3 ms·

You've said this a few times, but you leave out how scary it must be to be charged in such fashion. Some people are uninformed and plead guilty just to avoid t

You've said this a few times, but you leave out how scary it must be to be charged in such fashion. Some people are uninformed and plead guilty just to avoid that scary fate. I know you're not saying anything more than "This isn't actually what it would have turned out to be," but what would it have turned out to be if these charges had stuck? I'm curious how long a felony count of computer fraud or cyberstalking will land you in prison for.

ci5er 12y ago
It certainly is scary. Those folks are even scary for relatively "small" stuff. Small to them, but enough to majorly disrupt your life. A competent lawyer is not cheap, and does all the legal things you would expect -- but, if you are lucky, does a lot to help with the psychological/emotional trauma you are going through.
tptacek 12y ago
I don't know, but that's not what happened in this case; the defendant had an extremely competent lawyer who specializes in computer crime cases. How long could your sentence be? With no criminal history and for offenses deemed non-money-making, your sentence could be so low that you fall below the threshold for probation. On the other hand, if your crime is deemed serious or you have any history, 3-4 years might be more realistic. If you ran the world's largest credit card ring --- really, if you did anything with credit cards --- think more along the lines of 10-20 years. Interestingly, that last point has been a truism in the "computer underground" since I was a teenager. Break into phone switches. Own up Unix boxes. Release viruses. Just don't fuck with credit cards. It remains truish today.
akerl_ 12y ago
Which is why people being charged with crimes get lawyers: the lawyer can translate the legal proceedings and give you an actual understandable view as to what they mean.
rayiner 12y ago
One of the things people should understand is that plea bargains are not binding on the court. Before a plea is accepted, a judge will engage in a plea colloquy, where she will have a conversation with the defendant in open court to make sure that the defendant really understands what he's pleading to. A judge has no obligation to accept a plea she does not think is supported by the evidence, or which she thinks based on the colloquey goes beyond what the defendant is freely admitting to have done.

ci5er 12y ago

It certainly is scary. Those folks are even scary for relatively "small" stuff. Small to them, but enough to majorly disrupt your life. A competent lawyer is not cheap, and does all the legal things you would expect -- but, if you are lucky, does a lot to help with the psychological/emotional trauma you are going through.

tptacek 12y ago

I don't know, but that's not what happened in this case; the defendant had an extremely competent lawyer who specializes in computer crime cases. How long could your sentence be? With no criminal history and for offenses deemed non-money-making, your sentence could be so low that you fall below the threshold for probation. On the other hand, if your crime is deemed serious or you have any history, 3-4 years might be more realistic. If you ran the world's largest credit card ring --- really, if you did anything with credit cards --- think more along the lines of 10-20 years. Interestingly, that last point has been a truism in the "computer underground" since I was a teenager. Break into phone switches. Own up Unix boxes. Release viruses. Just don't fuck with credit cards. It remains truish today.

akerl_ 12y ago

Which is why people being charged with crimes get lawyers: the lawyer can translate the legal proceedings and give you an actual understandable view as to what they mean.

rayiner 12y ago

One of the things people should understand is that plea bargains are not binding on the court. Before a plea is accepted, a judge will engage in a plea colloquy, where she will have a conversation with the defendant in open court to make sure that the defendant really understands what he's pleading to. A judge has no obligation to accept a plea she does not think is supported by the evidence, or which she thinks based on the colloquey goes beyond what the defendant is freely admitting to have done.