Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Political Blind Spot)   Steubenville hacker faces 10 years in prison, Steubenville rapist is already out of juvenile detention   (politicalblindspot.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Steubenville, juvenile detention, rapists, convicts, Deric Lostutter, Steubenville High School  
•       •       •

8790 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jan 2014 at 10:29 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



195 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-01-14 10:50:08 AM  

pueblonative: Steubenville hacker faces up to 10 years in prison, Steubenville rapist is already out of juvenile detention

FTFS.

Sentencing guidelines; how do they motherfarking work?


Also he hasn't even been indicted yet has he?
 
2014-01-14 10:51:01 AM  

Lucky LaRue: doglover: EyeballKid: Lucky LaRue: I don't see how anyone can be upset that a criminal is getting punished.

You can do better than this to get attention, can't you?

He really can't.

You take things entirely too seriously.  How does this kid's fate - whether he walks away scott-free or goes to jail for the rest of his life - effect you in the slightest?


Wow. You get stupider and stupider as the thread goes on.
 
2014-01-14 10:51:17 AM  

Target Builder: ReverendJasen: James!: The hacker was over 18 and the rapist was under 18.  18 is the magical line of responsibility for your actions.

Unless you're black.  Then you get tried as an adult because you're such a risk to society.

Unless you're a star football player.


Marcus Dixon disagrees

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Dixon
 
2014-01-14 10:53:32 AM  

Speaker2Animals: I think if they really tried, they could have shoehorned more ads to break up the copy on that story. There actually were some spots where there were two or three paragraphs together!


You amuse me.
 
2014-01-14 10:54:02 AM  

DubtodaIll: pueblonative: Steubenville hacker faces up to 10 years in prison, Steubenville rapist is already out of juvenile detention

FTFS.

Sentencing guidelines; how do they motherfarking work?

Also he hasn't even been indicted yet has he?


Nope.  Apparently his attention whoring has started to piss off anonymous for some odd reason.
 
2014-01-14 10:54:20 AM  

Lucky LaRue: Maybe, but I wonder if we (collectively) would say the same thing about the people that hacked Target and exposed the financial/personal information of 70 million people.  Do they deserve something less than 10 years?  The difference here is not in the crime, but in the outcome.  I am not particularly interested in having a body of laws that differentiates on outcome - if the judge chooses to do that, then fine, but let's keep the laws fair and balanced.


I could take something back to Target and hand them my CC or a receipt and they would refund the card more than a decade ago.  I've played in the IT security game and to me that says they were keeping the whole credit card number.  That is a risk and now someone has played it.  The law doesn't apply when there are software errors.  Maybe they had their database encrypted but if you have the key to say "This is Sam's card, please encrypted it and put it in the database", you also have the key to decrypt it.  The only way not to lose the card to hackers in the long term is to not to store it.
 
2014-01-14 10:55:44 AM  

Lucky LaRue: QueenMamaBee: Lucky LaRue: html_007: Lucky LaRue: I don't see how anyone can be upset that a criminal is getting punished.

I see your point he broke the law.  I'm not saying he shouldn't be punished but damn 10 years?  That is a case of the punishment not fitting the crime.

Maybe, but I wonder if we (collectively) would say the same thing about the people that hacked Target and exposed the financial/personal information of 70 million people.  Do they deserve something less than 10 years?  The difference here is not in the crime, but in the outcome.  I am not particularly interested in having a body of laws that differentiates on outcome - if the judge chooses to do that, then fine, but let's keep the laws fair and balanced.

There's a huge difference in hacking into texts and pictures and hacking into financial information

I dunno - I can easily imagine situation where hacking texts and pictures could be just as damaging as hacking financial information.  And, again, I think the place for making the differentiation on what is a "serious" breach of the law and what isn't belongs in the courtroom, with the judge.  Our laws are already insanely complex; I can't imagine what they would look like if we tried to spell out that differentiation in the code itself.


We totally need a judge to determine if the social or legal damages done by this guy (aka exposing rapists and associates) is analagous to the financial damages done by completing your 2013 Christmas shopping at Target.
 
2014-01-14 10:56:52 AM  

The Muthaship: alice_600: Still illegally obtained and can't be used

See Mapp v. Ohio and Burdeau v. McDowell.


See: law, modern.

Just because one trial went one way doesn't mean all trials will always go that way this is a case by case basis. Law is written and been solidified since Snowden because of Snowden.
 
2014-01-14 10:57:36 AM  

Lucky LaRue: html_007: Lucky LaRue: I don't see how anyone can be upset that a criminal is getting punished.

I see your point he broke the law.  I'm not saying he shouldn't be punished but damn 10 years?  That is a case of the punishment not fitting the crime.

Maybe, but I wonder if we (collectively) would say the same thing about the people that hacked Target and exposed the financial/personal information of 70 million people.  Do they deserve something less than 10 years?  The difference here is not in the crime, but in the outcome.  I am not particularly interested in having a body of laws that differentiates on outcome - if the judge chooses to do that, then fine, but let's keep the laws fair and balanced.


If we can't make a distinction between someone trying to expose a serious crime that is being covered up and bulk identity theft than we are no better than the idiotic zero tolerance school administrations that get so much love around here.

So if I attack someone who is actively raping another person my legal standing should be the same is if I was just trying to take their wallet?  Is that what you're suggesting?
 
2014-01-14 10:57:36 AM  
Target has cc info. for 90 days only, then it's forever gone.

/worked the return desk for four years
 
2014-01-14 10:57:41 AM  
That some of the rapists have gotten out as soon as they have is indeed a travesty, but does that absolve the hacker of his own crimes? I'm not so sure I can honestly say that it does.
 
2014-01-14 10:58:28 AM  

alice_600: See: law, modern.


You have a cite that discusses this profound change to the exclusionary rule?

I can't find one, but I haven't practiced in 15 years....
 
2014-01-14 10:59:13 AM  
What a Steubenville Court mike look like.

www.dba-oracle.com

"Now, y'see, yew kin git a little bit of that ole poonie, yessir, h'aint nothing
wrong with that, we just let that slide.  Silly girl shoulda knew better,ah
reckon, boys'll be boys an all, but yew done started messin around with
dang olecomputers and such and lemme tell ya whut, bwah, yer goin' ta JAIL!"
 
2014-01-14 10:59:18 AM  

Lucky LaRue: I don't see how anyone can be upset that a criminal is getting punished.


i.canvasugc.com
 
2014-01-14 10:59:22 AM  

Millennium: That some of the rapists have gotten out as soon as they have is indeed a travesty, but does that absolve the hacker of his own crimes? I'm not so sure I can honestly say that it does.


I think he deserves a slap on the wrist...like a literal slap on the wrist.
 
2014-01-14 11:01:33 AM  
The hacker should be covered under the whistle blowers exception because he uncovered a cover up by the school.
 
2014-01-14 11:03:24 AM  

Gordon Bennett: Lucky LaRue: I don't see how anyone can be upset that a criminal is getting punished.

[i.canvasugc.com image 607x800]


Just because you get replies doesn't mean you were a successful troll.
 
2014-01-14 11:03:39 AM  

elysive: Millennium: That some of the rapists have gotten out as soon as they have is indeed a travesty, but does that absolve the hacker of his own crimes? I'm not so sure I can honestly say that it does.

I think he deserves a slap on the wrist...like a literal slap on the wrist.


Publicly.  There should be a big to-do.  Slap him in irons, haul him to the town square, bring out the state slapsecutioner (ideally the most feared nun at the local Catholic school), and in full sight of everyone... *thwack*.

You know, as a warning to others.
 
2014-01-14 11:04:03 AM  
The Richomond family, following the release,which focused on how hard the past 16 months have been for MaLik

won't someone PLEASE think of the football players!
 
2014-01-14 11:04:45 AM  

Thisbymaster: The hacker should be covered under the whistle blowers exception because he uncovered a cover up by the school.


And then he should have a farking parade.
 
2014-01-14 11:05:14 AM  

CapeFearCadaver: I think something crawled up Lucky's ass last week and died and the petrifaction is causing his brain to hemorrhage.

Or something.

James!: The hacker was over 18 and the rapist was under 18.  18 is the magical line of responsibility for your actions.

Have you watched PBS' Brains on Trial with Alan Alda?


One presumes that there would actually have to be a brain present. Not the case here.
 
2014-01-14 11:05:39 AM  
Yes and having an ounce of crack on your person will get you infinite more jail time than laundering hundreds of billions of dollars for terrorists and drug cartels.
 
2014-01-14 11:06:14 AM  
Oh, there's this:

www.eff.org

...Because everything is 100x worse if you do it over computer. Now it surprises me that a Subenville person can use a computer, maybe it's just a sentence for witchcraft?

us.cdn2.123rf.com
 
2014-01-14 11:06:35 AM  

The Muthaship: alice_600: See: law, modern.

You have a cite that discusses this profound change to the exclusionary rule?

I can't find one, but I haven't practiced in 15 years....


There is anecdotal evidence as to the prevalence of the "hey, meet me for lunch and we'll decide what's gonna happen here and f*ck what they want" rule, but I've never actually seen a meeting.
 
2014-01-14 11:06:37 AM  

Lucky LaRue: html_007: Lucky LaRue:  I am not particularly interested in having a body of laws that differentiates on outcome - if the judge chooses to do that, then fine, but let's keep the laws fair and balanced.


By that "logic" a drunk driver who gets pulled over should face the same penalty as a drunk driver that causes a wreck that kills an infinite number of pretty white girls.  Outcomes matter in court because outcomes matter in real life.
 
2014-01-14 11:07:16 AM  

Thisbymaster: The hacker should be covered under the whistle blowers exception because he uncovered a cover up by the school.


A few things: 1) Whistle blowers have to come from inside an organization and 2) Whistle blowers cannot break the law in the course of blowing the whistle.
 
2014-01-14 11:08:31 AM  

Maud Dib: One presumes that there would actually have to be a brain present. Not the case here.


Alan Alda or Lucky?
 
2014-01-14 11:08:36 AM  

Thisbymaster: The hacker should be covered under the whistle blowers exception because he uncovered a cover up by the school.


Okay, just point out the section of the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Fraud_and_Abuse_Act  that exempts AW "whistleblowers" who may not even have been on the original leak in the first place?
 
2014-01-14 11:08:51 AM  

bunner: I've never actually seen a meeting.


Oh, I've been to several of those.....
 
2014-01-14 11:09:13 AM  

Lost Thought 00: Yes and having an ounce of crack on your person will get you infinite more jail time than laundering hundreds of billions of dollars for terrorists and drug cartels.


Well, see, that crack money stays in the ghetto.  All that high finance stuff goes to the people who matter.  I'm pretty sure anything you do that moves more than 10,000,000.00 upchain is "legal".
 
2014-01-14 11:10:20 AM  

The Muthaship: bunner: I've never actually seen a meeting.

Oh, I've been to several of those.....


And there it is.  Quod Erat Demonstratum
 
2014-01-14 11:12:26 AM  

James!: The hacker was over 18 and the rapist was under 18.  18 is the magical line of responsibility for your actions.


18 is far from the magical line:    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/juvenile/stats/states.h t ml
 
2014-01-14 11:12:41 AM  
I have an idea.

Let's make a blanket "Don't be a sh*bag" law.

The metrics for infraction and prosecution will be arbitrated by a nice granny lady who makes pies and sweaters and grow roses.

It can't work any worse.
 
2014-01-14 11:14:03 AM  

Thisbymaster: The hacker should be covered under the whistle blowers exception because he uncovered a cover up by the school.


I think the problem is that you don't know the definition of what a "whistleblower" is. He isn't a whistleblower.
 
2014-01-14 11:15:40 AM  

The Muthaship: alice_600: Remember:

If you steal evidence it can't be used in court.

Not really the case.

Unless the person is acting on behalf of the government when they illegally obtain the evidence, it can usually be used.


I remember a fark story where a guy broke into a house to rob it and discovered evidence of a murder IIRC and gave it to the police.
 
2014-01-14 11:19:19 AM  

groppet: The Muthaship: alice_600: Remember:

If you steal evidence it can't be used in court.

Not really the case.

Unless the person is acting on behalf of the government when they illegally obtain the evidence, it can usually be used.

I remember a fark story where a guy broke into a house to rob it and discovered evidence of a murder IIRC and gave it to the police.


And the government can say "He didn't act on our behalf,"
 
2014-01-14 11:19:45 AM  
I got about 20 comments in before I threw in the potato and gave up.

/thnx for setting the tone, boobies (and I wasn't filter pwnd)
 
2014-01-14 11:20:44 AM  
You kinda lose the anonymous bit when you tattoo the farking symbol on your forearm.  "Find the anonymous hacker in the room." "ROLL UP YOUR SLEEVES!  Annnnnd done."

/Hacktivists are a joke
//Kinda like the people who participate in Middle East 'riot' threads and feel like they're helping by spamming unconfirmed tweets as fact
///And the media
 
2014-01-14 11:21:10 AM  

Thisbymaster: The hacker should be covered under the whistle blowers exception because he uncovered a cover up by the school.


The whistleblower exception prevents exposure of data from being prosecuted, but obtaining data is another matter entirely. This latter is where the hacker committed a crime, and whistleblower laws won't save him there.

Nor should they, really. It's not worth it.
 
2014-01-14 11:21:35 AM  

Lucky LaRue: doglover: EyeballKid: Lucky LaRue: I don't see how anyone can be upset that a criminal is getting punished.

You can do better than this to get attention, can't you?

He really can't.

You take things entirely too seriously.  How does this kid's fate - whether he walks away scott-free or goes to jail for the rest of his life - effect you in the slightest?


You just disproved the idea that there are no stupid questions.
 
2014-01-14 11:22:59 AM  

CapeFearCadaver: I think something crawled up Lucky's ass last week and died and the petrifaction is causing his brain to hemorrhage.

Or something.

James!: The hacker was over 18 and the rapist was under 18.  18 is the magical line of responsibility for your actions.

Have you watched PBS' Brains on Trial with Alan Alda?


His brain has been hemorrhaging since he created his account here. Lucky isn't just a troll, they're an incredibly uncreative one to boot.

/favorited!ed it right away
 
2014-01-14 11:23:25 AM  

Millennium: Nor should they, really. It's not worth it.


Yeah, couple of daft broads got taken around the block and dropped off crying.  Meh.  Gotta look out for the greater good.
 
2014-01-14 11:23:54 AM  

Lucky LaRue: html_007: Lucky LaRue: I don't see how anyone can be upset that a criminal is getting punished.

I see your point he broke the law.  I'm not saying he shouldn't be punished but damn 10 years?  That is a case of the punishment not fitting the crime.

Maybe, but I wonder if we (collectively) would say the same thing about the people that hacked Target and exposed the financial/personal information of 70 million people.  Do they deserve something less than 10 years?  The difference here is not in the crime, but in the outcome.  I am not particularly interested in having a body of laws that differentiates on outcome - if the judge chooses to do that, then fine, but let's keep the laws fair and balanced.


There definitely should be room for a judge when deciding a sentence.  I also understand the desire to send a strong message towards hackers, but what this guy did wasn't even malicious except possibly to a worse criminal than he is.

The Target hackers?  Throw the book at them.  Throw the whole goddammed library at them.

I think outcome as well as intent should be weighed carefully during sentencing.
 
2014-01-14 11:26:01 AM  

alice_600: groppet: The Muthaship: alice_600: Remember:

If you steal evidence it can't be used in court.

Not really the case.

Unless the person is acting on behalf of the government when they illegally obtain the evidence, it can usually be used.

I remember a fark story where a guy broke into a house to rob it and discovered evidence of a murder IIRC and gave it to the police.

And the government can say "He didn't act on our behalf,"


He broke in and stole a video camera and tapes.  Turned out the video tapes had child abuse on them, so the robber went to a payphone and gave an anonymous tip as to where the cops could find the tapes.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/20/21982638-alleged-child -s ex-abuser-caught-after-tip-from-burglar?lite

A quick attempt didn't find the Fark.com link but that's the story.  So while I agree it works similarly in the US, the example is from Spain.  It is possible you are recalling a different story though.
 
2014-01-14 11:26:11 AM  

The My Little Pony Killer: /favorited!ed it right away


Ok.
 
2014-01-14 11:27:15 AM  
Fair and balanced laws depend on using one set of scales.  Rotsa ruck.  We don't.  Utter hypocrisy and sneaking Sally through the alley from traffic court on up.
 
2014-01-14 11:29:09 AM  
How much "hacking" was actually done by this guy?

Did he take advantage of a reset password, or did he break into some guy's house, upload a wormy worm on to the hard drive and generally Hollywood the rapists?
 
2014-01-14 11:30:04 AM  

CapeFearCadaver: It's about the levels of maturity in various brains and the processing that takes place with different people when assigning judgment or fault.


Is that the one were people generally assign more blame to a chef that accidentally poisons and kills someone, than to a person who intentionally poisons and fails to kill someone?
 
2014-01-14 11:35:08 AM  
I see it would have been easier to simply murder the rapists rather than rat them out.

Would have gotten less time apparently as well.
 
2014-01-14 11:36:11 AM  

impaler: CapeFearCadaver: It's about the levels of maturity in various brains and the processing that takes place with different people when assigning judgment or fault.

Is that the one were people generally assign more blame to a chef that accidentally poisons and kills someone, than to a person who intentionally poisons and fails to kill someone?


Yep, through brain scans performed at Duke. The special takes it a bit further, though.
 
Displayed 50 of 195 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report