Hacker puts Judge in Prison

Cool, though I can't disagree with the judiciaries for wanting him to stop. Our entire law-system is based on preventing citizens from taking the right in their own hands. Sure, it isn't perfect, but it'd be less perfect to give a bunch of vigilantes free reign.
 
Kharn said:
Cool, though I can't disagree with the judiciaries for wanting him to stop. Our entire law-system is based on preventing citizens from taking the right in their own hands. Sure, it isn't perfect, but it'd be less perfect to give a bunch of vigilantes free reign.
Click to expand...

I agree,vigilantes are not the way to go,I mean one of them could plant something illegal on a persons PC because he dislikes the person and have some other dig it up...
There's not a perfect judicial system in the world and people who're innocent do spend time in jail,but I'd still think the risk is smaller than if a band of baseballwielding vigilantes are what's considered the law.

Since I now have expressed my thoughts on that matter I also want to congratulate the hacker for what he did,well done.
 
Kharn said:
Cool, though I can't disagree with the judiciaries for wanting him to stop. Our entire law-system is based on preventing citizens from taking the right in their own hands. Sure, it isn't perfect, but it'd be less perfect to give a bunch of vigilantes free reign.
Click to expand...
Yep. It's interesting that they still decided to accept the evidence in court, though. Since it was essentially evidence obtained in an illegal manner.
 
Sander said:
Yep. It's interesting that they still decided to accept the evidence in court, though. Since it was essentially evidence obtained in an illegal manner.
Click to expand...

Bit dodgy, but child porn/pedestary is one of those crimes in which the courts can stretch the rules any which way and nobody will stop them because of the emotional nature of the crime.

That and rape. I'd be quite a good cent on it that no crimes see more improperly handled and often unjust sentences than rape and pedophilic acts.
 
Kharn said:
Sander said:
Yep. It's interesting that they still decided to accept the evidence in court, though. Since it was essentially evidence obtained in an illegal manner.
Click to expand...

Bit dodgy, but child porn/pedestary is one of those crimes in which the courts can stretch the rules any which way and nobody will stop them because of the emotional nature of the crime.
Click to expand...

Yes,here in Sweden (and I'm sure it's happened elsewhere too) someone was sentenced for having childporn,which was found by a burglar who stole his PC.(when he discovered what was on it,he went to the law)

That and rape. I'd be quite a good cent on it that no crimes see more improperly handled and often unjust sentences than rape and pedophilic acts.
Click to expand...

I agree again,it hasn't passed a lot of time since a person spent some years in jail since his daughter accused him of sexually abusing her.(and she had the satanic rites,killing other kids and so on stories too...but still noone ever thought twice about it all and threw him into jail)
The daughter even confessed a year or so later that she was lying,but the legal system decided that she was lying this time.(and not when there had been childkillings even though no kid was missing)
It's a matter that -naturally- provokes feelings,hence people forget to listen to evidence and just see the monster in front of them.(a monster it would be if he was guilty,bu to expect a monster makes you a lot less likely to listen to evidence...so the monster is not the one you see,the monster is who you are...)
 
Rainstorm said:
I agree again,it hasn't passed a lot of time since a person spent some years in jail since his daughter accused him of sexually abusing her.(and she had the satanic rites,killing other kids and so on stories too...but still noone ever thought twice about it all and threw him into jail)
The daughter even confessed a year or so later that she was lying,but the legal system decided that she was lying this time.(and not when there had been childkillings even though no kid was missing)
It's a matter that -naturally- provokes feelings,hence people forget to listen to evidence and just see the monster in front of them.(a monster it would be if he was guilty,bu to expect a monster makes you a lot less likely to listen to evidence...so the monster is not the one you see,the monster is who you are...)
Click to expand...
So, now anyone can be put in jail without assumption of innocence and due process pr any real evidence, because a kid accused them of sexual abuse?
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
Anyway.

I remember that in Poland that a P.E. teacher was accused of sexual abuse by a teenage girl just for fun. Luckily, she finally confessed that she was lying.
I think that both she and her parents should be put efore a firing squad.
 
Sorrow said:
So, now anyone can be put in jail without assumption of innocence and due process pr any real evidence, because a kid accused them of sexual abuse?
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
Click to expand...

I remember (though I don't remember where) reading about a case in which a woman was suing a group of guys for group-rape. Everyone was all "they're so going to jail, the bastards", the case seemed mostly pre-decided. Until the court opened and one of the guys showed up with a videotape of the alleged crime, in which she was obviously egging them on and enjoying it, i.e. consensual sex.

What disturbed me most about the case was that she did not get sued in turn. Had that tape not existed, the guys would've gone to jail for years, no question asked. It should damn well be a felony to sue someone like that.
 
I think that was in Central Park in New York... I remember seeing it on the news awhile back and being one of the suckers who took it in without question because the "poor abused soul" hired a competent mouthpiece and let public opinion do the rest.

There are a lot of things about this country that I could rant about here, but c'mon-- the justice system really should be at the top of somebody's to-do list. That hooker really needed a boot to the head and a mandatory indefinite psychiatric sentence-- if those men had recieved a guilty verdict, their lives as free and productive citizens would've been over, which is tantamount to manslaughter at the least.

As to the OP... once the evidence the hacker kid planted was thoroughly investigated and determined to be authentic, the verdict shouldn't have been in any question. He didn't implant the files into any random computer to see what he could dig up- they were actively (albeit unknowingly) acquired via an image that one must infer Mr. Willman chose for it's strong potential as a bear trap for the kiddie-porn demographic. In effect, their crime brought about their own downfall. It's simple, it's fitting, and in my opinion it is the essence of the morally eloquent justice that the system purports to be built around. The letter of the law is certainly important, here as in all cases, but any "Justice" System that won't bend toward the spirit is more accurately referred to as a "Punishment" System, and quite often an arbitrary and byzantine one, at that.
 
wouldnt it be an easy defense to say a hacker put the porn on your computer if a hacker was already the person who reported it?

the hacker already proved that your computer was compromised. plausible deniability!
 
But if the accused judge had an access to the said material and did nothing to delete them form the computer and the time index's of the photos was before the hacking, he or she can't be prove that they weren't his/hers. :?: :!:
And as the law says it, it requires only to possess such material for it to be a crime.
 
Jarno Mikkola said:
But if the accused judge had an access to the said material and did nothing to delete them form the computer and the time index's of the photos was before the hacking, he or she can't be prove that they weren't his/hers. :?: :!:
Click to expand...
and? if the computer was comprimised once, it can be done again. as for time indexes? those aren't too complicated to fuck around with...
 
I don't know about the United States, but over here in (many countries of) Europe the evaluation of proof is pretty fucked up. Illegitimately acquiered proof is not immediately discarded, on the contrary, illegal proof (e.g. proof that has been collected through a crime, through violation of your privacy etc...) is now always used unless the suspect can demonstrate that the proof cannot reasonably be considered as reliable anymore (which in my opinion can be the case with a hacker). This leaves the door wide open for abuse such as random frisks, and inspections of homes by regular cops without written permission.

So it's not so much that they bend the rules a bit for child porn and rape, these ARE the rules which have to be bent back by the suspect by demonstrating the manifest unreliability of the proof.



Source in dutch: Samenvatting
De omstandigheid dat een bewijselement op onrechtmatige wijze werd verkregen, heeft in de regel slechts tot gevolg dat de rechter bij het vormen van zijn overtuiging dat gegeven rechtstreeks noch onrechtstreeks in aanmerking mag nemen: hetzij wanneer de naleving van bepaalde vormvoorwaarden voorgeschreven wordt op straffe van nietigheid; hetzij wanneer de begane onrechtmatigheid de betrouwbaarheid van het bewijs heeft aangetast; hetzij wanneer het gebruik van het bewijs in strijd is met het recht op een eerlijk proces (1). (1) Zie de concl. van het O.M. en "Het recht van verdediging in de rechtspraak van het Hof van cassatie (1990-2003)", Rede uitgesproken door procureur-generaal J. du Jardin op de plechtige openingszitting van het Hof van cassatie op 1 september 2003.

Source in French: Sommaire
La circonstance qu'un élément de preuve a été obtenu illicitement a en principe pour seule conséquence que le juge ne peut prendre ni directement ni indirectement cet élément en considération lorsqu'il forme sa conviction: soit lorsque le respect de certaines conditions de forme est prescrit à peine de nullité;
soit lorsque l'irrégularité commise a entaché la crédibilité de la preuve; soit lorsque l'usage de la preuve est contraire au droit à un procès équitable (1). (1) Voir les conclusions du M.P. publiées à leur date dans A.C. et "Le droit de défense dans la jurisprudence de la Cour de cassation (1990-2003)". Discours prononcé par Monsieur le Procureur général J. du Jardin à l'audience solennelle de rentrée de la Cour de cassation le 1er septembre 2003.
 
Kharn said:
I remember (though I don't remember where) reading about a case in which a woman was suing a group of guys for group-rape. Everyone was all "they're so going to jail, the bastards", the case seemed mostly pre-decided. Until the court opened and one of the guys showed up with a videotape of the alleged crime, in which she was obviously egging them on and enjoying it, i.e. consensual sex.

What disturbed me most about the case was that she did not get sued in turn. Had that tape not existed, the guys would've gone to jail for years, no question asked. It should damn well be a felony to sue someone like that.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I recall that one. I didn't know she wasn't sued right back though - didn't she commit perjury, or was she never given the opportunity? Still, lying in police hearings etc. has got to be punishable. She should seriously have been put away and punish-fucked for real.


SuAside said:
wouldnt it be an easy defense to say a hacker put the porn on your computer if a hacker was already the person who reported it?

the hacker already proved that your computer was compromised. plausible deniability!
Click to expand...
Agreed, it's pretty weird that can suffice as evidence. Like in Sweden, the anti-piracy bureau convicts people with screenshots from DC of them sharing copyrighted material as only evidence. Screenshots, for friths sache.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top