he has a book to sell and a consulting business to build. (Don't forget: Kevin hasn't been able to make much money for a number of years, and has a lot of lost time to make up for.)
Knowing all this as the result of your choice, would you choose this path again? If so, why?
I don't think he chose to be kept in Federal prison without a trial for more than 4 years. I don't think he chose to have the software he downloaded (and did not distribute) valued at an amount way beyond reality because the Feds said to. I don't think he chose to have terms of his probation which kept him from using his First Amendment rights or being able to make a meaningful use of his technologic abilities.
Did he choose to be the poster-boy of government corruption when it comes to prosecution of technology-related case? I don't think so.
You're the type of person who would ask Skylarov why he chose to come to the U.S. to speak at a technology conference.
No, there was never a trial. Kevin plead guilty. It took them four years to "decide" what his punishment was going to be. Locking someone up and forgetting about them for 4 years under this pretense is wrong.
Don't get me wrong, if you break the law, you deserve and should expect to have to pay the penalties. But you should also be able to expect to know what your punishment is going to be in a reasonable time frame.
The government had access to all the records that Mitnick could have used for his defense, but they arbitrarily withheld the records indefinitely. Each six months Mitnick was given the choice of going to trial with an unprepared defense and some crappy government lawyer with no access to the records necessary to prove his innoccence, or to sign a waiver allowing the government to delay the trial for another 6 months while he stayed in jail. In other words, they were just trying to fuck with him untile he broke, gave in, and pleaded guilty. They never had any intention of giving him a fair trial. It was a total mockery of the legal system and a travesty of justice.
No Offense meant, but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
he has a book to sell and a consulting business to build. (Don't forget: Kevin hasn't been able to make much money for a number of years, and has a lot of lost time to make up for.)
Knowing all this as the result of your choice, would you choose this path again? If so, why?
Re:No Offense meant, but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Did he choose to be the poster-boy of government corruption when it comes to prosecution of technology-related case? I don't think so.
You're the type of person who would ask Skylarov why he chose to come to the U.S. to speak at a technology conference.
Re:No Offense meant, but.. (Score:1)
Did Kevin waive his right to a speedy trial? I think I read that somewhere.
Re:No Offense meant, but.. (Score:1)
Don't get me wrong, if you break the law, you deserve and should expect to have to pay the penalties. But you should also be able to expect to know what your punishment is going to be in a reasonable time frame.
What Really Happened (Score:5, Insightful)