Xref: utzoo alt.security:1460 alt.folklore.computers:4931 comp.society.futures:2075
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!jik
From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Newsgroups: alt.security,alt.folklore.computers,comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Re: Feedback on Computer Crime - Apology
Message-ID: <1990Aug28.174333.22132@athena.mit.edu>
Date: 28 Aug 90 17:43:33 GMT
References: <19375@ttidca.TTI.COM> <1990Aug25.095033.29589@funet.fi> <1990Aug27.194144.10910@cbnewsl.att.com> <1990Aug28.161459.11497@ctr.columbia.edu>
Sender: daemon@athena.mit.edu (Mr Background)
Reply-To: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Lines: 39

In article <1990Aug28.161459.11497@ctr.columbia.edu>, mokry@ctr.columbia.edu (Robert Mokry) writes:
|> In article <1990Aug27.194144.10910@cbnewsl.att.com> arrizzo@cbnewsl.att.com (anthony.r.rizzo) writes:
|> >2)  You did not try to access the machine.
|> 
|> We don't really know if you didn't do it intentionally, and then posted this
|> note in order to prove that you did it unintentionally.

  Remember "innocent until proven guilty?"  If the defense states that the
access to the machine was unintentional, and it is necessary for the access to
have been intentional in order for a crime to have been committed, then it is
up to the prosecution to prove that the access was intentional.  If the
defense says, "I typed a wrong address by mistake," and the prosecution can't
prove otherwise, then the prosecution has not mistake, especially all the
defendant did was connect and then disconnect.

|> >3)  Connecting to the wrong node was a genuine mistake,
|> >    which you corrected by typing ^D.
|> 
|> What sort of statement is ^D?  Try explaining that to the judge.  ("Well,
|> your honor, first you hold down the control key and then you press the D
|> key, and no you don't let go of the control key till you've pressed the
|> D key, and no the D key doesn't need to be upper case so you don't need
|> to press the shift key at the same time, though I don't think it would
|> make any difference if you did so.")
|> ...

  This is a red herring.  If the judge is incapable of understanding the
relatively simple principles involved ("There is a standard character which is
used to signal to the other end of a remote connection that you wish to
disconnect from that connection.  The defendant typed that character as soon
as he realized that he had connected to the wrong machine, and his connection
was ended."), then the defendant is not getting a fair trial, and a good
lawyer should be able to use that as the basis for an appeal, if the defendant
is found guilty by that judge.

Jonathan Kamens			              USnail:
MIT Project Athena				11 Ashford Terrace
jik@Athena.MIT.EDU				Allston, MA  02134
Office: 617-253-8495			      Home: 617-782-0710