Slashdot Mirror
Kentucky Anonymous Member Indicted Three Years After FBI Raid (arstechnica.com)
A federal grand jury has indicted "KYAnonymous" -- more than three years after FBI agents raided and searched his home -- and charged him under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes an article from Ars Technica:
After The New York Times published an account [late in 2012] of a horrific rape against a teenage girl in Steubenville, Ohio, an online vigilante campaign was started...the campaign targeted local officials who the vigilantes felt weren't prosecuting the rape investigation seriously because the alleged perpetrators were high school football players... Two teenage boys ended up being charged, and when the case went to trial in March 2013, the two were convicted of rape and sentenced to one to two years in prison.
The indictment says Deric Lostutter "knowingly and intentionally joined and voluntarily participated in a conspiracy" to "harass and intimidate and to gain publicity for their online identities," according to the Lexington Herald-Leader. "If convicted in the Kentucky case, Lostutter could face a maximum penalty of 16 years in prison (no more than five years on each of three counts, and one year on a fourth)..."
"The federal search warrant of Lostutter's home listed 'Guy Fawkes masks' among the items agents were looking for."
The indictment says Deric Lostutter "knowingly and intentionally joined and voluntarily participated in a conspiracy" to "harass and intimidate and to gain publicity for their online identities," according to the Lexington Herald-Leader. "If convicted in the Kentucky case, Lostutter could face a maximum penalty of 16 years in prison (no more than five years on each of three counts, and one year on a fourth)..."
"The federal search warrant of Lostutter's home listed 'Guy Fawkes masks' among the items agents were looking for."
3 years after collecting evidence?
What, was the Grand Jury out for coffee?
The sad thing is they're going for more time than the real offenders.
I say we tell the Kentucky US Attorney about more serious crimes that could be occurring in her jurisdiction. Ones that would be a better use of taxpayer monies.
But trying to get people to investigate it is 15 years?
15+ years for cybercrime vs 1-2 years for gang rape? Makes total sense...
15+ years for cybercrime vs 1-2 years for gang rape? Makes total sense...
Rape, like other violent crimes, is almost always prosecuted under state law. Don't like the sentence? Talk to your your state legislature. Risking a felony conviction under federal law? Never a good idea.
Maybe, just maybe this guy broke the law. But the law he broke is wrong, unconstitutional, and should be overturned.
Problem is, the guy needs a few $100k and the ability to stay in jail for a few years until this hits the supreme court.
One or two years for rape, 16 years for embarrassing politicians into taking action on said rape. The priories of our "justice" system never cease to amaze me.
Rape someone instead of getting the feds to investigate the rape. You'll be doing less time.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If the justice system fails to do what the public feels is "right", it usually leads to vigilantism.
And the amount of vigilantism I get to see in the US leads me to the conclusion that there is REALLY something going VERY wrong with it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The real point here is not what was done but the mistakes that were made. Admit nothing, deny nothing, the only answer, we will discuss this in court, and to ensure you do not get refused to answer all over the place, answer questions with questions, never answer questions just seek clarification of the questions, the motives of the questioners and the basis for the questions (when they claim you are not answering the claims, state clearly that you legally are answering those questions). What is happening here is those who did not want to prosecute the original case because the rapists were protected and the victim was a nobody, now want revenge. Note they waited until after the real criminal were released so their penalties could not be reviewed whilst they pursued greater penalties against those that exposed the corruption.
I actually think the prosecution is a scam, designed to bait individuals into playing 'Anonymous' and then targeting them, it's a trap. Otherwise why dredge it up three years later.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
They only got 1 to 2 years because they were 16 and 17 and were tried as juvenile (not adult) and so got only up to the point they reached adulthood. The other guy was 18+ at the time of the fact. This is the difference and explain everything.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
After The New York Times published an account [late in 2012] of a horrific rape against Alayna Macaluso in Steubenville, Ohio, an online vigilante campaign was started...the campaign targeted local officials who the vigilantes felt weren't prosecuting the rape investigation seriously because the alleged perpetrators were high school football players
In 2016, the vigilantes would have been given an imprimatur to destroy the town, as exemplified by the recent Stanford case.
The prevailing attitude at Stanford is that disputed consent only favors the woman, and that Turner's hometown must be made to pay for his actions.
If it was at a prestigious university, they'd not even need a rape case to destroy the person. Washington & Lee used Title IX to wreck someone's life.
The worst parts of it are that no crime occurred, that due process wasn't served, and that there was no legal charge - just straight intimidation.
"Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
But trying to get people to investigate it is 15 years?
1. Anonymous didn't "get people to investigate." This was a feature story in the New York Times, and subsequently spread across newspapers across the US.
2. Sixteen years is the maximum possible sentence, if the hacker were convicted on all counts and for some reason the judge gave them the maximum sentence and made the sentences consecutive. That's not the way real sentences happen. More likely, since it's a first offence on a non-violent crime, would be a short sentence of a few months at most, followed by probation. Check the sentencing guidelines here: http://www.sentencing.us/
3. The sentence for the rapists was relatively low because they were under juvenile sentencing guidelines. The law has an odd belief that when a crime is committed by somebody under 18, they should not be put in jail for decades.