Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 4/21/2016 5:05:16 AM EDT
Judge Rules Evidence From FBI's Pedophile TOR Hack Inadmissable

Link
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 5:14:21 AM EDT
This is both a good and bad thing.
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 5:16:58 AM EDT
FBI kept running the servers they seized? so were they handing out kiddy porn as well?
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 5:32:46 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
FBI kept running the servers they seized? so were they handing out kiddy porn as well?
View Quote


Yes.


Link Posted: 4/21/2016 5:56:48 AM EDT
Like the Feds will actually give a damn and abide by this.
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 6:31:49 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This is both a good and bad thing.
View Quote

Link Posted: 4/21/2016 6:34:21 AM EDT
Yeah, it's not quite like building a fake bomb for terrorists, or selling legal firearms illegally.  They were actually distributing kiddie porn to catch people who wanted it.  Isn't that like actually selling heroin to an addict who then uses it?
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 6:52:13 AM EDT
I wonder if the guys in jail for the first trade center bombing can revisit the convictions since the FBI provided the explosives.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 7:12:34 AM EDT
It's unfortunate that he didn't get caught, but it's a good legal precedent.

We have the Miranda warning because of a rapist.
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 7:12:39 AM EDT


Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Yes.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:





Quoted:


FBI kept running the servers they seized? so were they handing out kiddy porn as well?






Yes.





 
No different than running guns to Mexico. They all be above the law.


 
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 7:21:07 AM EDT
Just like they basically sanctioned the hacks when they turned a member of anonymous. It's ok though, it's for your own good really...
Link Posted: 4/21/2016 7:29:12 AM EDT
For a non-tech savvy individual....do I have it right?

I assume they got a proper warrant to seize a server that was the ?host? for a kiddy porn website.  

Then, instead of shutting the server down, they let it run...and used a hacking program to 'remove disguises' from the people visiting the website and went after them.


If it was 'non technical' (i.e...similar to a physical (not digital) crime):

They got a proper warrant and raided a Drug house.

Instead of flash bangs, shoot the dogs and grandmothers, etc...that they usually do...the quietly snuck the dealers out the back and replaced the dealers with their own agents and continued to sell drugs.

Then, when the 'upscale' customers who would come in disguise to buy drugs...they'd follow them home (apparently to another state), break in quietly and find out who they were....then quietly leave and get an arrest warrant based on that info?

(I can see how the last 'break in' to get info isn't legal unless they got a search warrant from a judge in that jurisdiction)

Link Posted: 4/23/2016 11:37:37 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Like the Feds will actually give a damn and abide by this.
View Quote


now they will know to parallel construct next time
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 11:43:28 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
FBI kept running the servers they seized? so were they handing out kiddy porn as well?
View Quote

Pretty much.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 11:43:37 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I wonder if the guys in jail for the first trade center bombing can revisit the convictions since the FBI provided the explosives.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
View Quote


I read the article. It was not completely clear to me but I don't think that was the judges argument. I think she was saying the warrants  was technically improper or legally insufficient for the scope.  The argument was not relative to the fact that the were providingthe contraband.

what you say is correct about the first bombing. The FBI did in fact provide those explosives thinking that the plot was going to be carried out a little later, as was the plan to the criminal informants knowledge,  but as soon as soon as a criminal informant delivered the explosives to the cell or whatever, they took off right then and there to deliver to the Target.

I believe the reason they provided live explosives was because if they had provided inerts there would not have been a crime the way the law was written. The law is written now so that when the FBI provides inerts with the subject thinking that they are real the subjects can be charged with terrorism or whatever. 1 thing to point out though is that a lot of times when the FBI does this they are pretty much instigating the whole plot from start to finish getting some easily manipulated sometimes mentally retarded people too conspire with the plot so the FBI can come in and bust the plot which they essentially cooked up themselves and have a press release talking about how they stopped an attack.. I do not know if the FBI has ever actually stopped a terror plot that they didn't have something to do with to begin with
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 12:42:44 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It's unfortunate that he didn't get caught, but it's a good legal precedent.

We have the Miranda warning because of a rapist.
View Quote


The Miranda warning is shit. Do you really think a dirty cop is going to refrain from beating a confession out of you (or making one up) because he has to give you a warning or lie about giving you a warning? Do you think it is a good thing to discourage guilty people from confessing their crimes?

It is a legal abomination. Its mandate - to warn arrestees before questioning - is based on a supposed "supervisory authority" of the USSCt which is found nowhere in the Constitution. Yes, a statement must be voluntary to be admissible at trial, but voluntariness can and should be decided based on the totality of the circumstances, not on a two-bit shibboleth fabricated by a court run wild.
Link Posted: 4/23/2016 3:35:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


The Miranda warning is shit. Do you really think a dirty cop is going to refrain from beating a confession out of you (or making one up) because he has to give you a warning or lie about giving you a warning? Do you think it is a good thing to discourage guilty people from confessing their crimes?

It is a legal abomination. Its mandate - to warn arrestees before questioning - is based on a supposed "supervisory authority" of the USSCt which is found nowhere in the Constitution. Yes, a statement must be voluntary to be admissible at trial, but voluntariness can and should be decided based on the totality of the circumstances, not on a two-bit shibboleth fabricated by a court run wild.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
It's unfortunate that he didn't get caught, but it's a good legal precedent.

We have the Miranda warning because of a rapist.


The Miranda warning is shit. Do you really think a dirty cop is going to refrain from beating a confession out of you (or making one up) because he has to give you a warning or lie about giving you a warning? Do you think it is a good thing to discourage guilty people from confessing their crimes?

It is a legal abomination. Its mandate - to warn arrestees before questioning - is based on a supposed "supervisory authority" of the USSCt which is found nowhere in the Constitution. Yes, a statement must be voluntary to be admissible at trial, but voluntariness can and should be decided based on the totality of the circumstances, not on a two-bit shibboleth fabricated by a court run wild.



We should just make cops say it before making ANY contact w a subject.  Also, a statement clarifying their right to refuse consent to searches
An error occurred on the server when processing the URL. Please contact the system administrator.

If you are the system administrator please click here to find out more about this error.