Slashdot Mirror


NSA Contractor Indicted Over Mammoth Theft of Classified Data (reuters.com)

Dustin Volz, reporting for Reuters: A former National Security Agency contractor was indicted on Wednesday by a federal grand jury on charges he willfully retained national defense information, in what U.S. officials have said may have been the largest heist of classified government information in history. The indictment alleges that Harold Thomas Martin, 52, spent up to 20 years stealing highly sensitive government material from the U.S. intelligence community related to national defense, collecting a trove of secrets he hoarded at his home in Glen Burnie, Maryland. The government has not said what, if anything, Martin did with the stolen data. Martin faces 20 criminal counts, each punishable by up to 10 years in prison, the Justice Department said. "For as long as two decades, Harold Martin flagrantly abused the trust placed in him by the government," said U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein.

4 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Museum of Natural History contractor indicted over theft of classified mammoth data

  2. Re:Double standard by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 5, Informative

    IANAL, but in terms of the law as written, you're correct that intent doesn't matter. In terms of how the law has been applied, it does - and this matters to some degree, because the U.S. is part of the English legal tradition, rather than the French/Napoleonic (with the exception of Louisiana state law).
    More specifically, if you look back over the case law for this, people generally get prosecuted if:
    A) They get caught lying to the investigators
    B) Had the intent to steal, whether for profit or ideology
    To date, no one has been prosecuted without one of those two, or without prosecutors alleging one of those two. When I was in the military, I saw several cases where someone screwed up and put classified material on a system that wasn't rated for it, including email. Investigations were conducted, servers were purged, and those responsible got a slap on the wrist and a note in their file for committing a security violation (if you get enough of those, you lose your clearance). This is why Comey said what he did - cases like Clinton's result in administrative punishment at most, and the worst penalty was loss of clearance and thus job (which didn't apply anymore for her because she was no longer Secretary of State).

    In the case of this guy, likely the Prosecutors feel they have enough evidence to allege that he was trying to sell the data, probably based on his pattern of conduct, and probably also because those selfsame tools showed up for sale on the internet.

  3. Re:Barbarism is the the genes by nospam007 · · Score: 1, Informative

    "Genetically muslims are largely of Negro ancestry."

    Science taught us, that _all_ humans are largely of Negro ancestry, including your racist ass.

  4. Re:Double standard by dmiller1984 · · Score: 3, Informative

    That guy purposefully destroyed evidence after a 2012 interview with the FBI. I imagine that is what led to the jail sentence.