As how you have spent 8 years involved in a situation that seems by all accounts to have been an overblown kangaroo court, do you feel the government needs a specific branch specifically to deal with "cybercrime", and if so, how would you see it laid out, ideally, and why?
I am not sure I'd classify stealing and possessing Credit Card numbers as being overblown.
I would consider it a crime.. but not a (X) billion dollar crime.. we all know he broke the law.. but looking at what some white collar criminals have done with bookeeping, and the punsihments imposed, shows that Kevin had things go a lot worse for him. Probably because of the extreme use of the word "cyber".. but I dont think he deserved what he got.
Ahhh, I see. So those that do get punished should not be punished because
some others are not???? Shouldn't we be demanding
that the others be punished, not demanding ( back
in the day) that the US "Free Kevin?"
Ahhh, I see. So those that do get punished should not be punished because some others are not???? Shouldn't we be demanding that the others be punished, not demanding ( back in the day) that the US "Free Kevin?"
I dont think I, nor most of the people I have read on this forum believe that Kevin did not deserve to be punished. I certainly feel he did. My issue was more with inept prosecutors with an axe to grind, and media frenzy, coupled with people who were judging something they did not understand. That was the basis to my question for him.. is there a better way than how we do it now?
I am not a "kevin supporter". I know he broke laws, I know he did time, and I have no problem with that. I _do_ however have issues with the method with which they prosecuted him, and the way they treated him after the caught him.
As a counterpoint to that: having been a government poster boy/target, and having received punishment that by most accounts was too high for your crimes (even if you did steal credit card numbers, and even if you were a multiple repeat offender), do you have any advice for those of us who might face the same fate in the course of more noble ends (for instance, Arab Americans who had nothing to do with 9/11, held a peaceful protest against the rush to war with Iraq, and for that act have been or are about to be disappeared into indefinite secret detention)?
If a thing's worth doing, it is worth doing badly.
-- G.K. Chesterton
Seeing.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Maeryk
Re:Seeing.. (Score:2)
Re:Seeing.. (Score:2)
I would consider it a crime.. but not a (X) billion dollar crime.. we all know he broke the law.. but looking at what some white collar criminals have done with bookeeping, and the punsihments imposed, shows that Kevin had things go a lot worse for him. Probably because of the extreme use of the word "cyber".. but I dont think he deserved what he got.
Maeryk
Re:Seeing.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Seeing.. (Score:2)
I dont think I, nor most of the people I have read on this forum believe that Kevin did not deserve to be punished. I certainly feel he did. My issue was more with inept prosecutors with an axe to grind, and media frenzy, coupled with people who were judging something they did not understand. That was the basis to my question for him.. is there a better way than how we do it now?
I am not a "kevin supporter". I know he broke laws, I know he did time, and I have no problem with that. I _do_ however have issues with the method with which they prosecuted him, and the way they treated him after the caught him.
Maeryk
Re:Seeing.. (Score:2)