John McAfee Tells World How He Fooled Cops and Escaped Belize

It looks like the long and winding road of the John McAfee saga is going to continue for at least a little longer. McAfee posted a detailed blog post about how he was able to elude Belizean authorities and sneak out of the country. From the article: "'It's visually interesting and it is mostly a happy story — in line with most Christmas stories,' he wrote. The former software executive describes an operation that was heavy in advance planning and trickery. He says he planted a lookalike ('my double — a man I have known for over 30 years and who years ago legally changed his name to John McAfee') and had him picked up by authorities in the northern Belize-Mexico border, while he and a group of friends and reporters loaded up a truck and headed in the opposite direction, to a southern town called Punta Gorda. With the news that he'd been arrested broadcasting on a local news station, McAfee figured that checkpoint security would relax."

Comments

whoa

[someone1234]

He must have been planning his escape for years!

Re:whoa

[Anonymous Coward]

In his mind. If people would have known what he was thinking they would have beeen, like, "whoa!"

Re:whoa

[alexander_686]

I head do by nominate Keanu Reeves to play John in the made for TV film.

Would /. please spare us ??

[Taco Cowboy]

Dunno about you, but I'm really sick and tired of yet another episode of the ensuing saga McAfee, the publicity whore !

Please have some heart, Slashdot !!

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

Hey give him cre4dit. At least he is doing better then Hans Reiser.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Bieeanda]

Please, yes. The man's a scummy asshat who hasn't been involved in the tech industry for years. It isn't like that ghastly business with Hans Reiser, where there was at least the excuse of handwringing over the fate of the file system he was developing.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, Hans took blame, they had no direct proofs. Showel and book on how to kill his wife were NOT direct evidence of murder.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[LordLucless]

I hate his software as much as the next Slashdot geek, and think he's nutty as a fruitcake, but he's hardly a publicity whore. Publicity whores don't vanish into south America for decades on end. Your comment reminds me of all the attacks on Julian Assange - it seems anyone who gets media attention for anything other than being a politician or a celebrity gets accused of publicity whoring.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

How about just ignoring these articles and moving on with others. The McAfee software does not quarantine Slashdot stories from you.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[PolygamousRanchKid]

If you don't like the Lord of the McAfee franchise, you can:

1. Vote the story down in the Submissions queue.
2. Simply ignore the story and don't read it.
3. Submit something more interesting yourself.
4. Have your double — a man your have known for over 30 years and who years ago legally changed his name to Taco Cowboy read Slashdot for you.

Hey, if I don't like the stories that get posted, I remind myself that with Slashdot, I get what I pay for it . . . and it's worth every penny of it . . .

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[ae1294]

Sometimes people with OCD have to read ALL of the Slashdot articles before they can move on to looking at their new batch of porn downloads. Nerd Rage is sometimes hard on

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[flyneye]

Well, in Julians case, attention whoring seems to be saving his freedom and probably his life.
If it weren't for attention whores, there'd be no entertainment, no stage, no t.v., no radio and no girlies with daddy issues who wanna cuddle up to ol' fly.
Let's not make "attention whore" quite such an anathema.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

No, he's pretty much media whoring.
 
He never "vanished" into central (not south) America; he lived the lifestyle of a profligate rake and was rather proud of that, inviting people (including journalists) to drop by and see how awesome his life is. It's something for which he's generally rather famous: he also invited a few journalists to follow him around during his 'daring escape' more than likely just to pad his own ego.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Sulphur]

How about just ignoring these articles and moving on with others. The McAfee software does not quarantine Slashdot stories from you.

Yet.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[chris.alex.thomas]

dude, what would convince you, they found her head in his glove box? I mean....seriously? or are you being ironic perhaps...no smiley face...so I'm going to go with serious....

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I don't see any problem with 'news for nerds' occasionally writing about those of us who managed to escape the cubicle lifestyle. After all, this guy is living the life that most IT pros probably (at least secretly) aspire for; i.e. strike it rich while young enough to do something with the money, and spend the next few decades living on your own terms, rather than on the terms of pointy haired bosses. Good for him. If it were me, I'd like to think I'd invest more into charities and less on weird stuff than he did, but it's always easy to think you'd do things "better" than others given the chance. Either way, I hope he can keep the remaining years of his life together, and stay out of trouble.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[MagusSlurpy]

Head in his glove box is only circumstantial evidence. Did you see him put it in there?

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[JWSmythe]

I would think the witnesses seeing him hose out the blood from his car, or the fact that he somehow misplaced the passenger seat, would be pretty good clues.

But when he lead them to the body, that was a dead giveaway.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

I would think the witnesses seeing him hose out the blood from his car

He was a long time sufferer of nose bleeds. Nothing remarkable about this at all.

or the fact that he somehow misplaced the passenger seat, would be pretty good clues.

Typical geek, always taking things apart and not always putting them back together. Maybe a bit absent minded too. Doesn't prove a thing.

But when he lead them to the body, that was a dead giveaway.

Clearly a latent psychic. Doesn't prove a thing.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[TheGratefulNet]

it would have been really slash-worthy if he had changed his name to little johnny drop-tables.

THAT would be funny.

the rest is just - meh. rich-guy problems.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[mrsquid0]

McAfee's software turned into something awful, but I do have fond memories of using some of his pre-Window software to edit the executable for a version of larn and change the names of some of the monsters and magic artefacts. The .exe file did not care what a monster was called, as long as the name had the same number of bytes.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[mabhatter654]

How is that file system? He has plenty of time for patching bugs now. Provided he write all the patches out on notebook paper... Cause computers are a bit hard to come by in the slammer.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Provocateur]

And the new slashdot would send an investigative reporter to the Belize holding cell and hear out the double's story, and come out with a book called False Positive The Story of McAfee's Escape

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[TheLink]

It's not so popular now due to vendor lock-in.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[wolfie_cr]

. Publicity whores don't vanish into south America for decades on end. .

Geography check, Belize is in North America (or Central America if you want to be totally correct)

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[turkeyfeathers]

And the new slashdot would send an investigative reporter to the Belize holding cell and hear out the double's story, and come out with a book called False Positive The Story of McAfee's Escape

Published by Packt, so naturally it would get a great front-page review on Slashdot. Win-win!

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Well, there was that, and the whole agreeing to show them where he hid the body in exchange for a lighter sentence thing.

I guess you could theorize that someone else killed her and he was forced to watch them hide the body for some reason, but that's as crazy as ... wait. John McAfee? Is that you?

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Chrondike]

Can't tell if you're for real Anon. Hope not. You think you need direct proof to be convicted for murder? Compelling circumstantial evidence can also win cases - take the recent Scott Peterson trial or many others as examples. And while all the line items you note can be rebutted one at a time, taking all of them in aggregate reduces the probability that's all a big coincidence...enough so to convict.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

If he weren't posting on his blog all the time, maybe I could follow your logic.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Bigbutt]

You sure you're not confusing him with Peter Norton? I'd use the Norton Utilities to edit my Larn executable.

[John]

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[mrsquid0]

Yes, I think that you are right. It has been a long time.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

He is the very definition of a publicity whore.
He has been giving interviews on the run.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Relax, at least it's entertaining.

Or would you rather see another Apple/Samsung update or perhaps a nice pro-Microsoft article? I guess you'll rage against them all any way.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Patch86]

What is a story about a famous software engineer getting accused of murder (sort of), going crazy and going on an international run from the police, doing on Slashdot? Is it either of interest to Nerds, or News?

Or do you just want pictures of Spiderman?

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, there was that, and the whole agreeing to show them where he hid the body in exchange for a lighter sentence thing.

That was after the conviction; it doesn't count among the evidence used as proof that he did it. That just tells us (and after the fact) that they happened to guess right, given the iffy evidence they had to work with.

Had he not led people to the body, we never would have been sure he really did it, and there would be a lot of doubt about whether the system worked or not. Similarly, had he been acquitted, the same problem would have happened (and he probably never would have shown anyone where the body is).

Until Reiser decided to take the blame, the whole situation was bullshit, where everyone lost and it looked like society might have been better off had he not been charged. Which I guess goes to show how brilliant the sentence-deal gambit was. Score one point for the government as good guys, this time.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[ArhcAngel]

Geography Nazi...because being a grammar Nazi is just too mainstream!

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[TheCarp]

> Can't tell if you're for real Anon

GP's 'Latent Psychic' crack wasn't a dead giveaway? wow, have you considered a job at the FBI or TSA?

> Compelling circumstantial evidence can also win cases

as can lies, misunderstandings, and judges who are out to get "those anarchist bastards" (as one judge was famously quoted as saying after an old and controversial case in my own city). Winning a case is not the same as proving anything, or settling the matter in everyones mind. You may be able to convict with less, but you wont convince everyone that its not a wrongful conviction with less.

On the other hand, leading the police directly to where you buried the body is, generally, a dead giveaway.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[19thNervousBreakdown]

The thing is, the only reason the evidence was iffy at all was because they didn't have a body, whose importance itself is kind of an artifact of law--although it's very important in some cases, I don't think many people would credibly think that Nina just up and left the country and her kids with nothing more than the clothes on her back.

He had a "how to murder your wife and get away with it" book that he purchased right before she went missing, and absolutely no justification for why he was hosing out his car or why the passenger seat was missing. Maybe it looked to you like there was some reason to let him go because your personal standard of proof (instead of the legal one) wasn't met with the extremely filtered view you got of court proceedings (I'd be surprised if you got 5% of the facts that were presented in the courtroom), but the fact is Hans is a murderer, and he got caught. The system worked in this case. It seems an odd choice to criticize the standard of proof used in legal proceedings and then pick an example where you've already been proven wrong.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

"I hate his software as much as the next Slashdot geek,"

When he was actually _at_ McAfee software, the product was excellent.

The parts we hate were written long after he sold out and moved on.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

>Can't tell if you're for real Anon. Hope not.

I hope you were stoned when you posted this, because it's extremely clear that he's kidding.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

I love that the "dead giveaway" pun made two appearances.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

THANK you!

I swear, this whole "McAfee saga" just screams "Hey, this is an advertisement for the book McAfee is about to write".

And honestly, I don't have even the slightest, remotest urge to read the book that he will inevitably be writing about his "epic adventures" as I'm sure he will term them.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

I would think the witnesses seeing him hose out the blood from his car, or the fact that he somehow misplaced the passenger seat, would be pretty good clues.

I thought the witness only saw him hose out his car with no actual mention of blood. If the witness saw something more then water (blood) he couldn't have testified that it was for example paint or wine. BTW since she was strangled there shouldn't be much of her blood outside the body. He didn't misplace his seat he said he deliberately threw it out because he needed more room.

But when he lead them to the body, that was a dead giveaway.

Except that the jury didn't know that he lead them to the body because he lead them to the body after the trial.
Look, I'm not saying he didn't do it. He clearly did, and frankly I am glad he is in jail. However, when you look at the evidence and compare it to say: a hot hot young woman whose daughter goes missing; who not only doesn't report it for six weeks but actually goes out partying during those six weeks; whose daughter is finally reported missing by her mother; said daughters body turning with duct tape on her mouth and an autopsy determines that her death was a homicide -- then why was Reiser found guilty but she found not guilty?

The evidence in her case was much stronger then in his case, so I have to concluded he was convicted because he behaves weirdly. I behave weirdly .and it bothers me that a jury might one day take my weird behavior and use it to convict me of a crime.

In any case I started this to make a simple joke that McAfee was doing a much better job of eluding jail then Reiser did. Sorry that the thread turned to such a glum direction.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting a blog entry about how you escaped the police using a double negates the value of the double and is an act of attention whoring.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

Yes.Without attention whores we would have nothing to do except read books, go visit friends, go out shopping, learn to play the guitar ( instead of just pretending with guitar hero ), introduce ourselves to neighbors ...

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Golddess]

your personal standard of proof (instead of the legal one)

What do you mean "instead of"? As I understand it, the legal standard is "beyond the shadow of a doubt", but then it leaves the details of figuring out if that standard has been met up to the individual jury members. Is this incorrect?

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Golddess]

Until Reiser decided to take the blame, the whole situation was bullshit

Until then it was bullshit? I haven't been following that case at all, but the way it is being presented in these posts, how exactly does him confessing after he's been convicted make the situation not bullshit? It sounds like you're basically saying "Oh, so he really did do it? Then it was ok for the government to do what they did".

Whether someone did or did not do something should never change change the ok-ness of what was done in order to uncover that.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[MouseTheLuckyDog]

The thing is, the only reason the evidence was iffy at all was because they didn't have a body, whose importance itself is kind of an artifact of law--although it's very important in some cases, I don't think many people would credibly think that Nina just up and left the country and her kids with nothing more than the clothes on her back.

Most acquaintances of serial killers say that they cannot believe anything like that of the killer. People behave in strange ways. Maybe she was homesick. Maybe her boyfriend was a closet sadist and she felt the only way to escape was to flee the country. Maybe a deer hunter accidentally shot her and decided to hide the body.

One thing that is certain, if she had shot Hans in front of witnesses, her Russian roots would have been enough to deny her bail or at least set an extremely high one, due to the fact that her Russian roots would have made her a flight risk. If a person may flee to escape a murder conviction they may flee for a lot of other reasons. I also note that in the last few years we have had a large number of people who have goon missing only to learn later that they fled.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[SmurfButcher Bob]

> Well, in Julians case, attention whoring seems to be saving his freedom and probably his life.
Err... I might suggest that the attention whoring is what put those things in jeopardy in the first place.

Just sayin.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[AK Marc]

If the witness saw something more then water (blood) he couldn't have testified that it was for example paint or wine.

The witness would have been able to testify it was hosed out with a red-tinge. What the red was, he couldn't know.

The evidence in her case was much stronger then in his case, so I have to concluded he was convicted because he behaves weirdly. I behave weirdly .and it bothers me that a jury might one day take my weird behavior and use it to convict me of a crime.

You are wrong. People accept that husbands kill wives. Its one of the most common types of murder. It's "accepted" as normal behavior. He wasn't convicted because he was weird, but because his act was common, so the result was likely. The mother killing her daughter is also one of the most common murders. But it's one people don't like to think about. Just put parents on the jury and have your entire defense be "could you kill your own kid?" and you'll likely win. People don't want to think about it. It's horrific that a mother would kill her own child so she can party more. So the jury won't. They'll ignore the obvious because the human brain is broken, not because of any "weirdness" on Hans's part.

He should be convicted every time. He was guilty, and the evidence pointed to that without any other reasonable explanation. The murdering mother should have been convicted as well. You are confusing a wrongful acquittal with a wrongful conviction in your comparison. And oh yeah, OJ did it too. He got off because the police were incompetent, and his lawyer was good.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[AK Marc]

It wasn't a guess. There was no other reasonable explanation, all the evidence pointed to his guilt. They found correctly.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Incorrect, the criteria is "beyond a reasonable doubt". Very, very little can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. For instance, it's not beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was framed, and then coerced into confessing. It's possible. Heck, it's happened. But I don't think it's reasonable to think that's what happened in this case.

Since he did plead guilty, I imagine that at least he was under the impression that there was sufficient evidence to find him guilty, and the most likely reason for that is that he did in fact commit the crime. Unless you've got an argument that's more convincing than a confession that involves producing the hidden body, I fail to see why we should have let him go.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[AK Marc]

As I understand it, the legal standard is "beyond the shadow of a doubt",

It's beyond "reasonable doubt" "shadow of a doubt" has no standing in law.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[AK Marc]

The parts we hate were written long after he sold out and moved on.

He sold out in 1996, or so as far as I can tell. Did you actually use virus scanners about that time, or are you just revisioning history? Norton was better then. McAfee AV was horrible on servers (where most used scanners then, before they were everywhere). It was a massive resource hog, and would prevent normal operation of the server. One of the reasons people put Linux boxes out in front of MS Exchange is that products like McAfee to scan user emails before delivery would simply kill the server. MS wouldn't support an Exchange server with AV on it because they were so bad. A separate server was a cheaper/easier solution than getting McAfee to work on an Exchange server. Worst software ever.

The only way you get away with saying such things is that likely so many here are new enough to IT that they didn't administer a server while McAfee owned McAfee to be able to form an opinion, or they see an AC with unsubstantiated opinion stated as fact and ignore it, as 99% of all slashdot comments are unsubstantiated opinion stated as fact, so everyone else just ignored you.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Oh, and there's also the fact that he was found guilty of first-degree murder, so yes, it's certainly "instead of". The jury also had the option of finding for a lesser charge, involuntary manslaughter, but they felt that not only was the evidence was strong enough to convict, but to also go with the higher charge.

I think you may be confused by the fact that he was allowed to plead down to second-degree murder after he was found guilty. This was most likely done in order to nip any appeals in the bud, and also because the evidence, although convincing, was not something that would remain convincing when the entire trial was compressed into a two-sentence soundbite, which is all most people care to educate themselves with before deciding guilt in their own minds. I think the case for that being a correct assumption has been made pretty well in this thread.

Later, he was sued for killing his children's mother (unsure if they sued or someone sued on their behalf), and repeatedly stated that he killed their mother in order to protect them from her. He lost that too, and was ordered to pay them $60m. If you still have doubt, it's most likely due to being uninformed.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[CrimsonAvenger]

Well, in Julians case, attention whoring seems to be saving his freedom

Saving his freedom?? He's been stuck in the Ecuadoran Embassy for six months-plus, last I checked.

Hardly what I'd call "free"....

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[JWSmythe]

I thought the witness only saw him hose out his car with no actual mention of blood. If the witness saw something more then water (blood) he couldn't have testified that it was for example paint or wine. BTW since she was strangled there shouldn't be much of her blood outside the body. He didn't misplace his seat he said he deliberately threw it out because he needed more room.

As I recall, which is probably horribly wrong, there was blood in the car, and that's why he was washing it out... I find it's more efficient to wash out with 5 gallons of gasoline and a match, once the ignition lock is broken and parked far away from home. :)

I don't quite get the need for more room to move the body. Most of the time, a corpse isn't substantially bigger than a body with a pulse.

Any which way, for someone who was smart, and researching how to do it properly, he really didn't do it very well. Myself, I have the better plan. Don't kill anyone, and then you don't have to hide the body or make excuses. :)

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

It's actually "beyond a reasonable doubt".

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Golddess]

Incorrect, the criteria is "beyond a reasonable doubt"

Reasonable, shadow, regardless of which word is used, if the law lets individual jury members decide for themselves if that level has been surpassed, I don't see how one can claim that coming to a different conclusion is the same as not using the law's standard. You can disagree with OP (and maybe I would too. As I said in another post, I have not followed this case), but it would still seem to fit the law's standard just fine.

Oh, and there's also the fact that he was found guilty of first-degree murder, so yes, it's certainly "instead of".

I don't see how that changes it. We're talking about different people coming to different conclusions about what constitutes a "reasonable doubt". So if the jury (there was a jury, right?) had found him not guilty, does that mean people such as yourself who looked at the evidence and decided he was guilty would be the ones who are not using the law's standards? Is being on the jury what determines whether OP is using the law's standards or not when deciding if the evidence has proven his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

On the other hand, leading the police directly to where you buried the body is, generally, a dead giveaway.

Not if the police is from Belize!
There is a small town in Russia where a serial killer turned up who raped and killed young women. They arrested the guy. After a few months in jail he made a confession and led police to the murder scene to show where the body was. After another murder they arrested another guy. After a few months in jail he made a confession and led police to the murder scene... you get the point.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[19thNervousBreakdown]

Yes, being on a jury is what determines whether you're using the law's standards. If you're not on the jury, you're just a person forming their own opinion, and you can do that however you want.

The thing I took issue with was

Until Reiser decided to take the blame, the whole situation was bullshit, where everyone lost and it looked like society might have been better off had he not been charged.

That's the crazy assertion. It might have looked that way to this one uneducated (in this particular court case, I'm not trying to make a statement about the poster's general education) person, but it's silly in the extreme to think that your familiarity with a case that likely amounts to short blurbs should outweigh a full trial by jury.

I don't have a problem with coming to a different conclusion, but to think that your conclusion, based off what you read on Slashdot, is more correct than 12 people who sat and listened to the defendant alone talk for 11 days straight and that we should let the guy go free because of the court of public opinion, that's ... I don't even know what to call logic like that. And heck, it wasn't even the court of public opinion either, most people did think he did it as far as I could see, it's just this one guy that thinks he should have gone free because he wasn't personally convinced. It's so off the wall, the more I think about it, the more I think we've all been trolled.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[RightSaidFred99]

Jesus, are you fucking kooks still carrying on about Reiser? Listen, he did it. It was obvious he did it and it was obvious beyond any reasonable doubt, there was a mountain of evidence.

He wasn't "persecuted" because he was a weirdo, he was _prosecuted_ because the amount of evidence stacked against him was ridiculously high.

You've watched too much TV. Enough circumstantial evidence, in aggregate, means _he did it_. It's all about odds. What are the odds of X, let's say only 1/500. Then the odds of Y, 1/1000. You add enough of those things together and you come to the conclusion that there is say a 1/10 billion chance that he _didn't_ do it, and only a fucking lunatic doesn't find him guilty.

Please never be on a jury.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Paradise Pete]

Hey give him cre4dit. At least he is doing better then Hans Reiser.

Maybe the guy doing time is also a double, who years ago legally changed his name to Hans Reiser.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[flyneye]

So for the last two choices, we are in fact the attention whores. No one wants to just play guitar to themselves, not in the scheme of things and bothering the neighbors to introduce myself as a guitar player may not be on their radar, but, then, I am pretty damn charming.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[flyneye]

I think in the case of the Wiki, it was attention pimping, as documents were the feature.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[flyneye]

Is the beer cold there? Can he call out for pizza or girls? Is some subhuman moron directing him to eat,sleep,shit and shower? Beats prison, eh?

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's on paper, you'd have a chance of finding the data, unlike with ReiserFS itself. That mess *never* worked well.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

Publicity whores vanish into south America for decades on end... AND THEN post an entire detailed blog about his adventures, pictures included, on a top-level domain.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Anonymous Coward]

It was a massive resource hog

McAfee AV still is a massive resource hog, and it brings new PCs at work to their knees. I'd rather take the risk of getting a virus than run that crap.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Maritz]

Hardly what I'd call "free"....

Probably nicer than sitting in Gitmo in an orange jumpsuit with a sack over your head though eh. ;)

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[AK Marc]

The assertion was that it was not when he owned it. I disagreed. Your comment doesn't address how McAfee performed in the 1990s.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[dkf]

Winning a case is not the same as proving anything, or settling the matter in everyones mind.

You don't have to settle the matter in everyone's mind, just the minds of the members of the jury.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[Golddess]

Yes, being on a jury is what determines whether you're using the law's standards. [...] it's silly in the extreme to think that your familiarity with a case that likely amounts to short blurbs should outweigh a full trial by jury.

I can agree with that. My opinion was based on the assumption that a person on the jury and a person not on the jury are basing their decisions on the same set of evidence. If you base it on the assumption that the non-jury member isn't as informed, then I see your point.

Re:Would /. please spare us ??

[TheCarp]

You do if you want people to stop talking about it....or even acting on it. If enough people have enough disagreement with a decision, then it reduces respect for the justice system and can lead to the situation changing, dramatically.

Pretty Sharp :)

[Anonymous Coward]

lol... I can see it now, the McAfee Ultimatum Final Trilogy. Pre-quel to the Jason Bourne series hahaha..

Re:Pretty Sharp :)

[MagusSlurpy]

Shakey-cam as Jeremy Renner's beat-up pickup rolls past the mountain road checkpoint where they're arresting his double, played by Matt Damon?

Re:Pretty Sharp :)

[Anonymous Coward]

Meyat Da-mon. (think Team America) I can't help but think of that every time i hear his name...

For his next trick...

[bistromath007]

He should legally change his name to Carmen Sandiego.

Re:For his next trick...

[Anonymous Coward]

He should legally change his name to Slashdot Cruiser.

Re:For his next trick...

[wmbetts]

I thought of this when I read the summery http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rvQrLbxO_A

Re:For his next trick...

[rvw]

He should legally change his name to Carmen Sandiego.

if he could get away with something like this...

Prediction

[Anonymous Coward]

All this crap is made up. Nobody in Belize is after him. Nobody anywhere is after him. This guy is just some harmless narcissist who likes to see his name in the papers.

Re:Prediction

[SternisheFan]

Sounds like he's a legend in his own drug-addled mind. He's a sad case. Something drug counselors know is you can't believe anything an addict says, and expect anything that comes out of their mouths is a lie.

This story's a good lesson for people. Don't do hard drugs, kids, or this is what happens to your life.

Re:Prediction

[ColdWetDog]

No, the lesson is to do better drugs. Self concocted 'bath salts' is a spot on method for frying what's left of your cortex. Stick to the old standbys and you'll be fine. Just look at Mick Jagger!

Re:Prediction

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like the infamous troll APK (Alexander Peter Kowalski). That guy is seriously messed up.

Such a wonderful person

[djl4570]

I don't give a flying fuck what he says. I want to know the facts, not the accusations and spin.
What really happened in Belize?
Did he kill anyone?
If yes, wouldn't it be righteous to allow the authorities to properly investigate the circumstances of the homicide?
My sense is that Slashdot has been in the tank for McAfee since this started.
I want the truth and the whole story.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Tagged_84]

Exactly! I've had a hard time finding any real details beyond hyperbole. So many people are screaming guilty and scum, but I can't find many specific details to conclude anything. Can anyone enlighten?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Gotcha! I won't share my $25k with you!

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Ash Vince]

Exactly! I've had a hard time finding any real details beyond hyperbole. So many people are screaming guilty and scum, but I can't find many specific details to conclude anything. Can anyone enlighten?

The only details anyone apart from him knows is that his neighbour was shot dead. McAfee seems to believe that his neighbour was killed by a government death squad that was looking for him but got the wrong house so refused to even talk to the police investigating the shooting. The police view hiding from them as suspicious (lol, name a police officer who wouldn't) so are becoming more and more keen to talk to him.

The only way we will ever find out anything close to the truth is if the cops catch the killer without his help and he is proved innocent or if he gets extradited back to Belize and decides to plead guilty. Neither are that likely to my mind.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

a voice of reason on slashdot? whoah...

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Vintermann]

Did he kill anyone?

That's the important question. And I got to say, the more I hear of his antics (dopplegangers changing their name to his?) and novelty drug habits, the less inclined I am to give him the benefit of doubt on this one.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Hm, you don't always get reliable data. You will have to make do with what you have, which often isn't much.

A start here would be "who on earth would go to the lengths of getting someone else to legally change their name to the same as yours in order to maybe help you a few years into a future you couldn't possibly predict to the necessary level that you know with reasonable certainty you will even need exactly this kind of help ?". The answer to my own question is I don't have a clue, but it smells, and beyond that I am not even close to be interested enough to follow the "saga" or try to investigate at all. Better to just ignore the whole thing.

BTW, maybe I am closer than I think, judging from the following omen : The Slashdot Captcha gives me the word to recognize : "solved"

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

You want the truth? Here? There must be a few digits missing from you id ...

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Psyborgue]

I think it's perfectly reasonable not to hand your fate over to some third world country's justice system. That being said, i'm not sure he's telling the truth about everything he says in his blog. Then again, he could very well have good reason to lie or mislead until he feels he's safe enough to let down his guard and come out publicly. So what if he's a bit crazy or paranoid. Living in a shitty country with a lot of money you often have good reason to be.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Psyborgue]

So because he uses drugs and is perhaps a bit paranoid (then again, the doppleganger did come in handy), he's more likely to be guilty in your mind. That's awfully well reasoned of you.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[rudy_wayne]

Did he kill anyone?

That's the important question. And I got to say, the more I hear of his antics (dopplegangers changing their name to his?) and novelty drug habits, the less inclined I am to give him the benefit of doubt on this one.

It will soon be revealed that he killed Hans Reiser's wife.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[gutnor]

He is a dodgy man living in a dodgy country in latina america. You need to take any news from either the government or McAfee with a spoonful of salt.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[eric_herm]

Or rather, that he was hans Reiser wife who faked her own death in order to prevent reiserfs4 to be integrated upstream, paid as a ex russian secret agent by a unnamed super villain ( take your pick between Google, Microsoft, Apple or anything, we will explain for the next conspiracy that they are all the same company in the end )

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't give a flying fuck what he says. I want to know the facts, not the accusations and spin.

I want to know who killed Kennedy. And a pony.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[eric_herm]

Working in computer security industry make you crazy, there is nothing more to look for. That's one more evidence to add to the growing list of evidence on the topic.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

So, with a government death squad supposedly after him he got a lookalike who he's known for 30 years and who changed his name to John McAfee to hand hmself in? Did he explain the death squad bit first? Did his chosen victim believe any of it and if so then why participate - just because he wants to give his life to save the real McAffee? The whole thing is ludicrously far fetched. The sort of government who send death squads are not exactly likely to be gently with a false McAfee who deliberately aided and abetted the real one, even assuming the death squad didn't shoot him on sight.

Overall I'd say 99% chance that McAfee is guilty as hell (and probably lost touch with reality too), 1% innocent but completely lost touch with reality.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Sulphur]

a voice of reason on slashdot? whoah...

Or was that giddyup?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Sulphur]

Did he kill anyone?

That's the important question. And I got to say, the more I hear of his antics (dopplegangers changing their name to his?) and novelty drug habits, the less inclined I am to give him the benefit of doubt on this one.

It will soon be revealed that he killed Hans Reiser's wife.

And the Enquirer will report film footage of the event in eleven years.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

"who on earth would go to the lengths of getting someone else to legally change their name to the same as yours in order to maybe help you a few years into a future you couldn't possibly predict to the necessary level that you know with reasonable certainty you will even need exactly this kind of help ?"

A staggeringly rich person living in a poor country rife with corruption?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[PopeRatzo]

I don't give a flying fuck what he says. I want to know the facts, not the accusations and spin.

I'd like to go on the record that I don't give a flying fuck what he says and I DON'T want to know the facts.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Muad'Dave]

I want to know who killed Kennedy. And a pony.

I doubt whoever killed Kennedy also killed a pony.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

So because he uses drugs and is perhaps a bit paranoid (then again, the doppleganger did come in handy), he's more likely to be guilty in your mind. That's awfully well reasoned of you.

McAfee rows with his neighbour over McAfee's guard dogs, which roamed around the area biting people who were not on his property (he had no fence, of course). The dogs are poisoned in some mysterious incident and McAfee euthanizes them by shooting them. Shortly afterwards the neighbour is found shot dead. The Belize police would like to talk to him about this sequence of events. McAfee claims the ONLY reason they could want to talk to him is because they are corrupt and he then goes on a bizarre promenade around Central America making very weird blog posts.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Does that surprise you? It shouldn't. There is a direct correlation between paranoid drug users and murderous impulses. Prison is full of ladies and gentlemen belonging to both subsets. It's hard for the casual user to see, but anyone who has spent a significant amount of time emersed in that culture has seen the slow descent into madness that I'm talking about. I'm not necesessarily talking about any one drug in particular either. Coke, heroin, meth, perscriptions, all the way down to pot and alcohol. It's all the same. The amount of time it takes to get there and the severity may differ, but it's a matter of degrees. The key factor is becoming so involved in the substance that it becomes all consuming. Once that happens and the substance matters more than family, friends, etc the user begins to see other people as objects to facilitate their next high. If that means stealing they steal, if that means lying they lie, and if it means killing they kill.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

"Working in computer security industry make you crazy"

I'd be more inclined to think it was the drugs primarily.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Alef]

So, with a government death squad supposedly after him he got a lookalike who he's known for 30 years and who changed his name to John McAfee to hand hmself in?

...in a different country. (But don't let that detail stop you from being 99% sure.)

Re:Such a wonderful person

[TheGratefulNet]

in latina america

I knew about the pussification of america, but I didn't know that it went that far.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you want to kill a pony?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice story... EXCEPT that the neighbor poisoned his own dogs so he wouldn't have to answer for them biting people, sent them to McAfee before shooting HIS OWN 30 year friend and lookalike so it would be blamed on McAfee, and the neighbor could sneak away...

And he would have gotten away with it too if it weren't for those meddling kids!

Re:Such a wonderful person

[h4rr4r]

So then maybe don't move to such a country?

Of course then he would have to deal with lawsuits and personal responsibility.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[weszz]

oooo... choose your own adventure... I like that... Could be the next big thing... a community suspense book... each person gets to write a paragraph... Could make a million bucks from this... DIBS!

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

but I can't find many specific details to conclude anything. Can anyone enlighten?

According to neighbors, he liked to party a LOT. And spent a lot of time "entertaining" some very, very young girls of questionable legal age.
Other than that, there aren't many details.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you actually care? If it weren't for slashdot, would you care, or even know about this? It's not been on the news (that I've seen anyway) so really slashdot is the only place I hear about this. Personally I don't care about McAfee, nor do I care about the murder. I do find it odd that this man is able to be a suspect in a murder case, blogging about how he's on the run, and the fuckers can't catch him. Now he's safe and sound?

I wonder what'd happen if someone killed McAfee, became a murder suspect, then fled the US to Belize - blogging all the while about how sneaky he was to detour the American authorities. I'll bet people would react more/different.

Sorry if this is troll.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[admdrew]

he's more likely to be guilty in your mind

You're putting words in Vintermann's mouth. He clearly said he's simply less likely to give McAfee the benefit of the doubt. I think that's a pretty objective statement, given the extreme lack of information available about the situation and the relative paranoia McAfee seems to be exuding.

That said, he was in Belize, not McAfee's native land, so it's also reasonable to assume a heightened level of paranoia or fear.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't be surprised, actually. Ponies are pro-freedom and love to hunt communists.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Well there is the part where he kept posting on the internet about all the drugs he was making to make girls horny.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Translation Error]

I don't know... Did Kennedy ride in on it?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[dadelbunts]

YOU CANT HANDLE THE TRUTH!

Re:Such a wonderful person

[dadelbunts]

Yes because McCafee was obviously so poor that he had to go around stealing and killing to get his next fix. You got this down to a T. Good thing Carl Sagan is dead or that pothead would be causing all sorts of chaos right now.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

99% of the world thinks their world view is confirmed because the woke up, and were still breathing. "I'm alive for another day, my reasoning, can't be too far off...."

Of course now we live in a day and age, were stupid is protected with multiple safety nets, and Darwin has been largely foiled.

So your "Overall I'd say 99% chance" remark, has a 99% chance of being in the crackpot statistics category.

Overall, fuck off. You know nothing. Your track record for being correct, if I were to guess from your post, is at best, average. Which means you are wrong, most of the time, despite the fact that you woke up this morning.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[HideyoshiJP]

I don't know. From what I've seen, his lifestyle doesn't scream "murderer." He seems to be living a batshit-crazy life, to be sure, but he doesn't seem to be the murdering "type" if you will. Mind you, this is the opinion of an armchair commentator on slashdot stories about batshit-crazy people.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Nyder]

I don't give a flying fuck what he says. I want to know the facts, not the accusations and spin.

I'd like to go on the record that I don't give a flying fuck what he says and I DON'T want to know the facts.

I figure it will become a made for TV movie that I will end up watching the next time i'm waiting in the emergency room of a hospital, or in jail, or somewhere where I can NOT change the channel.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Tablizer]

ludicrously far fetched. The sort of government who send death squads are not exactly likely to be gently with a false McAfee...who deliberately aided and abetted

You are thinking like the middle class. Try it like this: "I'll give you 5 million if you pretend to be me and get the crap beat out of you for a year."

I suspect roughly 1/4 the population would go for such a deal.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[jimmetry]

You're trying to compare this guy to a gutter user. He has money. I have little doubt that he's guilty and his toying with MDPV has played a role, but drugs are not all the same. Different chemicals affect your brain in different ways, and violent behaviour is quite often created by extreme amphetamine abuse.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Tablizer]

with a macaroni feather in his cap.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[houghi]

Even if he pleaded guilty, that does not mean he IS guilty.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[omfglearntoplay]

So do you mean he should think like a down and out lower class person desperate for money to survive or a rich bastard that can use money to buy people?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Grammatical gender agreement is pussified? Whatevs.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Maow]

I don't give a flying fuck what he says. I want to know the facts, not the accusations and spin.

What really happened in Belize?

Did he kill anyone?

If yes, wouldn't it be righteous to allow the authorities to properly investigate the circumstances of the homicide?

My sense is that Slashdot has been in the tank for McAfee since this started.
  I want the truth and the whole story.

All good questions. I'd just add one more: how did he not get sent back to Belize and instead found himself on his way back to USA?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[bhsx]

He has been refining MDMA and trying to extract it from local flora. Large doses of MDMA over prolonged periods can (usually does, from what I know of it) cause serious paranoia. The type of paranoid that makes you see things that aren't there. Shadows in the corners of your eyes, everyone's out to get you type of paranoia.
He did this under a veil of secrecy and lies, duping Harvard researchers into signing-off on his drug hunt disguised as a cure to various disease. If you're not finding him suspicious, then you're not reading the articles that are quite clear on his recent history.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[ColdWetDog]

Batshit crazy with a penchant for seriously abusing psychosis inducing amphetamine-based drugs and with easy access to multiple firearms spells potential murderer to me, but hell, that's just my cynical world view, I guess.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[AK Marc]

The police want the truth too. He's wanted for questioning. He lived next door to someone who was murdered. He is a suspect until cleared, and maybe a material witness. The police have wanted nothing but to check with him about those things. He's done nothing but run and give excuses why he's running. If he weren't a criminal, why didn't he go to the US or UK embassies and invite the authorities in for questioning? The closest I could get to an answer to that is that he's a US tax evader, so, being a criminal facing lots of US jail time, he was avoiding anywhere with an extradition treaty with the US, until he was caught in Guatemala, which does extradite, and he's on his way to Miami now (or is in San Fran, or whatever). Turns out everyone avoiding capture ends up in the US eventually. They aren't avoiding the local charge, they are avoiding getting sent to the US.

But the US almost always gets them in the end. The Republicans complain about the New World Order, but were instrumental in putting it in place. The difference is that rather than submitting to a world government, the US has asserted itself to be the world government. But it's a New World Order none the less.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[AK Marc]

Did you see his picture? He reminds me of an ugly Dennis Hopper. He is loaded and *still* has to drug them to get them to sleep with him.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[AK Marc]

McAfee is a drug dealer living in Belize because the committed fraud and tax evasion in the US and fled. He had guard dogs that bit people off his property. His neighbor put out poison on his own property to defend himself from McAfee's violent dogs. The dogs ate the poison, and returned home, sick. McAfee confronted his neighbor, who defended his actions, after all, if McAfee had properly restrained his dogs, they'd be alive. McAfee killed his neighbor (revenge for killing his dogs). He then began running before the murder was even public (something only the guilty party or a fleeing witness could do, and nothing he's done is consistent with a witness). The rest is not in dispute.

Just because the truth can't be substantiated to your personal standard doesn't mean it isn't true.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[HideyoshiJP]

Potential? Yes. Then again, so do the lives of most married people. To me, this man screams "crazy-ass hippie." Then again, I haven't followed the saga extremely closely. I just knew he was running away from some "death squad" and was wanted for questioning in connection to a murder. He's got a hell of a narcissistic streak, though.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Algae_94]

I have no faith that "the truth" and "the whole story" will ever come out of Belize. I don't trust the authorities of that country to do anything properly.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do you think he is guilty? As far as we know all the evidence against McAfee is purely circumstantial, which isn't enough to proclaim someone guilty. Sure McAfee is a paranoid nutjob, but just because he is paranoid it doesn't mean they aren't out to get him, for all we know the police might be lazy and try to pin it on him because they don't have any better leads and they don't like him.

There is far too much doubt here to proclaim him guilty without more evidence. Maybe more evidence will come at a later stage and his guilt will be obvious, but until that evidence appears it is prudent to reserve judgement over his guilt.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[smugfunt]

The rest is not in dispute.

This whole post is false or inaccurate and/or pure speculation.
Or are you claiming some inside info not available to the rest of us?

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Tablizer]

I meant the original John's thinking about how to "buy" assistance, not his clone's thinking.

As far as the clone's thinking, some people crave wealth and/or an "easy life" so much that they'll suffer in the shorter term to obtain it.

Further, the existence of a clone doesn't mean there is an explicit plot to escape. Many big-wigs have body doubles around as a security precaution. Being held for more than a few weeks is no guarantee if no plot proof is found.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Narnie]

I personally like to take my latin american and McAffee news with a pinch of salt, a shot of tequila, and a slice of lime.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[AK Marc]

Define speculation. Is a critical reading of the information available with probabilities attached "pure" speculation? If it is, then you are asserting that every report so far is 100% lies. I'd like to see your proof on that. Or everyone but you requires proof, your unsubstantiated opinion should be treated as fact.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[smugfunt]

McAfee is a drug dealer

False. The GSU raided his compound and found nothing, after 14 hours of looking.

committed fraud

What fraud?

and tax evasion

What tax evasion?
The reason he left the US is (according to Jeff Wise) to avoid a law suit over someone who died while 'aerotrekking' with his company. McAfee says it was to lower his taxes (which is not the same as tax evasion).

He had guard dogs that bit people off his property.

You made this up.

His neighbor put out poison on his own property

You made this up.

McAfee confronted his neighbor

Some time before the murder, if it happened at all.

McAfee killed his neighbor

Oh really?. If the police thought this there would be a warrant for his arrest.

He then began running before the murder was even public

McAfee claimed to have buried himself in the sand to hide from a police search of his home. He claims he hung around for days. All we know for sure is the police didn't find him.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Anonymous Coward]

A "spoonful of salt" will put one way over their normal daily requirement, I believe you mean a pinch of salt.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[Maritz]

Overall I'd say 99% chance that McAfee is guilty as hell (and probably lost touch with reality too), 1% innocent but completely lost touch with reality.

You've failed to notice that the 'double' was arrested in Mexico, not Belize. This impacts your credibility on this issue significantly.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[AK Marc]

You made this up.

No, it was reported in many places. That you are an illiterate idiot doesn't change reality. First hit (of thousands):
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/4710040/John-McAfee-tells-how-he-wants-to-start-new-life-in-Southampton.html (about dog poisoning)

Re:Such a wonderful person

[smugfunt]

A Sun reader calls me illiterate...

The dogs were apparently poisoned.
That Faull put out the poison on his own property is made up by you.

Show me a credible source that makes that claim. Even the Sun does not.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[AK Marc]

I'm not a sun reader. I'm calling you a liar. You asserted that I made something up. I proved you wrong. You have been proven wrong. Yet, you persist in posting your incorrect opinion, repeatedly. Also, whether Faull put it on his own property is irrelevant to motive. All that's required is for McAfee to believe it. What proof do you have that McAfee didn't believe Faull put poison on his own property for the purpose of killing McAfee's dogs?

You asked for the truth. I gave it. That the truth doesn't agree with your unsubstantiated opinion doesn't bother me.

Re:Such a wonderful person

[smugfunt]

I proved you wrong.

No, to do that you have come up with evidence that you didn't make it up. Specifically what you claim, not just some vague reference to poisoned dogs.

What proof do you have that McAfee didn't believe Faull put poison on his own property for the purpose of killing McAfee's dogs?

Only McAfee's statements. I don't have proof that unicorns don't exist either.

You asked for the truth. I gave it.

Speculations are not facts, no matter how plausible you think they are, and you should not peddle them as truth.

"I'm so clever..."

[mystyc]

Why is it that people who have evaded authorities find it irresistible to gloat about how "clever" they are to have outwitted cops. I get it, maybe eventually talk about it in an autobiography, but he may technically still be evading said authorities. He might as well say, "nanna nanna booboo, come and get me!".

Re:"I'm so clever..."

[mseeger]

He might as well say, "nanna nanna booboo, come and get me!".

Thanks for the hope your giving us ;-).

Re:"I'm so clever..."

[Raumkraut]

Why is it that people who have evaded authorities find it irresistible to gloat about how "clever" they are to have outwitted cops.

I'd imagine that they generally don't.
The cops sure as hell aren't going to make an international song and dance about all the suspects who've slipped through their grasp, so the only such people you'll hear from are the self-aggrandising gloaters.

You're not likely to hear from anyone who's keeping a low profile, by definition.

Re:"I'm so clever..."

[TheGratefulNet]

well, better to be a self-aggrandising gloater than an unidentified face-down floater...

Re:"I'm so clever..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Why? That's easy to explain. Because he's either stupid or clinically insane. I think the latter is more likely, but either way he has a huge ego that needs regular feeding by broadcasting his antics to the world.

Re:"I'm so clever..."

[Infernal Device]

Why is it that people who have evaded authorities find it irresistible to gloat about how "clever" they are to have outwitted cops. I get it, maybe eventually talk about it in an autobiography, but he may technically still be evading said authorities. He might as well say, "nanna nanna booboo, come and get me!".

He's monologuing. That's the downfall of every evil villain.

In this case, he's probably more of a rich, paranoid nutbag than anything. Innocent until proven guilty and all that, but he's not helping his case any and I'm not going to vouch for the authorities in Belize, either.

Re:"I'm so clever..."

[iced_773]

Those are just the ones you hear about because they're the ones who gloat.

Compare to Whitey Bulger, who actually did keep a low profile, and it almost worked.

Disappointed

[mseeger]

I have to confess that i am a bit disappointed. My impression is, that the world would be a safer place with him being behind bars.

Re:Disappointed

[MACC]

Think about how nice the world would be if
the "right" million US citizens would be incarcerated ( instead of a bunch of unfortunate blacks and latinos ) ?

Always interesting to see that Americans seem to think that there is no law except US law in any country
they visit as guests.

Re:Disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to confess that i am a bit disappointed. My impression is, that the world would be a safer place with him being behind bars.

...and a much safer place with you there as well!

Your impressions, thankfully, are not what dictates right or wrong.

Re:Disappointed

[fnj]

Think how much better off if the entire Congress was behind bars, together with the President and all his cabinet, and most of the top corporate officers. Hey, it's a start.

Re:Disappointed

[Flentil]

Seriously? You'd lock him up based on some sketchy details you read about online. I think the world would be a much safer place without that kind of gross injustice.

Re:Disappointed

[realityimpaired]

The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
  -- Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2, Act 4, Scene 2

Re:Disappointed

[mseeger]

You'd lock him up based on some sketchy details you read about online. I think the world would be a much safer place without that kind of gross injustice.

No, i would lock him up for constituting a flight risk while being involved in a murder case. If the things happened in the US as they happened in Belize, don't you think he would be in custody now (or having paid at least so much bail to make his appearance in trial likely). He takes pride in escaping the police of the country he decided to live in.

Re:Disappointed

[realityimpaired]

In a perfect world, we'd be able to trust the police to do their jobs without prejudice or malice. In some parts of the world, that's already the case.

The GP could be in one of those parts of the world, and may not realize that in other parts of the world bribery is the standard operating procedure, and people are presumed guilty until proven otherwise (usually by means of the appropriate bribe). In this country for example, a man refusing to speak with police, evading them, and using a body double to confuse them while skipping the border would be considered an admission of guilt. It's a crime in and of itself, in the form of obstruction of justice, regardless of whether he's guilty of the murder in question, and would land him in prison on its own.

I can give him the benefit of the doubt: though I've never been to Belize I have been to countries in that part of the world and they tend more towards the bribery side of the equation (though some of them are notable exceptions). It's still difficult not to judge him by the norms of the culture I grew up in, though.

Re:Disappointed

[mseeger]

I am not to say if he's guilty or not. I am saying that he should face the investigation and the subsequent trial (if it comes to that). If he wishes to escape justice, he has to be arrested (as it is custom everywhere in the world). It is the country he has chosen to live in. So he has to follow the rules there.

Re:Disappointed

[wmbetts]

Why would the world be safer?

Re:Disappointed

[rjstanford]

Especially since the cost of his actions far outweighs that of a reasonable bribe under those circumstances.

Re:Disappointed

[mseeger]

Because having someone out there who thinks that the laws don't apply to him is unsafe by my book ;-).

Re:Disappointed

[DNS-and-BIND]

Putting the "right" in jail just because they have right-wing opinions is freaking scary. The people in prison today committed crimes that put them there, there was no round-up based on race.

Re:Disappointed

[afidel]

trust the police to do their jobs without prejudice or malice. In some parts of the world, that's already the case.

What part of the world would that be in, because I haven't heard of anyone perfecting AI and implanting it in robots yet. One of the most important lessons I learned in high school was that everyone has bias, it's part of the human condition. Most law enforcement officers have a bias towards catching the criminal and so they will color their view of the evidence to point towards their most likely suspect, most don't even realize they are doing it.

Re:Disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

The existence of people who obey any and all laws (with or without question) is far more dangerous to the rest of us than nuts like MacAfee. Obeying all laws rules and regulations - anywhere - is utterly socially irresponsible.

Re:Disappointed

[dadelbunts]

I smoke pot. Guess im unsafe.

Re:Disappointed

[fustakrakich]

...there was no round-up based on race.

*cough* drug war

And I don't believe he meant the political "right", as opposed to actual criminals.

Re:Disappointed

[Nyder]

Think how much better off if the entire Congress was behind bars, together with the President and all his cabinet, and most of the top corporate officers. Hey, it's a start.

Okay, what I have learned from the movies and TV is that being in jail doesn't stop someone from getting bad things done.

Re:Disappointed

[DNS-and-BIND]

Don't sell drugs, don't go to prison...or am I missing something somewhere? The CIA is forcing them, right?

Re:Disappointed

[mseeger]

Nope. Usually that doesn't include dead neighbors ;-).

Really, i don't freaking care if he was smoking his mattress, eating seaweed or running 30-day-trials of fancy pills. As long he is not offfering that stuff at the kindergarten, i could not care less. That his behavior may cause problems with law enforcement should not come completely unexpected for him. They are not as understanding as we are....

What i care about is: he had regular altercations with his neighbor about his dogs, first the dogs turn up dead, than the neighbor turns up dead and he flees the country while the police wants to question him (which i would not consider unreasonable).

He was in custody a few months prior to the incident. He was treated as roughly as everybody else there. He wasn't killed, not even close. So the claims that he has to fear for his life from the police are not credible.

Re:Disappointed

[fustakrakich]

...am I missing something somewhere?

Yes, prohibition is corrupt, and in these cases very racist, and must be eliminated by any means possible. The numbers speak for themselves. And yes, the CIA is enticing them, or maybe Iran/Contra never happened, right? If you want to punish people over drugs, make sure to get the "right" ones, the banks that launder the money and those government agents making all the arrangements to move the merchandise. But, of course, that cannot happen for very obvious reasons. Please, stop shilling for authority.

Re:Disappointed

[DNS-and-BIND]

So, "those people" cannot be expected to make decisions like us, and therefore it's racist. Isn't attributing characteristics to people based on race...racist? Hmmm....better not think that direction, there are some inconvenient truths that way.. Better to obey authority and not question our assumptions.

Re:Disappointed

[ColdWetDog]

I'm sorry. I don't think that phrase means what you think it means.

Re:Disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Minorities and the lower income are persecuted. You are clueless. I lived in the big city and the suburbs; I've SEEN the difference not just by race buy by locality.

Minorities in my suburb are harassed and that leads to them being far more likely to be caught. White suburban kids can drive around drinking underage without fear of arrest because unless they get in an accident they'll not be caught. If you are a minority, the cop will pull you over for no legit reason just for a fishing expedition on a bogus premise. I saw it in school (and I don't think schools have progressed since) where the few minorities were watched like hawks and accused all the time--- they were expected to do wrong--- while I was never even questioned and I cut class plenty. In inner city schools, I was treated equally (except by a couple racist black kids... who BTW are now in jail for life... society needs to take people's kids away when their family is fucked up; the ONLY thing the loser parents seem to do is to fight to keep the kids they abuse.)

Re:Disappointed

[Algae_94]

How do you know what he thinks it means? Maybe the quote was presented to agree with a post, or maybe as a contrasting disagreement. Until you know what he meant by it, you should not be so quick to pull the trigger on a long winded explanation to affirm that a quote does indeed mean the obvious definition - lawyers should all be killed.

Re:Disappointed

[mcgrew]

Putting the "right" in jail just because they have right-wing opinions is freaking scary.

Not scary, just wrong.

The people in prison today committed crimes that put them there

Crimes like sodomy, marijuana, gambling...

Re:Disappointed

[mcgrew]

Because having someone out there who thinks that the laws don't apply to him is unsafe by my book ;-).

That's almost everyone with more than a couple million dollars in the bank -- and they're usually right, they are above the law. Like the Who song says, they have guns that fire cops.

Re:Disappointed

[SecurityTheatre]

As usual, your view is shortsighted and misses the point, while still being somewhat consistent in a limited sense.

Yes, the poor are much more likely to commit crimes than the wealthy (or at least to get caught doing it). Minorities are a substantial portion of the poor.

You also fail to notice that drug sentences are 50% - 120% more lengthy for minorities than whites who do exactly the same crime, and conviction rates are much higher.

Now, what is the cause of this dichotomy, I have no idea. I doubt it's actual institutional racism in the courts. Maybe it's based on their behavior in court, or their willigness to submit to treatment, or some other metric such as family stability being taken into account, but we don't have any evidence other than the actual statistics which are a bit damning.

This it not to mention the fact that most drug dealing crimes begin with a search of property based on "reasonable suspicion", often in vehicles, where blacks appear to be as much as 10 TIMES more likely to be subject to a search as whites during a routine traffic stop.

Worth pointing out...

Re:Disappointed

[SecurityTheatre]

In the US, there is a presumption of innocence and a 4th amendment. He is under no requirement to speak to police and can simply refuse to talk with them.

You cannot arrest someone for not talking, nor can you force someone to pay bail unless they are charged with a crime, which for murder likely requires an indictment from a Grand Jury, based on substantial evidence.

Just saying...

Re:Disappointed

[fustakrakich]

Better to obey authority and not question our assumptions.

:-) Dig it. But there's one little thing you don't understand. If everybody obeys the law, they will have to make more laws.

Indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

This smack of shade of Hans Reiser, and we know how it turned out. Yes sometimes the police in country like belize is corrupt, but I would like to see evidence that this is not a murderer which escaped its sentence and gloat on it.

Re:Indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

I would like to see evidence that this is not a murderer which escaped its sentence and gloat on it.

So... a presumption of guilt?
Prove innocence or go to jail?
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear?
No smoke without fire?

Re:Indeed

[rjstanford]

Prove innocence or go to jail?

No... but prove innocence or be willing to talk to the cops when your neighbor gets murdered seems reasonable.

No smoke without fire?

Turns out that when you see a lot of smoke, its often worth checking to see if there's a fire. There isn't always, but there often is. Its one reason we have fire extinguishers in kitchens and workshops.

A lot of advance planning?

[Anonymous Coward]

For the escape? For the crime? For both?

Hey, John

[flyneye]

John, it's your story, you tell it like you want...

Re:Hey, John

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

I could do the EXACT same thing.

Man,
I'M ZAPHOD BEEBLEBROX!!

Re:Hey, John

[flyneye]

M'kay, Jeremiah, it's his story, you tell it like you want. Couldn't hurt.

Re:Hey, John

[plover]

All I could think of was "cool story, bro."

Delusional

[Snjit]

This has gone beyond news to just soap opera drama that belongs on a bad trash news site, not ./

I don't expect top notch, confirmed journalism from any internet news site but this one is pure fantasy on the part of McAfee. Stop feeding this delusional, drug addled news whore. He hasn't done anything for technology since selling his business. Stop letting these "news" stories through to the front page.

Thanks

Re:Delusional

[Dr. Tom]

Yeah, that blog post is probably all fake, yet another bit of social engineering designed to misdirect attention.
It's entertaining, I say, and relevant, for /.

--
You think this is cool, just wait for McAfee's Escape II

Re:Delusional

[TheNinjaroach]

Man, that dotslash site really sucks!

Re:Delusional

[mcgrew]

If you don't like McAfee stories, don't click on McAffee stories, and don't bother those of us who do by bitching about it.

Re:Delusional

[Maritz]

This. It's almost as if they want to bitch, or enjoy having a fuckin' moan about something. Almost as if.

He must have watched tv in the 80's ...

[Anonymous Coward]

because its a textbook A-Team escape!!!

Love it when a plan comes together.

So....

[wbr1]

A virus specialist deployed a Trojan?
Was that to evade capture or with his 18 year old girlfriend?

It could be wose.

[Anonymous Coward]

McAfee and Assange teaming up for a reality based online blog/story/video reality hide/escape/fool the authorities around the World reality series.

Re:It could be wose.

[AK Marc]

Assange turned himself in the first time they questioned him. Then, after he left the country with permission, someone else decided to re-file the dismissed charges. He offered multiple times to meet from his current location (something that Sweden does regularly), which they declined without explanation why it has been acceptable before but isn't now for Assange.

There is no factual telling of the story I can see that doesn't include major inconsistencies on the part of Sweden.

Very popular tourist route.

[Anonymous Coward]

I did the same route 2 years ago. 100's of tourists do the same route every day. Nothing special.

The route is explained in every tourist guide of Guatemala and Belize. Your can even order your tickets online.

So now the "Fake" McAfee...

[Anonymous Coward]

Gets to rot in jail for 20 years?

Re:So now the "Fake" McAfee...

[Dr. Tom]

Presumably he was released when it turned out to be the wrong guy. Coulda happened to anybody named John McAfee.

For all we know, he might be the murderer..

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, this publicity event is a great distraction to the fact that McAfee illegally escaped the country following a murder case where he legitimately was a suspect. The elaborate schemes that he has demonstrate that he had spent a considerable effort in preparation of the escape.

The fact that people are celebrating his successful escape is just sick. What if he did kill his neighbor? Reminds me of OJ Simpson and his "(If) I Did It" book. Let's hope McAfee doesn't go apesh*t like Simpson later went (kidnapping and armed robbery..)

Re:For all we know, he might be the murderer..

[19thNervousBreakdown]

I mean, this publicity event is a great distraction to the fact that McAfee illegally escaped the country following a murder case where he legitimately was a suspect.

Not that I don't think he did it--to be honest, I'd give it about a 60% chance that he did--but he was never a suspect. He was a "person of interest".

Narcissism, the bane of popular criminals

[argStyopa]

There's a fine line between panache and smug.
People hate smug, so that's a really really good way to lose one's public support.

Re:DON'T CARE

[wmbetts]

If I have to read about an attention whore I'd prefer them to be bat shit crazy. It makes the stories more interesting.

Really bad

[Anonymous Coward]

A History or Discovery Channel series called "Police Evaders"?

GTFO

[slashmydots]

I am going to be beyond pissed if the US doesn't extradite his dumb ass straight back to Belize.

Re:GTFO

[phantomfive]

Apparently if Belize wants that, all they have to do is file a warrant for his arrest. They didn't do that, which is why Guatemala let him go. I have no idea why Belize didn't file a warrant for his arrest. Most likely McAfee isn't as interesting as he thinks to the Belize government.

Re:GTFO

[Algae_94]

Possibly because Belize doesn't have enough evidence to bother filing a warrant. If they were able to talk to him, they might have gotten the information they needed, but they didn't get to talk to him.

Re:GTFO

[mu51c10rd]

It was odd to me as well. We do have an extradition treaty with Belize, so they could charge him and request him back. I'd like to see how he plans on dodging the FBI or Marshall's service.

Tale of two Cities

[T.E.D.]

That could have ended badly for the other John McAffe. If the Belize authorities aren't any better than cops in, say rural Texas, they aren't likely to care all that much that they have got the wrong guy.

Dude could easily have found himself sitting in prison the night before his execution, writing "Its a far far better thing I do today than I have ever done before; it is a far, far better rest that I go to than I have ever known."

he install the fake mcafee on there systems

[Joe_Dragon]

he install the fake mcafee on there systems as well as the real one and that give him the time to get away while there had to rebuild there systems.

Re:he install the fake mcafee on there systems

[mcgrew]

Joe, I'm pretty sure English isn't your native language so let me help you out there:

He installed the fake McAfee on their systems as well as the real ones, and that gave him the time to get away while they had to rebuild their systems.

As someone who has learned (badly) a couple of languages, I hope that was a help. I'd appreciate the same if I were trying to post on a Spanish language board.

I'll wait for the movie

[sl4shd0rk]

or book... you do realize that's where all this publicity has been leading right?

Re:I'll wait for the movie

[mill3d]

Not to mention crowd-sourcing the story development thanks to slashdoters' broad imaginations...

Why is wired and slashdot obssessed

[Anonymous Coward]

with this nobody.

He is a loser that hasn't been relevant in tech for a decade plus, and even then he made a shitty software product.

How much does this guy pay to have his "story" get posted on slashdot?

Irony

[Shoten]

On one hand, how batshit crazy paranoid do you have to be to befriend a lookalike and maintain that relationship for many, many years, even getting him to change his name to yours. On the other hand, that same batshit insanity probably leads to situations where you would need said body double...

Why is this in YRO

[neminem]

Should really be in idle.

Forethought?

[Cruciform]

You'd think someone that would have such a contingency plan against the "government that is out to get him" would just go somewhere else, pay taxes, and not have to come up with such plans.

Re:Forethought?

[kaatochacha]

If his delusion is that the government is out to get him, it really doesn't matter where he goes. He might as well go somewhere with less taxes.

Re:Forethought?

[Cruciform]

Except he is now "happy" to be back in the US. So there is a balance in there between taxes and killer governments that satisfies him.

julian assange all over again

[Cyko_01]

the difference being that I actually believed the assange story. Mcafee gives no explaination for why the police supposedly want him dead

I'm wondering...

[kaatochacha]

How do we know that this post isn't being posted by the DOUBLE, and that McAfee actually paid him to write it to throw him off his own tail, since he's actually McAfee pretending to be a double! muwhahahahah!

Re:I'm wondering...

[PPH]

At this point, I'm not certain that McAfee, in his drug fueled haze, is certain whether he is the real McAfee or the double.

Classic Meth Psychosis

[darth_borehd]

I've seen what methamphetamine abuse can do to people. Heavy abuse plus large cash reserves to keep doing whatever you want are a dangerous combination. McAfee has all the classic signs. (paranoia, megalomania, grandiose plans, outrageous claims, frantic activity, confabulated memories, etc) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stimulant_psychosis I don't know if he killed his neighbor. People on these drugs are capable of anything, even contrary to their history, personality, or beliefs. On the other hand, 3rd world countries like Belize are full of corruption.

Belize

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's just hope Belize handles this murderer-on-the-loose-abroad situation the American way: with a drone strike.

Deutchland Uber Alles!

[TiggertheMad]

Geography Nazi...because being a grammar Nazi is just too mainstream!

Well, that would then make you a Nazi Nazi, since you are correcting the parent post about the type of Nazi he is. I suppose that also, by logical extension, that makes me a Nazi Nazi Nazi. Let's just say this post completely Godwins the entire thread, and go have a pint.

Re:Deutchland Uber Alles!

[Anonymous Coward]

Better than a Yahtzee Nazi, however.

The New Odd Couple.

[Kaenneth]

He should go hide out with Kim Dotcom. but have a lot of camera's inside the house.

FTFY

[Anonymous Coward]

He might as well say, "nanny nanny poo poo, come and get me!".

Much better.

The plot thickens!!!

[Narcocide]

Maybe the Belize police just wanted to ask him why he's always seen entering/exiting the country twice in a row?

Or maybe his DOUBLE killed his neighbor!!!