At 05:46 PM 9/27/99 , John Gilmore wrote:
>[...]
>When sworn officers of the law and the courts violate the law with
>impunity, concealing their activities by making fraudulent statements
>under oath, and filing all incriminating information under seal, the
>law-abiding public cannot trust the jus
.us/CACJ.htm>.
It is worth noting that the actual number of telephones illegally
wiretapped exceeded the number reported by _more than an order of
magnitude_, according to the LA public defenders. One of those unreported
LA wiretaps ended up intercepting the calls of 130,000 LA residents
(with
The LA County Public Defender's Office has full information about their
case against the LAPD and LA Sheriff's Office up on the web at:
http://pd.co.la.ca.us/
It's particularly gruesome how the LAPD reported these wiretaps to the
Federal wiretap report, which cypherpunks and policy-maker
that lets prosecutors introduce computer
evidence (obtained, e.g., from wiretaps) without allowing defense
attorneys a chance to review its accuracy or to cross-examine the
prosecution's experts.
In my view, the LA wiretaps are yet another example of why we need
_more_ scrutiny in the courtroom, not le
