Uncle Sam outlines evidence against British security whiz Hutchins Court documents filed Wednesday in the trial of British security expert and accused malware writer Marcus Hutchins have outlined the very limited evidence the US government is willing to throw at the case. Hutchins came into the limelight after crippling the WannaCry ransomware attack earlier this year. He came over to the US …
I'm willing to bet you'd be pissed if someone broke into your house and damaged a lot of your things. I'll even go out on the limb here, and think you'd want this person thrown in jail. Maybe have 10 minutes alone with him in a room to show his nose the bottom of your shoe with a bit of force?
Even the fact there are many criminals out there, all using tools and knowledge gained from other people. You may even want to go after those who knowingly purchased the goods stolen from your house.
Just a guess tho.
I'm willing to bet you'd be pissed if someone broke into your house and damaged a lot of your things.
He didn't "break into their house". A more appropriate analogy would be a friend asked you to look at their car (computer, TV, cat, whatever) because it wasn't working right, and you found someone had tampered with it and added an extra bit of hardware (software/transceiver/DNA etc) for some unknown purpose. Knowing that "thing" didn't belong, you removed it.
You then let others know there's someone wandering around the neighbourhood interfering with pussies, and you tell people how they can stop their pussy from becoming infected.
His 6th amendment rights weren't violated.
In this case, Hutchins was given his Miranda Rights and he decided to answer questions without a lawyer present. All legal. It's also legal to use his answers in court, as long as he was provided Miranda. Again, he chose to answer questions without his lawyer present.
He wasn't questioned for 24 straight hours. He was never under duress. Good grief, do you dream this crap up? If this was the case, the US media would be all over it because he would be screaming about it.
He can refuse to answer any questions and end questioning at any time so he can consult a lawyer.
He's being afforded a quick and speedy trial; however, Hutchins' lawyer asked for a 60 day continuance. He will have a jury in court and only has to convince one of them he is not guilty.
In court, he has every opportunity to call witnesses. It's likely his attorney will ask for more time in order to gather them.
...so I don't want people yelling about Hutchins not being afforded a speedy trial, when it's his lawyer who will likely draw it out.
Spot the Yank...
So, a man is arrested at an airport and questioned repeatedly by Police. And he's not under any duress? Are Americans suffering some form of collective stupidity or is it desperation to deflect from the realisation that the rest of the world increasingly views America as an aggressive bully?
"the realisation that the rest of the world increasingly views America as an aggressive bully?"Some are slow on the uptake... The United States accused Habib of many crimes that he confessed to under torture over a period of three years. There was never any evidence to support US claims and Habib was eventually released without charges in January 2005.
Law enforcement seem to be the same all round the world. I found some unpleasant porn on a school principal's PC and reported it. Turns out is was nastier than the image that I saw as the wallopers came and server a Search Warrant on me and they were quite nasty for some time. There was a distinct change in attitude and tone and I assume that was when they came to the conclusion that I didn't possess any child porn in my electronic devices. The bastards still took my laptop, PC and plethora of storage sticks away and told me I could pick them up in 3 to 4 months. Phone their building the following week and was told they weren't going to forensics and I could come and pick them up. Shame the PC wouldn't work but hey, "that's not our responsibility".
You are deemed guilty by them until you prove yourself innocent. I fear for Marcus.
hum, you must have missed the part where the OP was the one who found the image. no need to call him lucky.
seems like common sense not to unduly screw over people reporting child porn, no? if you want to keep on getting infractions reported, that is.
maybe a quick forensic imaging of their electronics to make sure they're not setting someone up, but definitely make it painless as possible.
glad Hutchins didn't follow advice, cited here, to roll over and plead guilty to lesser charges. he's either proved guilty of Kronos (and should burn if so). or he should walk entirely free. this trial deserves all the sunlight it can get - both for his sake and the FBIs behavior and reputation. best of luck to him.
From the actual document (hey, am I the only one who actually read it?):
"To date, the defendant has provided the defense with the following:
- 1 CD with post arrest statements
- CD with 2 audio recordings from the county jail in Nevada. (The government is awaiting a written transcript from the FBI.)"
Is that a typo or was it really the defendant that requested these be included in the evidence?
In which case I'd assume that they consist of him trying to tell them they got the wrong guy... Like, for example, explaining why his code ended up in the trojan in question.
Even if not and it's actually a typo (quite a critical one in the wrong context!) interrogations generally end up in the case evidence/discovery regardless of whether they are incriminating or not (or even if they consist of responding "No comment" to everything, in countries where you don't have the right to refuse questioning outright).
Or maybe they think they can prove his answers wrong at a latter time, etc.
Even if not and it's actually a typo (quite a critical one in the wrong context!) interrogations generally end up in the case evidence/discovery regardless of whether they are incriminating or not
They also love to play with "soundbites" during hearings. "We asked the client if he stole the cars, and you can hear him clearly say he did [plays tape] {victim} 'Yes, I did' [stops tape] So you can see the defendant is clearly guilty".
Whereas the full tape would be "Yes, I did attend secondary school".
(Ok, this is starting to sound like I have a bit of a grudge against lying scumbagscoppers!)
"Ok, this is starting to sound like I have a bit of a grudge against lyingQuite understandable. I wish I could say otherwise, but my son was treated by them very badly. Never charged with anything after I was told by a detective that I would be utterly disgusted by what he'd done when he was charged. Eventually I received an abject apology from the chief detective who told me there was no evidence that The Gitling had been anything other than an exemplary citizen.scumbagscoppers!"
I am afraid it isn't just in the US. I was speaking to a member here that doesn't have a member. That memberless member told me that Shawnigan Lake is south of here. It is 30 kilometres north northwest of the station. South that far is 26 kilometres in the ocean. Then I spoke to the Watch Commander about how I could possibly pin down the IP address actual location address of a criminal with a fair degree of accuracy. He gave me a virtual blank stare.
My IP is intentionally difficult to pin down but I can still get it to about 7 km. It is in the same jurisdiction.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
