There were excerpts in the Wired article, and there are more in the court record - I'll see if I can find the link in my browser history. Quite interesting reading, actually...
On 5/3/10, J Roger <securityho...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I can see that you have no experience with the legal system other than >> what you've seen on TV (which is, to say, none at all). >> > > I know this is the Internet but you don't need to be quite so rude. Perhaps > I just haven't been arrested (caught) as many times as you have. > > If you read >> the IRC logs presented by the prosecution, it is pretty clear what the >> motive was. >> > > I have not seen these IRC logs. Have you? Could you provide a reference for > them please? > > > JRoger > > On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Ed Carp <e...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> I can see that you have no experience with the legal system other than >> what you've seen on TV (which is, to say, none at all). If you read >> the IRC logs presented by the prosecution, it is pretty clear what the >> motive was. Your "release it to the public and you have no liability" >> argument will land you in prison if you try it - go to any attorney >> and ask. Your emotional "prove Stephen is a saint" attempt at >> twisting what happens in the legal system doesn't change the FACT that >> the burden of proof was easily met by the prosecution and that the >> defense's arguments, while designed to sway people more used to >> emotional appeals than logic, did little to impress the court, with >> very predictable results. >> > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
