3 of 4 Charges Against Terry Childs Dropped

phantomfive writes "Terry Childs, who was arrested nearly a year ago for refusing to turn over the passwords to San Francisco's FiberWAN network, has been cleared of three of the four charges against him. The dropped charges referred to the attachment of modems to the network; the remaining charge is for refusing to turn over the password. The prosecutor has vowed to appeal, to have the charges reinstated. We have the original story, and the story where Childs tells his side, for those who want a refresher."

Comments

Witch hunt

[joaommp]

Always seemed to me this was not much more than a witch hunt. Why else would them set a bail higher than for killers and rapists?

Re:Witch hunt

[Anonymous Coward]

politics 101. pissing of the ones in power is the worst crime you can commit.

1M bail and 1yr in jail...?

[Manip]

I'm sorry but this guy has already had time served. Even if they do find him guilty one year in jail for what he did is far more than enough. Plus 1M bail? Is he a violent criminal? ...

This sounds like a classic story if ignorant people making decisions about technical crime and getting scared. I aim that both at the city and at the judge who set the original bail.

We need special technical trials for things like this within which both the defence and prosecution are allowed to bring in technical witnesses to put the case into perspective for non-technical people (as opposed to "HACKER! Get the pitch forks!").

Re:1M bail and 1yr in jail...?

[Seumas]

Ignorant people are afraid of the technologically savvy the same way they are afraid of science. They don't understand it, so rather than bettering their knowledge and informing themselves, they'd rather fear the worst and attack those who represent a threat (that is, those who know something they don't).

Also, why didn't the guy just say "dude, it was a complex random password and I've completely forgotten it"? They can't force you to give them a password that you've forgotten, surely? Also, is a partial "moral victory" really worth an entire year of your short life span?

Re:1M bail and 1yr in jail...?

[LordKronos]

We need special technical trials for things like this within which both the defence and prosecution are allowed to bring in technical witnesses to put the case into perspective for non-technical people

Huh? Special technical trials? Why? The current system already allows lawyers to bring in expert witnesses to explain stuff. And lawyers are allowed to do a bit of story telling during their opening and closing arguments, and they can use that opportunity to explain thing in other terms (including car analogies, if they choose).

A lot of us around here always complain about legislature creating special laws to make illegal things that are already illegal under an existing law. Let's not turn it around and start asking for special trials when the cases can already be accommodated by the existing court system.

Re:1M bail and 1yr in jail...?

[MrKaos]

This sounds like a classic story if ignorant people making decisions about technical crime and getting scared. I aim that both at the city and at the judge who set the original bail.

There is a saying, There is no such thing as a bad student only a bad teacher. If the legal system is ignorant about how 'technical crime' should be addressed it's because we, as technology professionals, have failed to lobby for the appropriate changes to be made to law to handle these cases properly.

We need special technical trials for things like this within which both the defence and prosecution are allowed to bring in technical witnesses to put the case into perspective for non-technical people (as opposed to "HACKER! Get the pitch forks!").

Why? The framework for all of these things already exist in the legal system. All this world changing technology has been unleashed over the last decade or two and Information Technology is maturing as a profession. It's a bit unrealistic to expect the legal system to make quality decisions about how the law should be adapted to handle those changes while the people responsible for delivering the technology do not get involved in educating those who can codify the law to behave reasonably.

It ridicules us to point the finger and say 'look at how ignorant they are' when in reality we should be more self critical and understand that this is the treatment we should expect if we are too apathetic to influence the legal system appropriately.

Re:1M bail and 1yr in jail...?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Huh? Special technical trials? Why? The current system already allows lawyers to bring in expert witnesses to explain stuff. And lawyers are allowed to do a bit of story telling during their opening and closing arguments, and they can use that opportunity to explain thing in other terms (including car analogies, if they choose).

Once upon a time a "jury of your peers" really meant peers, and not just the most easily swayed people in the jury pool. I'm not saying every single person on the jury needs to be a network engineer, but you can pretty much count on the prosecutor objecting to anyone in the pool with any technical expertise relevant to the case.

So, not special trials per se, but a process that rules out anyone with domain knowledge relevant to the trial is fundamentally broken. The number of really bad car analogies that get made here everyday among the relatively technically astute should be proof enough that requiring the issues to be dumbed down for an uneducated jury is not a very good way to run the system.

Re:1M bail and 1yr in jail...?

[Yetihehe]

There is a saying, There is no such thing as a bad student only a bad teacher.

You haven't seen some people who don't want and/or are incapable of learning the most basic scientific facts. Yes, you could spend with them 5x the normal time for normal student, but is it really worth it? We need someone to clean the streets, and really intelligent ambitious people don't really want to do it. Typical street cleaner doesn't need to know what an Ohm's law is.

Re:1M bail and 1yr in jail...?

[ScrewMaster]

With respect, none of this is as complex as DNA and other forensic evidence which is handled quite well in criminal trials every day.

With equal respect, have you ever been through jury selection? I have (a number of times unfortunately: every time I move they waste a day of my time not selecting me) and the GP is correct. The system selects for the most ignorant of any issues relevant to the proceedings, and anyone who could be presumed to have knowledge of mathematics or statistics suffer the first peremptory challenges issued. Don't want someone who can see through the numbers the trial lawyers and their expert witnesses pull out of their nether regions. I'm just a software engineer, and every god damn time I was asked what I do for a living I was promptly removed from the jury. The people that were left were often very nice people (you get to know some of your potential fellow jurors in the jury pool beforehand) but not people that I would want on my jury, if I were accused of a computer crime ... especially if I were innocent. The naked fear so many individuals have of computers, and especially those who are accused of computer crimes is unnerving. Fear of the unknown is not intrinsically irrational: but fear of gaining understanding is.

All the juries I've (almost) been on are filled with people to whom a trial about computer systems is, in fact, just as unfamiliar and frightening as a trial involving DNA or other complex evidence, and might just as well be about DNA so far as their level of understanding is concerned. The idea of a technical court is not a bad one at all, particularly given the importance of sophisticated science and technology to all of us, not just those with technical backgrounds. Imagine judges with engineering or science degrees running the show in such trials. Honestly, if we had such courts the patent system probably wouldn't be broken and the RIAA would have been laughed out of court from day one. I can just see a judge who just incidentally happened to have a degree in computer science asking an RIAA attorney: "So, you're claiming that a logged IP address infallibly identifies an individual copyright infringer? Hm. Not on this planet, bucko."

Truly, in these times ignorance is not bliss, and we as a society are paying the price for allowing our adversarial system to dumb down those who judge us. Remember, our justice system was developed in much simpler times. The pace of change being what it is, it's too much to expect the law itself to always be on top of things, but it shouldn't be too much to expect our juries to really be composed of our peers.

Re:Actual crime

[GaryOlson]

...sufficient to keep him from being hired...

After this thorough exposure and experience with the legal profession, law firms should be recruiting him. Not to mention his arrogance and narrow focus on a crucial point of fact indicates he would fit well in with lawyers of the same personality traits.

Re:Great!

[drinkypoo]

As an ex-employee, it's no longer his call as to "who gets the keys"

Wrong! The SOP was that he was only to turn the passwords over to the Mayor. This has been covered extensively. This requirement DOES go away if you're fired... you don't [by default] have to turn over ANY passwords! Just say "I don't work here any more, and I don't have your passwords." Meanwhile, if you do still work there, then you're still bound by the agreement you already made to follow the policies and procedures, which means he was bound to turn the passwords only over to the mayor.

In other words, the only charge not dismissed by the judge is the only one which he ever should have been accused of (if any) and he has a solid defense against it. We shall see how it plays out, but it is not nearly as cut and dried as you imagine or pretend.

Plea? What plea?

[Bacon Bits]

The defense made a motion challenging the evidence and the judge agreed that there was not sufficient evidence to support 3 of the 4 charges. There was no plea here. The court threw out the state's allegations for lack of evidence. There was no evidence because what he did was probably not sufficient as a matter of law (a matter of fact would probably have been decided by a jury). The charges were merely trumped up. Fabricated. Lies.

And yet they still kept this man in jail for a year awaiting trial for a ridiculous amount of bail money for a non-violent crime.

Re:Actual crime

[Sun.Jedi]

First, switch CISSP with DBA.

Lets not forget...

1. 1. The network he was unable to attend to (because of being jailed inappropriately) ran FINE in his absence. He has skills, and previous descriptions indicate this is not a simple network.
2. 2. He stuck to his beliefs. I think this is a good quality, especially considering it cost him his freedom for a period of time.
3. 3. In spite of the negative connotations of imprisonment, I'm sure there is educational value from his situation.
4. 4. In my personal opinion, from whats been published, management screwed the pooch on this one, he did the right thing, in several situations.

I would hire him.