Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

TJX Hacker Claims US Authorized His Crimes

Posted by samzenpus on from the one-armed-man dept.

doperative writes "Convicted hacker Albert Gonzalez is asking a federal judge to throw out his earlier guilty pleas and lift his record-breaking 20-year prison sentence, on allegations that the government authorized his years-long crime spree. From the article: 'The government has acknowledged that Gonzalez was a key undercover Secret Service informant at the time of the breaches. Now, in a March 24 habeas corpus petition filed in the US District Court in Massachusetts, Gonzalez asserts that the Secret Service authorized him to commit the crimes. “I still believe that I was acting on behalf of the United States Secret Service and that I was authorized and directed to engage in the conduct I committed as part of my assignment to gather intelligence and seek out international cyber criminals,” he wrote. “I now know and understand that I have been used as a scapegoat to cover someone’s mistakes.”'"

15 of 159 comments (clear)

  1. It's illegal... by msauve · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's illegal if the gov't does it too. They can't "authorized" illegal activity, and "following orders" is not a legal defense.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:It's illegal... by masterwit · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes but perhaps his sentence will be taken into consideration considering these new facts (if they are true). That is why these sentences have a range of penalties...

      --
      We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
    2. Re:It's illegal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. Possibly he has accomplices in Government who should also be behind bars but I don't see how that undermines his own conviction.

    3. Re:It's illegal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes but perhaps his sentence will be taken into consideration considering these new facts (if they are true). That is why these sentences have a range of penalties...

      Seems like government agents breaking laws like these (theft and fraud) should be subject to harsher penalties. Something's seriously wrong if they get lighter ones.

    4. Re:It's illegal... by ComputerGeek01 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yeah it kind of is, It's called the Nuremburg Defense. It's still illegal but what this guy is saying is that it was is (CO? Handler? I'm not sure of the terminology in this instance) commiting the crime based on the Command Responsibility doctorine.

    5. Re:It's illegal... by HungryHobo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd be very doubtful unless he has good proof he was working for the government.

      the government can do a lot of things and authorize it's agents to do a lot of things which would be illegal otherwise.

      For a trivial example:The executioner is not guilty of murder for executing a person sentenced to death.

      Police can take someone against their will and lock them up overnight for very flimsy reasons without the same penalties as a kidnapper who does the same thing for the same reasons.(Just try locking up your neighbor in your basement against his will to punish him for being drunk in public and see how it turns out for you)

      If someone believes their actions are at the behest of their government it shouldn't be a total defense but intent is important.

    6. Re:It's illegal... by Jurily · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seems like government agents breaking laws like these (theft and fraud) should be subject to harsher penalties to the people who ordered them.

    7. Re:It's illegal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unless he has documented proof that he was receiving these directions (e-mails, recorded conversations (legally recorded or not), etc.) I think his status declines from "government agent" to "sucker."

    8. Re:It's illegal... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'd be very doubtful unless he has good proof he was working for the government.

      According to the article, the government has already admitted that he (Gonzalez) worked for them.

      The strange thing about this is that Gonzalez signed a plea bargain and is now trying to break it. I'm not clear on all the details. Maybe it was one of those situations where someone in the government told him: "Plead guilty and we'll get you a suspended sentence and then you can continue to work for us" but then the judge, not wanting to appear weak on a "cyber" criminal, dropped the 20-bomb on him. That's a long bit for a young nerd to do, even someone who played with Russian mobsters.

      Again, I'm not clear on the details, but I could see the government playing with a guy's life like that, especially someone who was already breaking the law when he first got involved with the Feds.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:It's illegal... by Moryath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd be very doubtful unless he has good proof he was working for the government.

      Uhm.. the government ALREADY ADMITTED that they were using him as an undercover informant.

      One of those things about the word "undercover" is that unless you are participating in what is going on, chances are the people you are trying to inform on will peg you real quick. "Hey, don't talk to that guy, everyone he talks to gets busted by the feds."

      The Secret Service is no different than any other law enforcement agency. The dirtiest, most corrupt wing is always "Vice", simply because in order to find the guys they're trying to bust the cops have to get very, very, very dirty themselves. Sometimes they go native, sometimes they really go native, sometimes they get really freaking insane (more here. Sometimes it's even worse. Undercover cops on major mafia infiltration cases have had almost carte blanche to participate in anything that went on, so long as they testified later.

      Am I completely convinced he's telling the truth? No. Is it reasonably plausible that someone in the Secret Service gave him verbal instructions to do certain things in order to keep his credibility up so as to set up future busts, but then decided he wasn't worth it and used him as a scapegoat? Absolutely.

    10. Re:It's illegal... by RobertLTux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      actually the break goes the other way if he was promised a suspended sentence and the Judge gave him a "couple dimes" then the state broke the agreement.

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    11. Re:It's illegal... by darth+dickinson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seems like government agents breaking laws like these (theft and fraud) should be subject to harsher penalties. Something's seriously wrong if they get lighter ones.

      So, you're saying that narcs should get jail time for buying illegal drugs, in order to catch dealers "in the act"?

  2. Thought he was full of it, until I saw his handler by unassimilatible · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After seeing the agent in charge of Gonzalez, now I'm thinking there might be some truth...out there.

    --
    Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
  3. Re:almighty; rebates, bailouts coming, giving back by bmo · · Score: 3, Informative

    No, you're wrong.

    It's the Illuminati bringing back The Old Ones to immanentize the eschaton.

    The sarcrifices will begin after midnight, right after the American Medical Association band does its third encore.

    --
    BMO

  4. Ummmm, not buying the bullshit by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry, but this sounds really implausible to me. I'd need to see some solid proof before Id' accept this. For one, I can't see what the Secret Service would hope to gain. I mean if they need records for credit card transactions at stores they've got a far easier way to get them: Just subpoena the CC processors. They can have whoever the stores use (companies like Paymentech or the like) hand over all the records. Not only is that legal, but it is also much more covert since the companies themselves are not compromised.

    This would be how investigations work. They just get a court order for the people who have the info to hand it over, they don't hire some random guy to try and hack your shit. They get a subpoena or a warrant (depending on what they need, in some cases they might want to monitor traffic live for that they'd have a wiretap warrant) and they go to the people with the info. It's legal, maintains the chain of evidence, and gets much more guaranteed results than hacking.

    Also I find it hard to believe that if he really was working under orders from the SS that he wouldn't have told his lawyers and they wouldn't have done something. In my experience federal public defenders aren't morons. It is a good job, they can get good people. I can't imagine if he had opened up with "Guys I didn't think I was doing anything wrong! The Secret Service told me to do this!" they wouldn't have investigated that.

    To me, sounds like something he invented in a way to try and get out of jail. I'm not saying it is impossible, but I find it rather beyond credibility.