allegedly, because he's only accused of doing it) To put it in other words, he is accused of being > a person who knowingly and voluntarily participates in the commission of a crime. Regardless of the crime, the simple fact that he (allegedly) helped is a crime.
- h_anna_h 6y ago
  Sure but I don't know how this is relevant to what I said. > Having said that: yes, if you are the driver in a Bank robbery, you can get arrested for "basically driving a car" Driving in a bank robbery is different to basically just doing some calculations. It might be a crime but it should not be one. Regardless though I would claim that even if he tried to physically get into buildings and steal documents in order to expose warcrimes I would say that they should let him free.
  - africanboy 6y ago
    Driving is driving Doing some calculations is doing some calculations Driving for bank robbers or doing some calculations for the mob can be a crime, if driving or doing calculations was helping them to commit a crime and you knew it. > even if he tried to physically get into buildings and steal documents in order to expose warcrimes I would say that they should let him free. That's your opinion. I'm not saying you are wrong in principle, but that's not how law works.
    - h_anna_h 6y ago
      Sure, and it is your opinion that assange should have refused to help manning.
      - africanboy 6y ago
        I think there's a (big) misunderstanding here. My opinion __is not__ that Assange should have refused to help Mannings, Assange is an adult, he can chose to do whatever he wants. What I'm saying is that Assange should have refused to be accessory to a crime. Journalists are protected when they receive classified informations, even if obtained illegaly, as long as the journalist didn’t do anything illegal He knew he was helping with something illegal (at least he should have known) and that by doing it he would lose the kind of protections guaranteed to the press.
        6y ago
detaro 6y ago
I doubt a fair percentage of HN has used hashcat to break passwords to attempt to steal US government documents. The tool is not the point of the charge.

boomboomsubban 6y ago

I don't want to try and change your opinion on Assange's actions, many journalist have said the "I'll help" you see as a problem is a routine procedure, but you clearly disagree. A crime still isn't just a crime though. A less ambiguous example, unauthorized possession's of classified information is a crime, yet no journalist has been charged for it.

africanboy 6y ago
I'm honestly expressing no opinion on Assange's actions. "I'll help" is not a problem, if they are not helping someone to commit a crime (clarification: when I say "it's a problem" I mean it's a problem for whoever says "I'll help" because they are being accessory to a crime). What routinely escapes from the prosecution of the law is irrelevant. The fact that I have downloaded copyrighted material without any consequence doesn't make it legal. A crime is a crime by the law, the court has to decide if you either committed it or not (regardless if you did it for real, if the court can prove you did it, you did it). That doesn't mean that killing a baby and downloading an episode of a TV show illegally is the same thing, it means that if I helped you to download the content and you are accused of downloading that content and the court can prove it, I am accessory to the crime even if people routinely get by. > unauthorized possession's of classified information is a crime Are you referring to this? > Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both. What journalists do is not retain them, it's publish them, which AFAIK is not illegal.
- Talanes 6y ago
  >What journalists do is not retain them, it's publish them, which AFAIK is not illegal. Unless you are just immediately releasing all documents you receive unedited, you will have to retain them for a period first. Would a journalist raided the second before he could click publish be committing a crime, while a second later he would not be committing a crime and have never been committing a crime.