15 ms·

The feds are making it hurt in every way for Weev, but for what?

146 points by bifrost 13y ago

mosqutip 13y ago
How does this not violate several Constitutional amendments? Unexplained solitary confinement sounds like cruel and unusual punishment, and not allowing his lawyer to see him is clearly a denial of fair representation. I'm not sure about the legality of the diet, but maybe someone more informed on prison law could step in. Rooming him with terrorists and gang members? Denying entry for a woman not wearing a bra? (which, in addition to making no sense, is also creepy) This is clear abuse of state power, and I don't understand how people aren't outraged over it. But then again, the state effectively owns the media, so there's yet another obstacle in Weev's path. In a word: disgusting.
- johnpowell 13y ago
  This part confuses me. >"learned he was sharing a 10x10 cell in solitary with a cellmate" I'm not sure how that works.
  - downandout 13y ago
    Bunk beds. It's not "solitary" per se since he is with someone else...I think the actual euphemism is SHU or Special Housing Unit.
  - pavedwalden 13y ago
    I suspect that being locked up alone with one of the world's most obnoxious trolls is unfair punishment for whoever that cellmate is.
beedogs 13y ago
Pretty goddamned pathetic, America. You treat your rapists and your murderers better than your grey-hat hackers. Nice priorities.
- droopyEyelids 13y ago
  Weev was arrested for grey hat behavior, but we should remember he is an 100% black hat individual.
  - guard-of-terra 13y ago
    So it's somehow okay? I would expect that level of law awareness from bitter people in third world or post-totalitarian countries, not on HN.
    - honzzz 13y ago
      Actually, I believe that people from post-totalitarian countries might be more sensitive to human rights related issues than people from countries that never experienced totalitarian regime. As an adult I had lived in both US (only 7 months) and UK (2.5 years) but I grew up in communist eastern bloc and my experience leads me to believe that our collective bad experience made us sensitive to warning signs that people from always-free countries just don't see. I know this is highly subjective and I might be over-sensitive but if I were an American I would freak out about news like "a guy not given gluten-free food in prison" or "TSA forcing dying woman to strip in public" or "warrantless surveillance" or "indefinite detention"... because I would perceive them as not only signs of serious erosion of respect for human rights but also signs of pre-totalitarian state, and I would be scared shitless that really bad times are coming again. I cannot comprehend that Americans mostly just don't care.
      - guard-of-terra 13y ago
        "people from post-totalitarian countries might be more sensitive to human rights related issues" That doesn't happen with the bulk of population. They grow up with ability to rationalize out such issues, just like people growing up in market countries rationalize out poor and homeless.
        honzzz 13y ago
downandout 13y ago
The horrible treatment of just about anyone that enters the prison system is the primary driver of our plea-based justice system. While Weev's friends may think that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is afraid of their public complaints, the opposite is true. Such public stories help get other defendants to plead guilty in exchange for reduced sentences, hopefully in minimum security, "Club Fed" type facilities, before significant resources have to be spent on their prosecution. By discussing it here and spreading it online, we are actually advancing the goals of federal prosecutors across the country. As far as Weev himself, not much can be done. The feds are permitted to house any inmate in essentially any conditions they want as long as they meet certain (incredibly low) standards. Once you are in their grasp, you are at their mercy. Theoretically, they can keep him in segregation for the duration of his sentence. The bra thing is ordinary for jails and prisons. He is being threatened with "Diesel Therapy" - being moved from prison to prison - in order to disrupt his posts to the Internet which violate their rules. Basically, he hasn't learned (but will soon) that he is no longer in control. The harder he fights against the rules, no matter how idiotic those rules may be, the more difficult his life will become. This is true both while in custody and during the entire term of his Supervised Release. None of this is necessary or right in the eyes of anyone with half a brain, but it is the system we have and he exposed himself to it.
- antihero 13y ago
  It amazes me that people aren't revolting over this - how is this not considered comparable to slavery on an utterly massive and unprecedented scale?
  - kaonashi 13y ago
    Because it's rare that white middle/upper class people are subjected to it.
    - pyre 13y ago
      More like, because it's happening to someone that is: a) 'one of us' and b) he's someone high profile, that is attempting to remain so even after going to prison. I have a feeling that if Weev was black or Asian it would still be a big deal to us[1]. I don't remember hearing much about Kevin Mitnik's issues with his jailers. I'm sure he had at least some. [1] Though there is the remote possibility that it would be cared about 'less' because it would be seen as racial discrimination rather than just out right maliciousness, but I'm optimistic that this wouldn't be the case.
rosser 13y ago
Weev is a raging douche, who appears to take a perverse kind of pleasure in being as brazenly reprehensible as possible, but no one deserves this kind of treatment.
SG- 13y ago
It's clear that there's no real interest in reforming people and simply punishing them in any way possible regardless of what it means when they finally come out of the US jail system. That just seems to be the way in the US and other countries, however in a lot of others there's effort to actually reform people instead of punish. A lot of people also facepalm or complain that criminals in other countries serve a fraction of time compared to Americans as well as them having really good living conditions and programs available to them in jail.
drawkbox 13y ago
Yes what he did is wrong. But prison for non-violent offenses is violence itself, cruel and unusual punishment. This would make monarchies proud. Hardline can deter people but do you really want to support solitary confinement and prison for non-violence? The cost is too great on many levels not just monetary. Money spent on locking up non-violence is money lost for other public services. We are all going to pay at least $30,000 per year in taxes for this one instance. Why create criminals? This is no rehabilitation, this is creating life long criminals. Maybe there is something I am missing, but find no value in locking up non-violence unless it is repeat offenses or crimes that result in violence.
- robflynn 13y ago
  It's really sickening how things play out. I have a friend who was jailed for counterfeiting. He weed from someone and received counterfeit bills as change. Next day, he bought a pizza with the change. After he got home, he realized the money looked weird. He tried to do the right thing and called the pizza place and told him that he thinks he received counterfeit bills as change from somewhere and told them that he was going to bring them some new money. When he arrived he was jailed. He refused to give up his friend and ended up jailed for a while. Thankfully, his attorney was able to work some magic after his initial sentencing and get him switched to house arrest at a significantly reduced sentence. It just seems weird to me that unintentional possession of something can get you into so much trouble. What happens if I end up with a counterfeit bill from somewhere and a cop decides to search me? Does he notice? If so, then what? What if I honestly don't know where it came from?
  - rayiner 13y ago
    He got jail because he refused to give up his friend and thus became an accessory.
    - qwerta 13y ago
      It is basic human right to refuse testify against yourself or family member.
jacquesm 13y ago
You can tell a lot about a country when you look at the way it treats those that are in its power, especially those in the prison system. The conditions of inmates tell you a lot more about the state of affairs compared to the 500 richest guys/girls or the GNP. America is still very low on the totempole when it comes to being civilized in this way, and by the looks of it things are getting worse rather than better. Plea bargaining, the largest in-jail population of any country (both in absolute numbers as well as percentage wise), ridiculous legal costs and a prison system that is rife with structural problems. It's almost as if America has decided that prisoners are not people.
- pyre 13y ago
  Well, they can't vote so it's easy for politicians to use them as fodder to further political goals.
  - dailyrorschach 13y ago
    Actually many states have changed their position to allow voting once sentence/probation is completed. http://www.aclu.org/maps/map-state-felony-disfranchisement-laws http://www.aclu.org/maps/map-state-felony-disfranchisement-l...
- why-el 13y ago
  Your first line is similar to a Dostoevsky quote: "The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons." (The House of the Dead)
  - jacquesm 13y ago
    Interesting, I have not read Dostoevsky but I don't think you need to be particularly smart or well read to come up with that line of reasoning, it seems common sense to me that when the other side has no power at all the freedom that gives to the side in power will show them at their worst. If that worst then is pretty good that would be a hallmark of a good society.
pyre 13y ago
1) It sounds like he's not necessarily in 'solitary confinement' because he's got a cellmate. Sure he's separated from the rest of the prison population, but it's not the same situation as if he were really in solitary confinement. 2) Not allowing him access to his lawyer, or allowing his lawyer to be informed of his situation seems like it has to be against some sort of rule/law/regulation. If it isn't then we need to start calling up some legislators. 3) What's the deal with the 'you must wear a bra' rule? Someone in another thread said that this was standard. Why? I could maybe understand a rule that said "no bras" if they thought that a bra could be used to smuggled something somehow, but forcing all women visiting to wear bras seems odd. Are they afraid of a prison riot over a bra-less woman? 4) Are there really rules against him distributing information to the outside world via friends or his lawyer? What is the point of such rules? For some stupid edge-case of suppressing mafia bosses from operating from prison? Are they trying to stop criticism of the jail conditions from reaching the outside (i.e. anti-whistle-blower)? 5) If Weev really did break some sort of prison rules, then why will they not confirm why he was put in administrative detention? He's obviously there for a reason, why will they not disclose it? Makes it come across like they feel that disclosing the reason would look worse than just withholding it and waiting for all this to blow over. 6) Why are they not giving him gluten-free meals if that's 'what the doctor ordered?' If something is medically necessary, and it's withheld from an inmate, why is this not a punishable offense?
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  Are there really rules against him distributing information to the outside world via friends or his lawyer I think you may have misread: The penitentiary also threatened to (list of actions) if he tries to communicate with the outside world via Internet again. They don't object to him communicating with friends or his lawyer; they don't want him active online. What is the point of such rules? For some stupid edge-case of suppressing mafia bosses from operating from prison? That's what comes to my mind as well. Weev isn't a mafia boss, but he is a black hat hacker, and he is (was?) a part of Goatse Security. The Internet is his medium. If you throw him in prison and grant him free access to the Internet, have you really done anything? It's actually kind of an interesting conundrum- a thief is removed from the streets to stop him from thieving. Here we have a hacker we have tried to put into a system meant for a thief, when maybe the better analogue would be to remove him from his streets, i.e. the Interenet, instead of putting him in prison to remove him from the street. House arrest and monitored or limited access to the Internet has always seemed like one of the better options the penitentiary system has tried for "Internet criminals".
al1x 13y ago
Trolls getting trolled. Why is this not hilarious?
- Leszek 13y ago
  Because it's a human being treated inhumanely?
  - al1x 13y ago
    He's not being treated inhumanely, he's being punished for repeatedly trying to skirt the system. You put people in jail who break the rules of society. You put people in isolation who break the rules of the prison system. He can "fight the system" all he wants but I don't see any reason to shed tears over it each time he gets caught and punished. He's an adult acting like a child getting punished like an adult.
    - DanBC 13y ago
      > You put people in jail who break the rules of society. The US puts more people in prison than any other country. Is it really worth the cost of imprisoning people for non-violent crimes? It doesn't appear to deter people from committing crimes. It certainly doesn't help criminals rehabilitate and become productive members of society.
      - al1x 13y ago
        > Is it really worth the cost of imprisoning people for non-violent crimes? Are you suggesting they should go unpunished? > It doesn't appear to deter people from committing crimes. The suggestion that the threat of imprisonment does not act as a deterrent to criminal activity is absurd. > It certainly doesn't help criminals rehabilitate and become productive members of society. Do you really not see "I'm here because I screwed up. I probably should try to not screw up in the future." going through the mind of prisoners as they sit in their cells?
        13y ago
mcintyre1994 13y ago
I'm really confused here, what is the use of 'solitary' in a shared cell? He's either a threat to others or he's not. If he is, he should be on his own, not with a cell mate, why wouldn't he be a threat to the cell mate? And if he's not a threat to others, he shouldnt' be in solitary. Isn't that the point of solitary?
- vidarh 13y ago
  It's intended as punishment, not a protective measure.
  - mcintyre1994 13y ago
    Still seems pretty pointless to put somebody else in the cell with him, but I guess that makes more sense. My speculation would be they have more in solitary than they have space for, but I'll avoid trying to infer anything from that.
    - vidarh 13y ago
      It's not necessarily intended to get him alone - in fact they might intentionally want to avoid full isolation because it is massively problematic not just because of space but because of the dramatic mental health issues it can cause (have a look at the amount of mental health problems at the Supermax prisons). Note the restrictions on showering, and presumably there's lots of other restrictions on access to recreational facilities etc.. Could be abusive enough even before they decide to withdraw the last shred of human contact. Though you might very well be right.
quackerhacker 13y ago
Speaking from experience (myself), I did my time at a camp (10mnths), then like 2 months at a hold over in Dublin (I got violated at Oakland's halfway house, because I had an iPhone and I was creating a program on it). In all honesty, I think Weev pissed off the wrong people. If I remember right, didn't he even release emails on politicians. So of course the BOP will lean towards appeasing the parties (gov officials) that can make changes. Being in the hole is unusual for him, since he was non-violent, unless he showed up intoxicated (media articles and people for that matter tend to leave out details). I know it's the beginning of his sentence, but there's nothing you can do...start reading, working out, and writing code (that's what I did). Oh, and everyone in there seems to be studying commodities and currencies (doesn't hurt, cause getting a job will be hard). ADDED: just read weev's wiki, the feds hated him, I heard (thankfully heard), the transfer center he went to (Federal Transfer Center, Oklahoma City) is NOT somewhere you want to EVER be. And I was told not to talk to the media while I was doing my case (didn't help that Wired and every other tech blog was calling) BTW @downandout, your terms sounds like you know too.
- tripzilch 13y ago
  > In all honesty, I think Weev pissed off the wrong people. Pissing off people is what Weev does, and every step along the way, pissing off people is what got him there. And he'll probably keep on doing it, because it's Weev and not just some average "difficult person", he's really really good at it. I don't know what that means, it probably won't make things any easier for him.
  - quackerhacker 13y ago
    An example is, I was assigned a counselor in there (everyone is), and if you piss them off, they can take away who you can have contact with and how much good time credit you'll get, or when an "opening," at a halfway house is. Stay quiet and keep to yourself...to build on my earlier post... the program I was making on my iphone at the halfway house that violated my time there was just a probability and statistics auto trade program for forex. I got told on from inside by someone because I didn't want to plug them in on it. The person who decided if I stay or not, looked at the code, looked at my offense, and assumed I was doing dirt...handed my iphone to secret service (who gave it back to me when I got out). So for Weev's sake, I hope he simmers down. It'll be easier, he'll get out of the shoe, get out early, and be trolling in no time.
hawkharris 13y ago
There are serious problems with the way this story is reported. It relies primarily on Tweets, and the author made no effort to contact officials for comment. Having worked as an investigative journalist, I know that most authors hold themselves to finding at least three solid sources. If that's impossible to do for a given article, the author should either hold off on the lead until it matures or give the reader a firm caveat that what he or she is reading might be speculative.
- jff 13y ago
  What's that you say? Vice is using insubstantial reports from one side to create a sensationalist narrative? Why I never!

146 points by bifrost 13y ago

How does this not violate several Constitutional amendments? Unexplained solitary confinement sounds like cruel and unusual punishment, and not allowing his lawyer to see him is clearly a denial of fair representation. I'm not sure about the legality of the diet, but maybe someone more informed on prison law could step in. Rooming him with terrorists and gang members? Denying entry for a woman not wearing a bra? (which, in addition to making no sense, is also creepy) This is clear abuse of state power, and I don't understand how people aren't outraged over it. But then again, the state effectively owns the media, so there's yet another obstacle in Weev's path. In a word: disgusting.

johnpowell 13y ago
This part confuses me. >"learned he was sharing a 10x10 cell in solitary with a cellmate" I'm not sure how that works.
- downandout 13y ago
  Bunk beds. It's not "solitary" per se since he is with someone else...I think the actual euphemism is SHU or Special Housing Unit.
- pavedwalden 13y ago
  I suspect that being locked up alone with one of the world's most obnoxious trolls is unfair punishment for whoever that cellmate is.

beedogs 13y ago

Pretty goddamned pathetic, America. You treat your rapists and your murderers better than your grey-hat hackers. Nice priorities.

droopyEyelids 13y ago
Weev was arrested for grey hat behavior, but we should remember he is an 100% black hat individual.
- guard-of-terra 13y ago
  So it's somehow okay? I would expect that level of law awareness from bitter people in third world or post-totalitarian countries, not on HN.
  - honzzz 13y ago
    Actually, I believe that people from post-totalitarian countries might be more sensitive to human rights related issues than people from countries that never experienced totalitarian regime. As an adult I had lived in both US (only 7 months) and UK (2.5 years) but I grew up in communist eastern bloc and my experience leads me to believe that our collective bad experience made us sensitive to warning signs that people from always-free countries just don't see. I know this is highly subjective and I might be over-sensitive but if I were an American I would freak out about news like "a guy not given gluten-free food in prison" or "TSA forcing dying woman to strip in public" or "warrantless surveillance" or "indefinite detention"... because I would perceive them as not only signs of serious erosion of respect for human rights but also signs of pre-totalitarian state, and I would be scared shitless that really bad times are coming again. I cannot comprehend that Americans mostly just don't care.
    - guard-of-terra 13y ago
      "people from post-totalitarian countries might be more sensitive to human rights related issues" That doesn't happen with the bulk of population. They grow up with ability to rationalize out such issues, just like people growing up in market countries rationalize out poor and homeless.
      - honzzz 13y ago

downandout 13y ago

The horrible treatment of just about anyone that enters the prison system is the primary driver of our plea-based justice system. While Weev's friends may think that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) is afraid of their public complaints, the opposite is true. Such public stories help get other defendants to plead guilty in exchange for reduced sentences, hopefully in minimum security, "Club Fed" type facilities, before significant resources have to be spent on their prosecution. By discussing it here and spreading it online, we are actually advancing the goals of federal prosecutors across the country. As far as Weev himself, not much can be done. The feds are permitted to house any inmate in essentially any conditions they want as long as they meet certain (incredibly low) standards. Once you are in their grasp, you are at their mercy. Theoretically, they can keep him in segregation for the duration of his sentence. The bra thing is ordinary for jails and prisons. He is being threatened with "Diesel Therapy" - being moved from prison to prison - in order to disrupt his posts to the Internet which violate their rules. Basically, he hasn't learned (but will soon) that he is no longer in control. The harder he fights against the rules, no matter how idiotic those rules may be, the more difficult his life will become. This is true both while in custody and during the entire term of his Supervised Release. None of this is necessary or right in the eyes of anyone with half a brain, but it is the system we have and he exposed himself to it.

antihero 13y ago
It amazes me that people aren't revolting over this - how is this not considered comparable to slavery on an utterly massive and unprecedented scale?
- kaonashi 13y ago
  Because it's rare that white middle/upper class people are subjected to it.
  - pyre 13y ago
    More like, because it's happening to someone that is: a) 'one of us' and b) he's someone high profile, that is attempting to remain so even after going to prison. I have a feeling that if Weev was black or Asian it would still be a big deal to us[1]. I don't remember hearing much about Kevin Mitnik's issues with his jailers. I'm sure he had at least some. [1] Though there is the remote possibility that it would be cared about 'less' because it would be seen as racial discrimination rather than just out right maliciousness, but I'm optimistic that this wouldn't be the case.

rosser 13y ago

Weev is a raging douche, who appears to take a perverse kind of pleasure in being as brazenly reprehensible as possible, but no one deserves this kind of treatment.

SG- 13y ago

It's clear that there's no real interest in reforming people and simply punishing them in any way possible regardless of what it means when they finally come out of the US jail system. That just seems to be the way in the US and other countries, however in a lot of others there's effort to actually reform people instead of punish. A lot of people also facepalm or complain that criminals in other countries serve a fraction of time compared to Americans as well as them having really good living conditions and programs available to them in jail.

drawkbox 13y ago

Yes what he did is wrong. But prison for non-violent offenses is violence itself, cruel and unusual punishment. This would make monarchies proud. Hardline can deter people but do you really want to support solitary confinement and prison for non-violence? The cost is too great on many levels not just monetary. Money spent on locking up non-violence is money lost for other public services. We are all going to pay at least $30,000 per year in taxes for this one instance. Why create criminals? This is no rehabilitation, this is creating life long criminals. Maybe there is something I am missing, but find no value in locking up non-violence unless it is repeat offenses or crimes that result in violence.

robflynn 13y ago
It's really sickening how things play out. I have a friend who was jailed for counterfeiting. He weed from someone and received counterfeit bills as change. Next day, he bought a pizza with the change. After he got home, he realized the money looked weird. He tried to do the right thing and called the pizza place and told him that he thinks he received counterfeit bills as change from somewhere and told them that he was going to bring them some new money. When he arrived he was jailed. He refused to give up his friend and ended up jailed for a while. Thankfully, his attorney was able to work some magic after his initial sentencing and get him switched to house arrest at a significantly reduced sentence. It just seems weird to me that unintentional possession of something can get you into so much trouble. What happens if I end up with a counterfeit bill from somewhere and a cop decides to search me? Does he notice? If so, then what? What if I honestly don't know where it came from?
- rayiner 13y ago
  He got jail because he refused to give up his friend and thus became an accessory.
  - qwerta 13y ago
    It is basic human right to refuse testify against yourself or family member.

jacquesm 13y ago

You can tell a lot about a country when you look at the way it treats those that are in its power, especially those in the prison system. The conditions of inmates tell you a lot more about the state of affairs compared to the 500 richest guys/girls or the GNP. America is still very low on the totempole when it comes to being civilized in this way, and by the looks of it things are getting worse rather than better. Plea bargaining, the largest in-jail population of any country (both in absolute numbers as well as percentage wise), ridiculous legal costs and a prison system that is rife with structural problems. It's almost as if America has decided that prisoners are not people.

pyre 13y ago
Well, they can't vote so it's easy for politicians to use them as fodder to further political goals.
- dailyrorschach 13y ago
  Actually many states have changed their position to allow voting once sentence/probation is completed. http://www.aclu.org/maps/map-state-felony-disfranchisement-laws http://www.aclu.org/maps/map-state-felony-disfranchisement-l...
why-el 13y ago
Your first line is similar to a Dostoevsky quote: "The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons." (The House of the Dead)
- jacquesm 13y ago
  Interesting, I have not read Dostoevsky but I don't think you need to be particularly smart or well read to come up with that line of reasoning, it seems common sense to me that when the other side has no power at all the freedom that gives to the side in power will show them at their worst. If that worst then is pretty good that would be a hallmark of a good society.

pyre 13y ago

1) It sounds like he's not necessarily in 'solitary confinement' because he's got a cellmate. Sure he's separated from the rest of the prison population, but it's not the same situation as if he were really in solitary confinement. 2) Not allowing him access to his lawyer, or allowing his lawyer to be informed of his situation seems like it has to be against some sort of rule/law/regulation. If it isn't then we need to start calling up some legislators. 3) What's the deal with the 'you must wear a bra' rule? Someone in another thread said that this was standard. Why? I could maybe understand a rule that said "no bras" if they thought that a bra could be used to smuggled something somehow, but forcing all women visiting to wear bras seems odd. Are they afraid of a prison riot over a bra-less woman? 4) Are there really rules against him distributing information to the outside world via friends or his lawyer? What is the point of such rules? For some stupid edge-case of suppressing mafia bosses from operating from prison? Are they trying to stop criticism of the jail conditions from reaching the outside (i.e. anti-whistle-blower)? 5) If Weev really did break some sort of prison rules, then why will they not confirm why he was put in administrative detention? He's obviously there for a reason, why will they not disclose it? Makes it come across like they feel that disclosing the reason would look worse than just withholding it and waiting for all this to blow over. 6) Why are they not giving him gluten-free meals if that's 'what the doctor ordered?' If something is medically necessary, and it's withheld from an inmate, why is this not a punishable offense?

sliverstorm 13y ago
Are there really rules against him distributing information to the outside world via friends or his lawyer I think you may have misread: The penitentiary also threatened to (list of actions) if he tries to communicate with the outside world via Internet again. They don't object to him communicating with friends or his lawyer; they don't want him active online. What is the point of such rules? For some stupid edge-case of suppressing mafia bosses from operating from prison? That's what comes to my mind as well. Weev isn't a mafia boss, but he is a black hat hacker, and he is (was?) a part of Goatse Security. The Internet is his medium. If you throw him in prison and grant him free access to the Internet, have you really done anything? It's actually kind of an interesting conundrum- a thief is removed from the streets to stop him from thieving. Here we have a hacker we have tried to put into a system meant for a thief, when maybe the better analogue would be to remove him from his streets, i.e. the Interenet, instead of putting him in prison to remove him from the street. House arrest and monitored or limited access to the Internet has always seemed like one of the better options the penitentiary system has tried for "Internet criminals".

al1x 13y ago

Trolls getting trolled. Why is this not hilarious?

Leszek 13y ago
Because it's a human being treated inhumanely?
- al1x 13y ago
  He's not being treated inhumanely, he's being punished for repeatedly trying to skirt the system. You put people in jail who break the rules of society. You put people in isolation who break the rules of the prison system. He can "fight the system" all he wants but I don't see any reason to shed tears over it each time he gets caught and punished. He's an adult acting like a child getting punished like an adult.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    > You put people in jail who break the rules of society. The US puts more people in prison than any other country. Is it really worth the cost of imprisoning people for non-violent crimes? It doesn't appear to deter people from committing crimes. It certainly doesn't help criminals rehabilitate and become productive members of society.
    - al1x 13y ago
      > Is it really worth the cost of imprisoning people for non-violent crimes? Are you suggesting they should go unpunished? > It doesn't appear to deter people from committing crimes. The suggestion that the threat of imprisonment does not act as a deterrent to criminal activity is absurd. > It certainly doesn't help criminals rehabilitate and become productive members of society. Do you really not see "I'm here because I screwed up. I probably should try to not screw up in the future." going through the mind of prisoners as they sit in their cells?
      - 13y ago

mcintyre1994 13y ago

I'm really confused here, what is the use of 'solitary' in a shared cell? He's either a threat to others or he's not. If he is, he should be on his own, not with a cell mate, why wouldn't he be a threat to the cell mate? And if he's not a threat to others, he shouldnt' be in solitary. Isn't that the point of solitary?

vidarh 13y ago
It's intended as punishment, not a protective measure.
- mcintyre1994 13y ago
  Still seems pretty pointless to put somebody else in the cell with him, but I guess that makes more sense. My speculation would be they have more in solitary than they have space for, but I'll avoid trying to infer anything from that.
  - vidarh 13y ago
    It's not necessarily intended to get him alone - in fact they might intentionally want to avoid full isolation because it is massively problematic not just because of space but because of the dramatic mental health issues it can cause (have a look at the amount of mental health problems at the Supermax prisons). Note the restrictions on showering, and presumably there's lots of other restrictions on access to recreational facilities etc.. Could be abusive enough even before they decide to withdraw the last shred of human contact. Though you might very well be right.

quackerhacker 13y ago

Speaking from experience (myself), I did my time at a camp (10mnths), then like 2 months at a hold over in Dublin (I got violated at Oakland's halfway house, because I had an iPhone and I was creating a program on it). In all honesty, I think Weev pissed off the wrong people. If I remember right, didn't he even release emails on politicians. So of course the BOP will lean towards appeasing the parties (gov officials) that can make changes. Being in the hole is unusual for him, since he was non-violent, unless he showed up intoxicated (media articles and people for that matter tend to leave out details). I know it's the beginning of his sentence, but there's nothing you can do...start reading, working out, and writing code (that's what I did). Oh, and everyone in there seems to be studying commodities and currencies (doesn't hurt, cause getting a job will be hard). ADDED: just read weev's wiki, the feds hated him, I heard (thankfully heard), the transfer center he went to (Federal Transfer Center, Oklahoma City) is NOT somewhere you want to EVER be. And I was told not to talk to the media while I was doing my case (didn't help that Wired and every other tech blog was calling) BTW @downandout, your terms sounds like you know too.

tripzilch 13y ago
> In all honesty, I think Weev pissed off the wrong people. Pissing off people is what Weev does, and every step along the way, pissing off people is what got him there. And he'll probably keep on doing it, because it's Weev and not just some average "difficult person", he's really really good at it. I don't know what that means, it probably won't make things any easier for him.
- quackerhacker 13y ago
  An example is, I was assigned a counselor in there (everyone is), and if you piss them off, they can take away who you can have contact with and how much good time credit you'll get, or when an "opening," at a halfway house is. Stay quiet and keep to yourself...to build on my earlier post... the program I was making on my iphone at the halfway house that violated my time there was just a probability and statistics auto trade program for forex. I got told on from inside by someone because I didn't want to plug them in on it. The person who decided if I stay or not, looked at the code, looked at my offense, and assumed I was doing dirt...handed my iphone to secret service (who gave it back to me when I got out). So for Weev's sake, I hope he simmers down. It'll be easier, he'll get out of the shoe, get out early, and be trolling in no time.

hawkharris 13y ago

There are serious problems with the way this story is reported. It relies primarily on Tweets, and the author made no effort to contact officials for comment. Having worked as an investigative journalist, I know that most authors hold themselves to finding at least three solid sources. If that's impossible to do for a given article, the author should either hold off on the lead until it matures or give the reader a firm caveat that what he or she is reading might be speculative.

jff 13y ago
What's that you say? Vice is using insubstantial reports from one side to create a sensationalist narrative? Why I never!