Slashdot Mirror
HOPE Speaker Rombom Charged with Witness Tampering
An anonymous reader writes "Steven Rombom -- a.k.a. "Steven Rambam" -- the licensed private investigator who was arrested Saturday by FBI agents minutes before his talk on privacy at the Hope Number Six hacker convention in New York -- is being charged with witness tampering and obstruction of justice in a money laundering case the government is pursuing against Albert Santoro, a former Brooklyn assistant district attorney, according to Washingtonpost.com's Security Fix blog. The government alleges that Santoro hired Rombom to locate a government confidential informant whom Santoro accuses of entrapment, and that Rombom visited the informant's in-laws under the guise of an FBI agent and tried to convince them tha their son-in-law was a danger to their daughter and grandkids."
Well at least the conspiracy theorists will be silenced a bit. Sounds like hes getting what he deserved. Its one thing to try and dig up dirt, its another to make it personal and try to ruin a guys family.
Now that the details are out . . .
The details are not yet out. Only the accusation is out.
KFG
That, friends, is why it's a bad idea to get worked up before you know both sides of an issue. It's too stressful to work up a righteous indignation only to find out that the other side had a valid point you didn't know about.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
The revealed details certainly don't justify a conviction, but they definitely do justify an arrest if there's sufficient evidence to warrant a trial. I was withholding judgement of the FBI's tactics until I learned what he was accused of. Now that I know, I'm not unhappy with them.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
Seriously canyou be charged with witness tampering, by not even issuing a threat, to either the witness or his family?
You can be charged with anything, at any time. Think about that. Think about it really, really hard. The Framers did. Now think about the fact that these days you don't even really need to be charged, only "suspected" to be whisked away in the night.
I think, perhaps, the real question at issue in this case is can you be converted into a government witness by being charged with a crime?
KFG
It seems that most of the people who are replying to this story haven't heard the expression "Innocent until proven guilty" We know what he's been charged with but we still have no idea whether he did it or not. So the people assuming he got what he deserved are just as guilty of jumping the gun as the people who assumed it was a conspiracy.
Unless that was the FBI's best chance for knowing where he would be at what time.
From everything I read, the FBI performed this arrest in a way that I wish *all* law enforcement would follow. They tracked him well enough to know where he would be in a public place, and they quietly went in and arrested him. No big show, no breaking down doors with guns blazing and cameras following.
Do you have ESP?
Erm, why on Earth would they want to do that? Assuming that the FBI was acting in good faith, what would be the advantage in letting a suspect have a few more minutes of freedom - possibly enough for someone to figure out what was happening and warn him? Wouldn't it be their obligation to apprehend him (and theoretically remove him from public threat) as soon as possible?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Obviously, he had plenty to hide
Can you please post your name, address, DOB, mothers maiden name, social, credit card no, and expiry date (and that little 3 digit code on the back)
or do you have something to hide...
It would've been really nice if they had let him give his talk first though. :-) But yes, I agree.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
When you impersonate a federal agent, you give up the choice of deciding where, how, and when you will be taken in. About the only way to have control over that is to give yourself up as part of a deal.
"But this one goes to 11!"
Given the present administration, if you don't presume they're violating civil liberties to the fullest extent possible shy of tipping over to police state, then you're a fool.
As for "how they managed to determine it was him," you might consider this part of the complaint:
Alternatively, they might do it so that the exercise didn't appear to be an attempt to censor honest citizens. I mean if he didn't have anything sensitive to say, where was the harm in letting him talk? He could have done it handcuffed to an agent for that matter. If they'd done that, it would have been clear that there was no ulterior motive.
Well, arguably yes, at least if you assume that we're dealing with Osama Bin Headcase here, and that he intends to let off a canister of Sarin Gas in the conference center. However the man in question was arrested charged with witness tampering.I don't think prompt arrest is always the most important priority in law enforcement. Television encourages us to suppose it must be, because the dramatic structure of a crime series pretty much requires that there be suspense up until the last minute, amd with terrible consequences should the lawmen fail.
But real life doesn't work like that and, realistically, the worst case here was that they'd have to pick him up on the road, on his way home.
Sometimes it's more beneficial that the law be seen to be fair and even handed, than that an alleged criminal (and the charge has not been in any way proven) be arrested at the earliest possible opportunity.. From that perspective, and given the limited negative consequences of a wrong call, I think the public interest might have been better served by letting him do his presentation first.
It's the old saying: the law must not only be done, it must also be seen to be done. I'm not sure it was seen to be done in this case.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
"Then why not nab him at home or the office, why wait until 5 minutes before he's due to speak at a grey hat hacker conference? It's sending a political message. Also, you HOPE and DEFCONers, keep in mind that just because the feds haven't shut it down and arrested everyone don't mean this won't be the year they do."
Holy Christ you give the FBI a lot of credit - but really they aren't that smart. They got him because they knew where he was going to be at a certain time, nothing else. I am a tin foil hat wearin' conspiracy theorist myself, and even I would have to stretch to read more into this.. The FBI doesn't run political public relations - they have better agencies for that.
And if anyone attending DEFCON doesn't know there are feds in attendance watching the event and all attendees, they had better skip the event.
And real-time facial recognition software...puh-leeze...
"But this one goes to 11!"
patriot act