7 ms·
Coincidentally had child porn on his machine.
by say_it_as_it_is 4y ago
Coincidentally had child porn on his machine.
- bobthechef 4y ago
- AustinDev 4y agoThe go to ‘sprinkle some crack on em’ tool in the alphabet toolbox.
- bostonsre 4y agoHe had state secrets on his machine.. why would they need to do this or what would they gain from doing this?
- jdmonty 4y agoMakes him look really scummy?
- sedatk 4y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32090407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32090407
- dredmorbius 4y agoImpeaching the witness. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_impeachment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witness_impeachment
- brian_cunnie 4y agoIANAL, but I don't think they can introduce child pornography charge in the espionage trial--they severed the two trials, and the ex-CIA coder hasn't yet been convicted of child pornography (it's the later trial), so it doesn't fall under the "Prior Conviction" umbrella.
- dredmorbius 4y agoFair point. There are other potential prosecutorial benefits. There's still the court-of-public-opinion element. Such a charge might give allies / witnesses for the defence pause to come forward. Facing multiple independent counts also increases pressure, costs, and distracts attention for the defendant against any one case. Given the defendant here is representing himself, that may be a major hurdle. (Last sentence here is a stealth edit FYI.) Whether the CP charges are justified or strategic I really can't say. The practice of digging up additional dirt on defendants in specific instances is a venerable tradition however.
- boomboomsubban 4y agoHow would they know he had state secrets on his computer? And how could they convince a judge they knew he had those secrets without admitting to illegal activities themselves?
- shreyshnaccount 4y agohe leaked them. he had to have them for him to leak them. if you're asking how they know he was the leak, idk
- boomboomsubban 4y ago>he had to have them for him to leak them A smart leaker would then delete them and destroy any disk they touched. Even if they knew he leaked them, there's no guarantee he would have them on his machine. Which would be another reason to ‘sprinkle some crack on em,' that way he would still be punished if he was prepared.
- hulitu 4y ago> A smart leaker would then delete them and destroy any disk they touched. And the prosecutors will put them back. Just like police inserts a small package in your backpocket when they arrest you.
- boomboomsubban 4y ago>Which would be another reason to ‘sprinkle some crack on em,'
- bostonsre 4y agoI would assume they would know by doing a standard legal investigation where they get a warrant from the judge and look. I don't know what evidence they gave in the warrant application in this case but usually they have to be more than a blind shot in the dark request.
- hulitu 4y agoIt's a tradition at those 3 letter agencies. They know that some people love wistleblowers and they want to discredit them. Just look at wikipedia pages of those wistleblowers or spies.
- sedatk 4y agoIf there was such a tool, why wasn't it used for others like Chelsea Manning?
- daenz 4y agoNot every leak and leaker is the same. If a tool/procedure like that existed, it would probably be used on people who could generate positive public perception of their actions. Apparently the "vault 7" leak was centered around how devices were hacked to spy on private citizens and consumers. The public has a soft spot for people who leak things that expose direct invasions of privacy. Chelsea Manning on the other hand leaked documents that I don't believe would influence public opinion of them very easily (diplomatic cables and different military things). If you were going to break the law (planting evidence) to smear the character of someone, smear the person who has a higher chance of the public siding with.
- sterlind 4y agothen why wouldn't they have used it against Edward Snowden? he revealed a whole mass surveillance operation, along with misconduct by NSA agents, and there was a lot of popular support for him. I still agree they could have smeared him, but I don't think it's improbable that the porn was actually his. Pedophiles are skilled at opsec, keeping secrets and doing unsavory things, so their background suits working in IC if they can conceal their behavior. And if discovered by a foreign intelligence agency, they'd be easy to extort into spying. Vault 7 released a fair bit of code, didn't it? It would benefit state adversaries to leak that publicly, by burning exploits the CIA's using.
- boomboomsubban 4y agoHow would it work with Snowden? "Yknow the guy who flew to Hong Kong and stated he deleted all his data? Turns out he still had one computer he forgot that just so happens to be jam packed with illegal porn." Much easier to trap him in Russia and claim he's a foreign agent.
- newsclues 4y ago
- smitty1e 4y agoLiving by the sword could result in dying thereby.
- boringg 4y agoI think all the comments miss that this comment is said as a joke. I don't think OP is meant that they literally did that - it would be a particularly dumb law enforcement move that would jeopardize the entire case.
- krapp 4y agoPlenty of people believe the government literally does that all the time, as a matter of routine.
- Terry_Roll 4y agoWhat word causes the ultimate form of cognitive dissonance in males?
- smeagull 4y agoASD love doing that too. I think they got it from the Americans.
- kornhole 4y agoThis one is very hard to believe. A guy who worked on advanced hacking tools and was able to get out that much data without trace does not know how to use encrypted hidden volumes nor shred his hard drives?
- wombat-man 4y agoMaybe he did. Maybe he wasn't able to shred in time.
- Bud 4y agoEasy for me to believe. Highly intelligent and skilled people are often also very arrogant and think they can't get caught. Or, they have blind spots. Or, they just get careless about certain things.
- yucky 4y agoEdward Snowden was the exception, not the rule.
- spoonjim 4y agoLeakers tend to be optimists and idealists. But it’s cynics and misanthropes who are the best at opsec.
- bearmode 4y agoThis leaker wasn't motivated by idealism, he was just a dickhead trying to get back at his employer.
- spoonjim 4y agoI don’t find that extremely surprising. The Catholic Church scandals have shown that child sexual abuse is much more widespread than anyone would like to think, and with all of the teenagers out there taking nude pictures there could easily be underage porn out there that people don’t even know is illicit. Between intentional and unintentional possession there is probably a significant percentage of the population who they could get on this charge.