Comments on: Police blotter: Trojan horse leads to porn convictions

In this week's installment, judge upholds conviction instigated by a hacker who reported incriminating files.

[pjester]

Trojan Horse

Nice work!

[mjd420nova]

Nothing to hide

I have no sympathy for these scumbags. It's the same as the feds listening to phone calls. If you are not engaged in anything illegal, then whats to worry about?? The individuals have got to learn one way or another. I don't care how the information is procurred, if it's against the law, then you are guilty and should be prosecuted and tossed in jail. I am a law abiding citizen and have nothing to hide. Let them look and listen, it's the only way we have to protect ourselves, our nation and the liberties we enjoy. If you violate that trust then you deserve what you get.

[Macsaresafer]

What's illegal?

I have no sympathy for them either, but these things don't apply
to just the 'guilty.' The worry is that people using these tactics to
go after real criminals like pedophiles might use the same
tactics to go after people whose politics they don't agree with.
That's a valid concern, but as I've said in a previous post, results
are what matter.

When a defendant doesn't dispute the validity of the evidence,
but only whether or not it was legally obtained, we all lose if
they're able to have it excluded. I don't want to give law
enforcement a free ride, but the primary responsibility of any
justice system is to set the innocent free and convict the guilty,
and our system isn't doing that.

If a defendant doesn't at least make a reasonable claim that
evidence is inaccurate or false, it should be considered. The
penalties for civil rights violations by police shouldn't be paid by
society. They should be paid by the police. Most professionals
have to maintain Errors and Omissions Insurance, I don't see
why the police should be any different.

[CeeAyy]

Emotional...

You are reacting to this emotionally. The point is not, what do
you have to hide... What is more important, the law or the
results? I would like to be free from unreasonable searches. I
don't want anyone listening to my phone calls or looking into my
windows. I don't want to have to answer for my actions at the
WHIM of anyone. If you have reasonable suspicion that's one
thing. If you have a mere hunch, don't try to force me to do
anything. If you have probable cause, then arrest me.

Also, you are advocating an end to privacy. That is definitely
"unamerican". Ben Franklin once said that anyone who would
trade security for freedom doesn't deserve either. (loose quote)
The values and ideas of our country are more important than
anyone's life. Either you respect the Constitution or you believe
that the ends justify the means. I believe in law and due process.
I don't believe in a wild west mentality. If we don't have rules and
law we don't have a society, or rather, a civilized society.

Lastly... you can't enjoy liberties if you give them up for
protection. It doesn't work that way.

[qwerty75]

Ironic

We have to take away liberties because it is "the only way we have to protect ourselves, our nation and the liberties we enjoy." ???????

Exhibt A on the failure of the american education system: mjd420nova

If a scumbag has no rights, you have no rights.

[Brandon Bartelds]

You Must Trust Everyone

The issue is with a regular person (not a higher authority) looking at this information. By your assumption, either you truely have nothing to hide, including credit card number, or banking information, or you are forgetting that there are a lot of criminals out there. You are going to allow laws permitting hackers to access your computer in hopes that they are only going to scan for illegal activities of another nature?

I have mentioned before...I think if you submit something to AOL and they release it, i'm sorry, but you searched it, it's public. But things that I keep to myself such as financial information, I'll share with my bank because they have promised to keep it secret, heck, i have nothing to hide and i'll share all information on my computer with a government of police authority, but I would never permit a regular citizen that I did not know, to go onto my computer to ease their minds of my innocence.

Every hacker out there would claim they were searching for kiddie porn if they got busted. It would become as ridiculous as the insanity plea.

[bemenaker]

How is this legal

How can the court make the distinction that because this guy is outside the US the rules don't apply. The evidence, and where it was obtained were all inside the US. Regardless, of whether it was in the US or not, it was tried in US courts. I want child molestors and child porn purveyors dealt with as much as the next guy, but not at the cost of the Constitution. ***?

[Macsaresafer]

Simple, really.

The reason for a presumption of innocence is that the state has,
in theory, unlimited resources to bring to bear against a
defendant. If it were acceptable for the police to collect evidence
using the techniques used by 1069, that would be unacceptable
because we don't want the police going on fishing expeditions,
where they might ensare innocent people along with the guilty.
Individual people how ever, don't have infinite resources, and so
when they present evidence to the police, however obtained, this
provides probable cause to begin an investigation.

If an individual breaks into a home to rob it, but finds evidence
that the owner committed a murder, shouldn't the police be free
to use that evidence if the individual provides it to them? We can
all agree that the burglar should be held responsible for his/her
crime, but why not the murderer too? In this case, the alleged
burglar is outside US jurisdiction, so there's nothing they could
do, even if they believed 1069 had stolen from the pedophile.
Since it is illegal to own child pornography, it can't be stolen
from you. You have to have the legal right to possess something
for that to happen. Just try to have someone arrested for
stealing crack from you. You'd both end up in jail for
possession, not theft!

[gerardogerardo80]

Crime is a cash machine for lawyers and politicians.

If you feel criminals have too many rights, just follow the money is the golden rule.

Our revolving crime is because there is no sincere desire of ending it. They just want to keep it profitable, can't grow to become anarchy but plenty to sell alarm systems, to ask for larger police budgets, more salary and benefits, job security for judges. When was the last time you saw a judge laid off at the EDD unemployment line?.
Many of the expensive Mercedes and BMW are diven at the expense of victims tears, I mean you and me.

It make sense to protect the criminals, if we were to run out of them, all this lavish and sofisticated legal system that we proudly claim the best in the universe, it is just average.

New York or Los Angeles are not safer than Mexico City. Montreal is as safe as Albuquerque. We are richer true not safer thanks to our legal system, that is very selective when it comes to enforcement, we have law in the books that are just pure decoration.

The images given by Hollywood like Perry Mason etc are just pure fiction. Fresh are still in my mind the debacle of 1992 when Los Angeles, Chief of Police Daryl Gates and Mayor Tom Bradley failed to potect the city and caused misery and destruction. This is the real face of my side of the country a burning city.

After 14 years still a mess, we have a Mayor that looks like one of the Los Bandidos de Rio Frio
( Classical Mexican Novel The Bandits of Cold River ). I am a latino, but pray the Lord to protect you if you are in the hands of a hispanic politician and it gets ugly if it is from the left.
Still a very nice place but if we were to love the country a little more, and ourselves a little less if not perfect could be a little to closer heaven.

[ap21986]

why should you worry if you have nothing to hide...

At the end of the day if this guy isnt taking anyones money or revealing details to anyone else why should he not carry on his tirade against peado's... my personal opinion is that every convicted peadophile who has been either caught in the act or knowingly had "relations" with a child under the age of 10 should be spaid (have genitals chopped off didnt know if you use this word in america) between 10 and 16 it can become confusing because young girls especially look older and older everyday... Yes this "Hack" could be used to make him alot of money but this is an entirely different matter... i think police should be able to do this and i believe it is done thru out europe except for the states and the UK... we have had peadophilia related convictions soar and something needs to be done this guy maybe something of a batman doing the right thing the wrong way....

[wbenton]

Reporting a crime should not be an offense

It sounds like the bad guys want to make the messengers of worthy news to pay for turning evidence against them in a crime.

Is it illegal to report a crime?

Then what's all the bruhaha about here?

Somebody somewhere stumbles on something illegal and reports it... where's the problem?

Walt

[Brandon Bartelds]

Perhaps Because they ALSO committed a crime.

Basically your mentality is that if you can point to a larger crime, you should no longer be charged. It's been done in the past, and that's what the article is talking about, but I don't agree with it. Nail them all. Not a single one of those people should go unpunished, no matter how important the one criminal was in finding the evidence for the other.

A good example would be up in Canada the Paul Bernardo / Carla Hamolka (sp?) case. You can search it online, since they were pretty sick serial killers. Anyways, point being that Carla works out a deal to provide evidence against Paul for killing teenage girls in exchange for her freedom (or lesser charge at least). Cops agree, and then find video tapes of the killings, showing that Carla was involved in killing her own teenage sister.

So, since Carla killed one person, Paul killed several, since the worse criminal is off the streets, all is good, even though Carla is now out living free cause she served her short sentence.

Everyone who does a crime should be punished, not just the worst offender. The pedos should go to jail, and so should the hacker. He is not innocent at all.

Now C

[andocrates]

.

Did you even read the story?

[bknowledge]

Criminal must pay!!

If you break into a building to steal and happen to prevent a murder in the process you are still a thief and should be charged as such but saving a live should count in your sentencing hearing. What unknown user 1069 did is a crime in almost 90% of countries around the world and should have been treated as such. They were able to find the evidence on those individual?s PC?s but what is to stop someone else from planting information on the PC of someone they don?t like or for financial gain from their activities.
But bringing those two perverted individual to justice and stopping the further abuse of children by them or at their request should have and must be taken into account at Unknown user?s sentencing and most likely they would have had to serve it doing community service and paying a fine.

[waterspider]

Give me a break

19 years for posession of an image? How draconian is that? Being a pedophile does NOT automatically make one a child molester. It can be argued that CP actually helps people afflicted with this orientation find some releif without actually acting on their desires. It is possible to obtain these images without producing, buying or sharing it. So where is the harm in that I ask. This is a first amendment issue and bordering on a thought crime. People should be punished for their actions, not their thoughts or orientation. That illegally obtained evidence is allowed in this case bodes ill for everyones freedom. Someday the forces of sexual repression will come for you too. Think about it before your so quick to condem people different from you.

[MrTreize]

Rediculous

There should be some punishment for child abuse but nearly 20 years for the mere possession of a photograph is truly barbaric. Even if it is the photo pf a child. I am not for collecting nor photographing children but if those guys merely possesed the picture, where is the monster that actually took it? Another thing I am afraid of is this unknown whistle-blower that was the key to the convictions. He has already displayed knowledge and skill hacking into a person's computer, how are we to know he did not place the evidence there himself out of revenge or for profit? It is illegal to have a number of things onyour computer in your posession such as pirated software, pirated music, and government secrets. It is also illegal to hack into a persons computer. I care about the welfare of people, but I care about their privacy more. If the government cannot enter a persons house without a warrant granted for suspicion, then how is it that the information a person who admits to committing a felony by hacking a computer can be trusted? Can the information provided be trusted as accurate? Aren't there laws that state that there must be unquestionable proof? How can you convict a person if the proof in question is coincidental from an admitted criminal.

[Deathbringer]

Elephant tusk

ITs like an elephant tusk, buy your buying it you create a market for it. This person, if he really was collecting these photos, should be put in jail for the rest of his life. Or better yet have his image posted across the worlds so there is no where he could hide.

[Macsaresafer]

Nobody hacked INTO his computer!

He downloaded an illegal file. That file then hacked its way OUT
of his computer. If he hadn't committed the crime in the first
place, he wouldn't have any worries about his privacy.

I saw one of those reality cop shows recently where the cops left
a new bicycle on the street and watched it. When somebody took
it, they got arrested, including a search. If that search turned up
drugs or other contraband, it meant more charges. If you
download an illegal file, you should expect to be searched. You
should expect to be charged with each crime you've committed.
If you value your privacy you shouldn't commit crimes, since I
don't imagine prison allows you much privacy.

As for the punishment, he's done a lot more than just download
a picture. He's ensured that more children will be abused, and
those kids will have to live with that for the rest of their lives,
not a mere 20 years.

[Deathbringer]

Strange

Anyone think that this hacker might have been the one to put the child porn on this guys computer? It was a hacker after all. Did anyone question that fact?

[ferretboy88]

Wait a minute

What if a person hacked into a persons computer and found away
to install the child porn. He or she could then inform the police and
then fame a innocent man. I'm glad I use linux and mac computers.
Its a lot safer than windows pcs. I think only the police should do
this things. I am glad a scumbag is in jail though.

[old.ace]

Well...

Considering that the virus/trojan horse was initially put on a user group alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.pre-teen; one can only assume that the felon had to go to a user group where illegal activities were taking place anyway

[estrin59]

Browser hijackers lead to conviction

I would like to send you some links to publications about my criminal
case. I was forced to confess to the
possession of child porn. My browser was hijacked while I was browsing
the web. I was redirected to illegal sites against my will. Some
illegal pictures were found on my hard drive, recovering in
unallocated clusters, without dates of file creation/download.

I do not know how courts can widely press these charges on people to
convict them, while the whole Internet is a mess.

This is my story in inquisition21.com. There is all
information about case written by Irish writer Brian
Rothery.

http://www.inquisition21.com/article~view~7~page_num~3.html

This is publication in Wired news

http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,63391,00.html

This is publication in Theregester

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/13/browser_hijacking_risks/

Article in Globe and Mail newspaper
http://ctv.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040617.gttwhijac17/tech/Technology/techBN/ctv-technology

Article in ZDnet
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105_2-5344831.html

This is article in Washington Times, May 22, 2004
There is information about my case.

http://www.cato.org/cgi-bin/scripts/printtech.cgi/dailys/05-30-04.html

Article in Crime research center:

http://www.crime-research.org/news/07.22.2004/506/

Article in Dallas, TX Newspaper

http://www.crime-research.org/news/24.12.2004/862/

Child porn law was declared unconstitutional in Hennepin County, Minnesota, USA'
http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=11750


"I came here to the US as political refugee from the former Soviet
Union, and, now like many other people in the US, I feel shame that
all of this can happen in the US ? supposed to be the greatest
democracy in the world."

[Steve580]

Because *that* works so well...

You're not operating in the real world, though. You can't cut demand by outlawing the deed; the "War on Drugs" proves that manifestly.

As for illegal immigrants: our economy would take a severe it were they all deported, so no, I don't think they should be arrested. I support open immigration.