5 ms·

> The problem, in short, is that the Assistant U.S. Attorney Glenn Moramarco doesn’t understand what Weev did and instead compared his hacking to “blowing up a

> The problem, in short, is that the Assistant U.S. Attorney Glenn Moramarco doesn’t understand what Weev did and instead compared his hacking to “blowing up a nuclear plant in New Jersey.” He said: >> We have a case here where…[the defense] is arguing that this was completely open to everyone. But you look at the testimony of Daniel Spitler and the steps he had to take to get to this wide open Web and I’m flabbergasted that this could be called anything other than a hack. He had to download the entire iOS system on his computer. He had to decrypt it. He had to do all sorts of things—I don’t even understand what they are. Wow. When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred. In my opinion, this individual's statement makes them sound like a self-aggrandizing, grade-A asshole -- the prosecutorial equivalent of an ambulance chaser with a low-def ad on late night TV and a strip-mall office that smells like moldy carpet.

angersock 13y ago
Yeah, when the state can't even articulate the act, much less why it is wrong, it is really hard to respect their jurisprudence. EDIT: And before anyone counters with "Whether you respect it or not, it's the law (and they have the power to enforce it).", do consider that such an argument is basically saying that the rule of law boils down to men with guns. I don't think that that is either noble or desirable--for a civilization, we must do better.
- ataggart 13y ago
  The rule of law does boil down to men with guns. http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm
  - rayiner 13y ago
    The rule of law boils down to men with guns listening to the judgment of twelve of the most ordinary people that can be found. If you're unlikable, or if you're acting outside the social norms, that creates a problem for you.
- gamblor956 13y ago
  In this country, the citizens have guns too. This is actually a pretty big reason for why the police are so heavily militarized here as compared to gun-prohibitionist nations like France or Germany. But the law does not boil down to men with guns--it boils down to our voluntary consent to live by the laws by choosing to live here (immigrants) or to remain here (everyone else) as opposed to somewhere else, like the wonderfully law-free nation of Somalia.
  - tod222 13y ago
    > as opposed to somewhere else, like the wonderfully law-free nation of Somalia. Ahh yes, the false dichotomy. Structure your argument to exclude all but two options, one of which is chosen to be extremely unpalatable. Thanks for a textbook example.
eCa 13y ago
> I don’t even understand what they are. Should a prosecutor be allowed to prosecute a case if he doesn't understand the actions taken by the prosecuted? How can he be sure that a crime has been commited? > He had to download the entire iOS system I guess the prosecutor has downloaded the entire iOS system to his Iphone. I guess he doesn't know that he has done that.
- fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
  Shouldn't a prosecutor either recuse themselves, or at least consult subject-matter experts before proceeding with a prosecution over a subject about which they admittedly have insufficient knowledge? Is that not part of a lawyer's or at least a prosecutor's code of professional conduct?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - gamblor956 13y ago
    It is, though defense attorneys and judges rarely call them on this since it is a bridge-burner. Once you do this, you can be pretty sure they're acting within the rules/ethical obligations in future dealings, but you're also less likely to get good deals from them since they're much less willing to negotiate. This matters since most criminal defendants actually are guilty (and admit it!) and don't want to go to trial.
- DominoTree 13y ago
  This hack didn't rely on doing anything with iOS other than sniffing the traffic iOS sent to AT&T. I think what they were attempting to say was that Xcode's iOS simulator may've been employed. Another interesting fact: weev did not actually write or run the script that harvested the data, or talk to AT&T's servers. That was all Daniel "JacksonBrown" Spitler, who was sentenced to 18 months of probation. weev simply shared the list of harvested data with Gawker, under the condition that it be redacted if published, as proof that the leak had occurred. Think about that; the guy who actually did the hacking got probation. The guy who simply alerted the media to the hacking got 41 months. Source: I am Nick "Rucas" Price, member of Goatse Security, and I am mentioned numerous times in the federal criminal complaint.
eli 13y ago
That seems like an unfair extrapolation of one (possibly out of context) quote. I don't think what Weev is accused of doing should be a jailable offense, but I also don't think the prosecutor (apparently!) not understanding what's involved in scripting a web scraper somehow proves it either way.
gamblor956 13y ago
When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred. By that logic, when a programmer is illiterate with regards to the law, they should be barred from programming forever if they make an app/SaaS/whatever that breaks any law, any where, for whatever reason. Prosecutors, especially US Attorneys, are self-aggrandizing, attention-seeking political whores, but technical illiteracy by itself is not a justification for disbarring them from the practice of law. Weev's attorney can, and should, [edit (past tense)]have sought[/edit] Moramarco's removal from the case based on his statements. Prosecutor's don't need to be fully technically literate when it comes to prosecuting a crime, but they do need to at least understand the basic details in order to maintain their ethical obligations to their position, the court, and the defendant.
- glesica 13y ago
  > need to at least understand the basic details in order to maintain their ethical obligations to their position, the court, and the defendant. So, if he didn't do this, and knew he didn't do it, couldn't one argue that he should be disbarred, or at least be subjected to some sort of professional sanction?
  - gamblor956 13y ago
    Disbarment? No. Sanctions? maybe. It depends on how relevant the misunderstanding was to the actual prosecution of the case. While the prosecutor was very technically illiterate, based on available records that illiteracy wasn't relevant to the elements of the crime itself, namely that he "impersonated" (within the meaning of the law) someone else's identity to access protected information. The id theft charge is the biggie here--it actually imposes more criminal time than the underlying offense itself, because as other posters have noted it changed a misdemeanor to a felony.
    - hmsimha 13y ago
      I'd argue that it becomes a pretty relevant misunderstanding when an innocent man (as far as the accusations go) sits in prison for a year. If someone can't practice law effectively (such as if they erroneously prosecute people for crimes they did not commit), then their ability to practice becomes a danger to society.
r00fus 13y ago
> When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred. Unfrozen caveman prosecutor? I miss Phil Hartman. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfrozen_Caveman_Lawyer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfrozen_Caveman_Lawyer

angersock 13y ago

Yeah, when the state can't even articulate the act, much less why it is wrong, it is really hard to respect their jurisprudence. EDIT: And before anyone counters with "Whether you respect it or not, it's the law (and they have the power to enforce it).", do consider that such an argument is basically saying that the rule of law boils down to men with guns. I don't think that that is either noble or desirable--for a civilization, we must do better.

ataggart 13y ago
The rule of law does boil down to men with guns. http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm http://faculty.msb.edu/hasnasj/GTWebSite/MythWeb.htm
- rayiner 13y ago
  The rule of law boils down to men with guns listening to the judgment of twelve of the most ordinary people that can be found. If you're unlikable, or if you're acting outside the social norms, that creates a problem for you.
gamblor956 13y ago
In this country, the citizens have guns too. This is actually a pretty big reason for why the police are so heavily militarized here as compared to gun-prohibitionist nations like France or Germany. But the law does not boil down to men with guns--it boils down to our voluntary consent to live by the laws by choosing to live here (immigrants) or to remain here (everyone else) as opposed to somewhere else, like the wonderfully law-free nation of Somalia.
- tod222 13y ago
  > as opposed to somewhere else, like the wonderfully law-free nation of Somalia. Ahh yes, the false dichotomy. Structure your argument to exclude all but two options, one of which is chosen to be extremely unpalatable. Thanks for a textbook example.

eCa 13y ago

> I don’t even understand what they are. Should a prosecutor be allowed to prosecute a case if he doesn't understand the actions taken by the prosecuted? How can he be sure that a crime has been commited? > He had to download the entire iOS system I guess the prosecutor has downloaded the entire iOS system to his Iphone. I guess he doesn't know that he has done that.

fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
Shouldn't a prosecutor either recuse themselves, or at least consult subject-matter experts before proceeding with a prosecution over a subject about which they admittedly have insufficient knowledge? Is that not part of a lawyer's or at least a prosecutor's code of professional conduct?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- gamblor956 13y ago
  It is, though defense attorneys and judges rarely call them on this since it is a bridge-burner. Once you do this, you can be pretty sure they're acting within the rules/ethical obligations in future dealings, but you're also less likely to get good deals from them since they're much less willing to negotiate. This matters since most criminal defendants actually are guilty (and admit it!) and don't want to go to trial.
DominoTree 13y ago
This hack didn't rely on doing anything with iOS other than sniffing the traffic iOS sent to AT&T. I think what they were attempting to say was that Xcode's iOS simulator may've been employed. Another interesting fact: weev did not actually write or run the script that harvested the data, or talk to AT&T's servers. That was all Daniel "JacksonBrown" Spitler, who was sentenced to 18 months of probation. weev simply shared the list of harvested data with Gawker, under the condition that it be redacted if published, as proof that the leak had occurred. Think about that; the guy who actually did the hacking got probation. The guy who simply alerted the media to the hacking got 41 months. Source: I am Nick "Rucas" Price, member of Goatse Security, and I am mentioned numerous times in the federal criminal complaint.

eli 13y ago

That seems like an unfair extrapolation of one (possibly out of context) quote. I don't think what Weev is accused of doing should be a jailable offense, but I also don't think the prosecutor (apparently!) not understanding what's involved in scripting a web scraper somehow proves it either way.

gamblor956 13y ago

When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred. By that logic, when a programmer is illiterate with regards to the law, they should be barred from programming forever if they make an app/SaaS/whatever that breaks any law, any where, for whatever reason. Prosecutors, especially US Attorneys, are self-aggrandizing, attention-seeking political whores, but technical illiteracy by itself is not a justification for disbarring them from the practice of law. Weev's attorney can, and should, [edit (past tense)]have sought[/edit] Moramarco's removal from the case based on his statements. Prosecutor's don't need to be fully technically literate when it comes to prosecuting a crime, but they do need to at least understand the basic details in order to maintain their ethical obligations to their position, the court, and the defendant.

glesica 13y ago
> need to at least understand the basic details in order to maintain their ethical obligations to their position, the court, and the defendant. So, if he didn't do this, and knew he didn't do it, couldn't one argue that he should be disbarred, or at least be subjected to some sort of professional sanction?
- gamblor956 13y ago
  Disbarment? No. Sanctions? maybe. It depends on how relevant the misunderstanding was to the actual prosecution of the case. While the prosecutor was very technically illiterate, based on available records that illiteracy wasn't relevant to the elements of the crime itself, namely that he "impersonated" (within the meaning of the law) someone else's identity to access protected information. The id theft charge is the biggie here--it actually imposes more criminal time than the underlying offense itself, because as other posters have noted it changed a misdemeanor to a felony.
  - hmsimha 13y ago
    I'd argue that it becomes a pretty relevant misunderstanding when an innocent man (as far as the accusations go) sits in prison for a year. If someone can't practice law effectively (such as if they erroneously prosecute people for crimes they did not commit), then their ability to practice becomes a danger to society.

r00fus 13y ago

> When a prosecutor is not only technically illiterate, but proud of their illiteracy, they should be disbarred. Unfrozen caveman prosecutor? I miss Phil Hartman. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfrozen_Caveman_Lawyer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unfrozen_Caveman_Lawyer