mitnick-digest Saturday, December 5 1998 Volume 01 : Number 211 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 20:49:03 EST From: DINOMITE1@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Poem/ Chapter Bylaws >>In a message dated 12/3/98 2:33:11 PM Pacific Standard Time, DINOMITE1@aol.com >>writes: >> >><< I think that we need to just forget the what-ifs, when/if a problem a >>rises, >> it can be taken care of >> >> >So you suggest....instead of resolving a problem now, you/we wait untill its >introduced as problem by becoming an inconvinience to members of the chapter?? >Hardly a wise idea if you ask me... > >AcidRayne i'm jsut saying that you guys are looking for every little thing that can go wrong and are arguing over a solution. not all of the chapters have to be the same, they can each decide how to solve their problems some constructive critasism there ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 18:07:24 -0800 (PST) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: [mitnick] Poem/ Chapter Bylaws Here's an idea: Skip the membership cards, the bylaws, the charter, the formality and just MEET for christ's sake. If you want to be in a club, might I suggest the Boy Scouts of America? <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure - - - - - - To do: 1) Update my "To do" list. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 18:50:36 PST From: "kenneth sooyna" Subject: Re: [mitnick] wednesday's hearing kerry, are these documents free or is there a fee to request them? also, can anyone from anywhere in the world request them? the thinker >Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 17:54:43 -0500 >At 04:26 PM 12/3/98 EST, you wrote: >>Pisses me off along with the numerous things i've heard. Damnit. Now, >>someone gets in trouble for displaying documents that are legal and anyone >can >>have? Wow, that's something i haven't heard before. THis is bullshit, and > >One thing I want to say - that document was never displayed anywhere, and >I'm not going to do that. Apparently the problem is the mere fact that the >documents were even _requested_ in the first place... > >kerry > - - http://listen.to/duz http://thinker.findhere.com icq:19173887 ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 04:57:29 +0000 From: kerry Subject: [mitnick] April 20 trial date Kevin's trial will be continued until April 20. *********************************************************** F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 23:26:24 -0500 From: Porkchop Subject: [mitnick] Of Judges, Prisons, and angry people GenevaAt 5:00 PM -0500 12/3/98, Macki wrote: >The key in this instance was that the Judge responded to a normal, >reasonable request, with an emotional scolding... If she makes a habit of >this, or can be made to blow up even worse, perhaps Kevin can get a new >Judge. I'm reminded of BernieS. Back after his jaw was broken, he was not receiving the medical treatment he needed to allow his jaw to repair itself. The prison (Buck's County at the time, I think) was receiving calls from people outraged that he was not getting his calcium. If you listen to the Off The Hook from that time (Use the new search function on 2600.com) you can hear Bernie talking about how the head of the prison came and told him to "call off the dogs" or something like that, when in fact Bernie had no control over it. Bernie was threatened with something or other and he was not well liked. I might remind everyone that Bernie got his medicine, no doubt due in part to the calls. What does it mean? I think it means that when you see something wrong and make a stink, the immediate response might be negative, but the long-term result is good. PkCp - -------- My mis-spelling ability knows no bounds, sorry. (umm, yaa, aie cn spel) Creator: Techie Theatre Funnies OnStage! < ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 23:34:22 -0500 From: "ArGus" Subject: Re: [mitnick] ZDTV Report on Trial (RA URL) I'd just like to thanx TelePhreak in being on the ball and recording the clip I don't get ZDTV so I miss all of the mainstream reporting so keep up the good work - ---ArGus - -----Original Message----- From: TelePhreak . To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Thursday, December 03, 1998 4:43 PM Subject: [mitnick] ZDTV Report on Trial (RA URL) >a couple minutes ago zdtv did a report on kevins trial. I made a ra copy >of the broadcast. the first second or two got cut off, and its poor >recording quallity, so you may have to turn up you volume and listen >carefully. > >http://www.intac.com/~santon/zdnet.rm > > > >- - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - F > -TelePhreak R > Email: AcidHak@Hotmail.com E > mIRC: TelePhrk E > ICQ: 10886438 K > Aol Instant Messanger: TelePhrk 0 E > NPA: 908 (NJ) V > http://phonerangers.cjb.net/ I > http://welcome.to/phonerangers N >- - - - - - - - ->Phone Rangers<- - - - - - - - - - - > > >______________________________________________________ >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 23:38:40 EST From: BadGirlnLA@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] 12/3/98 court appearance The rumor is that all sides are ready to do some negotiating. http://msnbc.com/news/220567.asp Judge postpones Mitnick trial REUTERS LOS ANGELES, Dec. 3 — A judge Thursday postponed for three months convicted cracker Kevin Mitnick's trial on federal fraud and theft charges and said she would probably order a separate trial for his co-defendant. U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer delayed the start of Mitnick's trial to April 20 from Jan. 19 at the request of his lawyers, who said they needed more time to prepare. PFAELZER SAID SHE WOULD also likely grant a defense request to hold a separate trial for co-defendant Lewis DePayne. Outside court, defense lawyer Donald Randolph said Mitnick, who is being held in jail pending trial, would have liked to start trial even later in 1999. "He's concerned about the massive amount of material (in the prosecution's case)," Randolph said. "He's anxious to make sure we're prepared." Mitnick is accused in 25 criminal counts of stealing proprietary information from Motorola, Nokia, Novell, Sun Microsystems and other companies by hacking into their computers. Mitnick was convicted of computer fraud in 1989 and sentenced to one year in prison. After his release, he was arrested again and convicted for violating his parole. © 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 12:35:18 +0800 (SGT) From: Ben Dover Subject: Re: [mitnick] wednesday's hearing You're DA|\/|n Right it's bullshit... This wholE da|\/|n thing is bullshit! EspEcially JudgE PFaElzER! Who thE hEll doEs shE think shE is??? ShE |\/|ay bE a couRt justicE, but shE's NOT God! ShE pissEs |\/|E oFF! I apoligizE FoR thE cRudity oF this |\/|EssagE, but so|\/|EonE @ |\/|y housE knows |\/|oRE about co|\/|putERs than thEy aRE ad|\/|itting to, bEcasE thEy havE put shoRtcut kEys on it and I havE to pREss shiFt on cERTain kEys so that I don't tRiggER thE|\/|, and thE "|\/|" kEy on |\/|y co|\/|putER doEsn't woRk at all! I'll sEnd anothER copy using only lEttERs iF you would likE |\/|E to! kerry wrote: > > At 04:26 PM 12/3/98 EST, you wrote: > >Pisses me off along with the numerous things i've heard. Damnit. Now, > >someone gets in trouble for displaying documents that are legal and anyone > can > >have? Wow, that's something i haven't heard before. THis is bullshit, and > > One thing I want to say - that document was never displayed anywhere, and > I'm not going to do that. Apparently the problem is the mere fact that the > documents were even _requested_ in the first place... > > kerry > > > *********************************************************** > FREE KEVIN bumperstickers http://www.mindspring.com/~jump0 > *********************************************************** > PO Box 17435 - Raleigh NC 27619 - email jump0@mindspring.com > checks/money orders payable to "Free Kevin Publicity Fund" > *********************************************************** > Stickers are sold at cost plus postage - we make no profit > from this effort - donations are split equally between > Kevin's Defense Fund and the Free Kevin Publicity Fund. > *********************************************************** > F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com > > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:09:45 -0800 (PST) From: Edith Crabtree Subject: Re: [mitnick] **off-topic**Chapters... Look SkyFire, Acid or whatever. Don't start any crap with me. Aaron D. Ball" 's calling me a catamite cocksucker is equally imature and usless. So, if you are going to presume to play the role of the list conscience, I suggest you either direct your comments both ways, or keep your mouth shut and mind your business. - ---SkyFireZ@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 12/1/98 5:08:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, jd00579@yahoo.com > writes: > > << I didn't ask a question, you fucking jerk. You commented on something > I posted. Go home and suck your mothers dick! >> > > > Wow.. real mature.. and important information as well.... > > Acid > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:10:38 -0800 (PST) From: Edith Crabtree Subject: Re: [mitnick] **off-topic**Chapters... Look SkyFire, Acid or whatever. Don't start any crap with me. Aaron D. Ball" 's calling me a catamite cocksucker is equally imature and usless. So, if you are going to presume to play the role of the list conscience, I suggest you either direct your comments both ways, or keep your mouth shut and mind your business. - ---SkyFireZ@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 12/1/98 5:08:34 PM Pacific Standard Time, jd00579@yahoo.com > writes: > > << I didn't ask a question, you fucking jerk. You commented on something > I posted. Go home and suck your mothers dick! >> > > > Wow.. real mature.. and important information as well.... > > Acid > _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 07:14:10 -0800 (PST) From: Edith Crabtree Subject: Re: [mitnick] Chapters... Unless you are in fact Aaron D. Ball" as well and this is some sort of game you jerks enjoy playing. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 11:08:08 -0500 (EST) From: "Aaron D. Ball" Subject: Re: [mitnick] **off-topic**Chapters... On Fri, 4 Dec 1998, Edith Crabtree wrote: # Look SkyFire, Acid or whatever. Don't start any crap with me. Aaron # D. Ball" 's calling me a catamite cocksucker is equally # imature and usless. So, if you are going to presume to play the role # of the list conscience, I suggest you either direct your comments both # ways, or keep your mouth shut and mind your business. For the record, the mail in question ran like this: - --- On Tue, 1 Dec 1998, Edith Crabtree wrote: # What about the breaking into networks part, you sap? Gee, you cocksucking catamite, ... - --- So if you want to play "waaah! He did it first! Spank him, too!", you'll need some other evidence. (HINT: "you cocksucking catamite" was a direct result of "you sap".) AcidSkyRaiyneFire, or whatever, is no one I know. If you have anything more to say about this, say it via private email to the two of us. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 11:50:50 -0500 From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com Subject: [mitnick] News from Wednesday's court hearing in Los Angeles: You have got to be kidding! Now their investigation Kerry? Can't they just stop acting like the entire world is out to get them? When I hear shit like this I can't even begin to tell you the amount of anger that builds up inside. FBI (Fucking Bureau or Idiots) can't leave anything associated with this case alone. What are they gonna do throw her in jail as well? News from Wednesday's court hearing in Los Angeles: - ----- In a somewhat bizarre display on Wednesday, Judge Pfaelzer directed an emotional outburst at Mitnick after learning that a 2600 staffperson had requested her publicly available financial disclosure statements. She demanded to know who "that person from North Carolina" was and whether or not they were part of the defense team. The person in question is Kerry, who has been diligently maintaining the kevinmitnick.com site and now is preparing for a possible FBI investigation because of her efforts. These documents are available to the public; anyone can request them, as long as they have the request notarized. The purpose of having financial disclosure documents for judiciaries is so that the public can ensure that judges don't have financial biases which may affect their decisions. Judges know when they turn their reports in every year that people will be able to see them. As public officials, they realize people have a right to know which companies they own stock in. This is precisely what Kerry was trying to accomplish - simply ensuring that the judge does not have any financial holdings that might give her a bias in this case. Journalists, legal researchers, and ordinary people request these reports without a problem. Does the judge think that everyone associated with Kevin is out to get her? - ----- Another hearing is scheduled for Thursday where the issues of delaying the trial and not having access to the evidence are expected to be addressed. emmanuel ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 12:25:14 -0400 From: patty@inch.com Subject: [mitnick] Good Job Hi Kerry, I'm on the list and have to wade through so much junk to get to some information but it's OK. Some of it is funny and some is plain stupid. What I want to say is Thank You for doing a great job. It's a lot of work and It's appreciated by me and I'm sure a lot of other folks, specially Kevin. It has to be a nightmare waiting like this and it's great he has people like you helping. That's all Thank you and Good Job! : ) Patty Heffley ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: "It Is Easier To Ask Forgiveness Than Permission" :) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 14:44:09 EST From: BadGirlnLA@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] Doug Thomas/Mitnick article Donald Randolph, Kevin's attorney, said, "We got everything we asked for," which included the trial continuance, the electronic discovery, an agreement about supervision, and a commitment from government attorneys to produce their exchibit list within a week. Read more in Doug Thomas' article. http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/16627.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 15:11:00 EST From: BadGirlnLA@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] Mitnick/De Payne (sever cases) MITNICK & DE PAYNE'S CASES TO BE SEVERED ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 12/04 NEWS: Computer hacker's trial delayed again By Peter Hartlaub, Daily News A judge granted computer hacker Kevin Mitnick another trial date delay Thursday and indicated the man accused of helping him would be tried in front of a separate jury. But U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer warned Mitnick this would be the last delay in a case that has stretched for years. "The court wants to go to trial," she said. Mitnick's trial date was bumped from Jan. 19 to April 20 at the request of Mitnick's attorney, Donald Randolph. Mitnick has been in a federal lockup waiting for trial without bail since May 1996, although he was serving a sentence part of that time for a different set of hacking crimes. The former San Fernando Valley resident faces 25 charges including damaging computers and stealing software. Pfaelzer also said she planned to grant a request from Lewis DePayne to sever his case from Mitnick's and be tried separately. DePayne is not in custody and faces 14 counts of aiding and abetting Mitnick. "I am going to sever. I think I am," the judge said, after DePayne's attorney, Richard Sherman, broached the subject. "I wasn't going to do that, but the more that goes on in this case, the more I think it's appropriate." Sherman still needs to file a motion to sever, which U.S. Attorney's Office prosecutors said they will protest.12/04/98 01:26 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 15:33:54 EST From: Bobwil623@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] Doug Thomas/Mitnick article maybe i missed something in Doug Thomas' article, found at... http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/16627.html call me crazy, but isn't there a slight, unanswered, unaddressed problem of the FBI planting an informant in mitnick's former defense attorney's office? i'm confess my surprise that not a *word* of this allegation appears in the article found at the link above. anyone care to comment? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 16:10:55 -0500 From: Emmanuel Goldstein Subject: Re: [mitnick] Doug Thomas/Mitnick article On Fri, Dec 04, 1998 at 03:33:54PM -0500, Bobwil623@aol.com wrote: > > maybe i missed something in Doug Thomas' article, found at... > > http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/16627.html > > call me crazy, but isn't there a slight, unanswered, unaddressed problem > of the FBI planting an informant in mitnick's former defense attorney's > office? that's far from the only thing. it's utter bullshit how this is being hailed by kevin's lawyer as some sort of great victory. all kevin got was a three month extension of his lease in prison. nobody's talking about bail anymore. he still won't be allowed to have visitors outside of immediate family and his lawyer. but the part that really got me was seeing the extension granted *because* of the government's failure to provide evidence and then the judge goes and chews out the *defense* for requesting a delay! not a word of criticism directed towards the prosecution, at least none that i saw reported. this doesn't bode well for the trial. all of the real issues, inhumane treatment, no bail, ridiculous amount of time incarcerated, government informants, failure of the prosecution to provide evidence - none of that appears to have been addressed. yet we're being told this is a victory. forgive me if i skip the parade. emmanuel ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 16:56:31 -0500 From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com Subject: [mitnick] DOJ Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 14:39:27 -0800 From: "Caliban Tiresias Darklock" Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ - -----Original Message----- From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 2:16 PM Subject: [mitnick] DOJ >Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? #include "don't hack web pages in Kevin's name.h" #include "what the hell does hacking a web page prove in the first place.h" #ifdef SILLY As long as we're at it, why not put a Microsoft logo next to the banner? Then we could blame them for it. #ifdef __WIN32__ #include "get a real operating system.h" #else /* ifdef __WIN32__ */ #include "get a job.h" #endif /* ifdef __WIN32__ */ #endif /* ifdef SILLY */ I would bet money that *whatever* happened wouldn't help Kevin at all. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 16:59:33 -0600 From: "Joe Shambro" Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ That's no way to get your message across. I really think that trying to fix something for someone who broke the law (aka, Kevin's trial) by breaking it yourself isn't a way to express it at all. There are lots of non-destructive ways to get the word out. - -Joe - -----Original Message----- From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 4:37 PM Subject: [mitnick] DOJ > > >Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? > > > ------------------------------ Date: 4 Dec 98 16:03:36 MST From: aclin@usa.net Subject: [mitnick] Severence:The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly Is the potential severence of Depayne from Kevin's case a good thing? My thougths our as follows: THE GOOD: If Lewis Depayne can sever his case and keep the Jan. 19 trial date or obtain another date prior to Kevin's then that would be great. Since a claim of aiding and abetting requires proof of the underlying offense, ie what the govt. claims Kevin did, Kevin's attorney will get an oppotuntity to see the governments entire case against Kevin and plan appropriately. THE BAD: The likelihood of the above happening is slim and none. The government will attempt to have DePayne stay in the same case or ask for a trial date after Kevin's. The date is totally up to the judge's discretion. If DePayne gets an earlier trial date then his lawyers know he is in the drivers seat for a great settlement. There is no way the govenrment is going to waste its ammo on an aider & abetter when they want Kevin. They will do anything to settle that case if the date is before April 20. THE UGLY: Besides the govts. abuses in this case, which are to numerous to mention at this point, the question of whether Lewis DePayne will settle and what will he have to do in retuen, if anything. ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:14:40 -0500 From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ Never said that it should be done, all I said was wonder what would happen. caliban@darklock.com on 12-04-98 05:39:27 PM Please respond to mitnick@2600.com To: mitnick@2600.com cc: (bcc: Gregory Jones/NWSMEL) Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ - -----Original Message----- From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com To: mitnick@2600.com Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 2:16 PM Subject: [mitnick] DOJ >Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? #include "don't hack web pages in Kevin's name.h" #include "what the hell does hacking a web page prove in the first place.h" #ifdef SILLY As long as we're at it, why not put a Microsoft logo next to the banner? Then we could blame them for it. #ifdef __WIN32__ #include "get a real operating system.h" #else /* ifdef __WIN32__ */ #include "get a job.h" #endif /* ifdef __WIN32__ */ #endif /* ifdef SILLY */ I would bet money that *whatever* happened wouldn't help Kevin at all. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:17:30 -0500 (EST) From: Patty Heffley Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ They would blame him like they have for everything else even though the poor guy can't even visit with anyone. Isn't the phone possibly monitored? Anyway I think Kevin has a right to do anything that he is capable of to get relief. We have a right to annoy (they see it as that and not our right) the government as much as we are allowed to by the constitution. There should be a big uproar about the judge getting snippy about being rightfully investigated. What do they think? He's orchestrated everything from a cell? This government does whatever it pleases and will continue to do so until the common man goes out of his house and says STOP!, which isn't likely anytime soon. Of course the basketball lock out gives people a little more frustration and time to ponder but thes people just rented more movies. Until it affects people personally or they can imagine what it is like they will sit there and even agree with the powers that be. - -patty 4 Dec 1998 gjones@raleigh.ibm.com wrote: > > > Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:26:39 -0500 (EST) From: dark@mail.dandy.net Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ > Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? The same thing that always happens when someone goes off the leash and does (forgive me) *stupid* things in Kevin's name that he does not condone: His reputation (and potentially his case) would suffer. Kevin is already suffering from some of the lousiest PR (public relations) on the planet. People doing damage in his name only adds to the negative perception of what Kevin's case and hacking are all about. Believe me, I understand the urge to make a statement... but there are so many more constructive ways to help. Please let's all focus on them and not try to kill KM with kindness. Thanks, Dark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:44:50 EST From: Phoenxknt@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] April 20 trial date In a message dated 98-12-03 23:12:03 EST, you write: << Kevin's trial will be continued until April 20. *********************************************************** F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com >> yay, maybe he'll be free, and what a birthday present that'll be to me (My B- DAY is April 21). Maybe its a sign, he'll be found innocent (is the word aquited?) and I'll have a double party. I dread bad news that day tho... :( ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:47:00 EST From: Phoenxknt@aol.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ In a message dated 98-12-04 18:23:01 EST, you write: << Never said that it should be done, all I said was wonder what would happen. >> Please, no hypothetical questions on the list. - -AM ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:50:58 EST From: Phoenxknt@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] Absolute Matter's goodbye for now. Hey i'm grounded from the modem (yah right, I'll get on at Enigma's) But i'm sure you'll all be happy to know I'm not going to be replying to mail as quickly as usual. Oh well, ya'll hate me anyway. Later - -Absolute Matter ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 19:07:38 -0500 From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ I want to thank all of you for your quick and polite responses. It's nice to see that people are taking an active interest in KDM's welfare instead of yelling and screaming at everyone else and calling them names. dark@mail.dandy.net on 12-04-98 06:26:39 PM Please respond to mitnick@2600.com To: mitnick@2600.com cc: (bcc: Gregory Jones/NWSMEL) Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ > Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? The same thing that always happens when someone goes off the leash and does (forgive me) *stupid* things in Kevin's name that he does not condone: His reputation (and potentially his case) would suffer. Kevin is already suffering from some of the lousiest PR (public relations) on the planet. People doing damage in his name only adds to the negative perception of what Kevin's case and hacking are all about. Believe me, I understand the urge to make a statement... but there are so many more constructive ways to help. Please let's all focus on them and not try to kill KM with kindness. Thanks, Dark ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 20:05:46 EST From: Bobwil623@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] "...ya wanna do less time than mitnick?" ya say ya wanna do less time than mitnick? become an fbi agent and agree to launder $700,000 for the drug cartel. you'll get three years, which, when compared to kevin mitnick, means you would have been released last March. http://www.post-gazette.com/win/day6_5a.asp > Giving in to the temptation > > December 1, 1998 By Bill Moushey, Post-Gazette > Staff Writer > > Rene De La Cova was a highly respected > supervisor with the U.S. Drug Enforcement > Administration in 1994, working undercover in > Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Five years earlier, it was > De La Cova who had been selected to serve an > arrest warrant on Manuel Noriega after American > forces invaded Panama. > > De La Cova and his partners routinely > investigated and arrested people who might bring > in more money in a month or a week, or a day > than the agents earned in year. Or five years. > > In a 1994 operation, De La Cova and his partners > were working under cover and had agreed to > launder $3 million for a Houston drug operation. > > Once they got the money, they began arranging > for the drug dealer's arrest. > > Then De La Cova got a late-night call. There was > another $700,000 to launder, a drug dealer told > him. > > Could he do it? > > De La Cova should have obtained authorization to > continue the investigation. Instead, he flew to > Houston without telling anyone. > > He stuffed the money into his luggage, flew back > to Miami, and stashed some of the cash in safety > deposit boxes. The rest went into stock > brokerage houses and banks across the country. > > De La Cova got caught. Just how isn't clear _ a > judge sealed his case file shortly after he > pleaded guilty in 1995. He was sentenced to > three years in prison. > > Under federal sentencing guidelines, someone > convicted of engaging in a drug- or > money-laundering conspiracy involving that much > money would normally face more than 20 years in > prison. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 20:10:50 EST From: BadGirlnLA@aol.com Subject: [mitnick] Reporters/quiet Bob, you are wondering why there is nothing being mentioned regarding possible government informants, and I am wondering why the news media skipped right over Judge Pfaelzer's outburst in court regarding her public financial disclosure records being requested by a concerned U.S. citizen. I believe Poulsen will have much more to say in the very near future. For now, there is only a short statement on zdtv covering the main events of yesterday's rather bland court appearance. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.zdnet.com/zdtv/cybercrime/chaostheory/story/0,3700,2172016,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 17:24:05 PST From: "kenneth sooyna" Subject: Re: [mitnick] DOJ forget the 'free kevin' banner, get one of the new ones on che's site http://che.findhere.com/ the thinker >From: gjones@raleigh.ibm.com > > >Wonder what would happen if somehow the DOJ's web page got hacked with the "FREE KEVIN" Banner? > > - - http://listen.to/duz http://thinker.findhere.com icq:19173887 ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:32:13 -0800 (PST) From: rOTTEN Subject: Re: [mitnick] Mitnick/De Payne (sever cases) On Fri, 4 Dec 1998 BadGirlnLA@aol.com wrote: > But U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer warned Mitnick this would be the last > delay in a case that has stretched for years. "The court wants to go to > trial," she said. Oh yeah...that's a hoot. <..rOTTEN..> nobody move, nobody get hurt error187(1) critical failure - - - - - - To do: 1) Update my "To do" list. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 18:40:10 -0800 (PST) From: Douglas Thomas Subject: Re: [mitnick] Reporters/quiet Well, I think both those questions can be answered directly. On Fri, 4 Dec 1998 BadGirlnLA@aol.com wrote: > Bob, you are wondering why there is nothing being mentioned > regarding possible government informants It didn't come up in the hearing, which is what the story was about. I do think there is a story to be written about Austin, etc. And one should be written, but when one has 600 words to communicate everything going on in two days of hearings, not everything is going to make it in. I am looking into doing a follow up story about Austin's role as an informant. > why the news media skipped right over Judge Pfaelzer's outburst > in court regarding her public financial disclosure records being > requested by a concerned U.S. citizen. > Pfaelzer was *very* careful. Much of her disapproval was non-verbal and innuedno. There was no *outburst* only a few cryptic comments directed at Randolph and Kevin. No one in court even knew what the document was or what the discussion was about until after the hearing when we talked to Randolph outside. It was curious, and more than a little creepy, but I wouldn't use the term outburst. This judge has been doing this long enough to know how to express herself without putting it into the record directly. When you see the transcripts, you'll see what I mean. There is very little there. Now, for the comment which is sure to be unpopular. I must confess I can understand her apprehension. People have done amazingly juvenile things in Kevin's name. Just as Kerry has the right to request that information, I think that judge Pfaelzer has the right to not be harrassed. (Not that that was ever Kerry's intention). Pfaelzer simply put everyone on notice that if something "untoward" came of this request that it would be pursued. She *never* indicated that the information should not have been requested, that she would in any way hinder the request, or that she would in any way do anything improper. She did warn that if there was some nefarious activity behind this, it would be followed up on. There wasn't, so there shouldn't be any follow up. There are outrageous things going on here. Lots of them. But Pfaelzer's concerns about who is requesting her public records isn't one of them. I want to also explain why this continuance was a victory for the defense. For those who don't know the case was scheduled to start Jan. 19th. Because of plea negotiations, which fell through, Randolph had done nothing to prepare for trial. Pre-trial motions (which are some of the most important aspects of the case, e.g. motions to supress evidence, etc.) need to be filed 45 days prior to trial. That meant Dec. 5th. Without a continuance, things would have gotten ugly, fast. And not in a way that anyone would have been happy about. Kevin would have preferred a May start date, but it was clear that Pfaelzer would never grant that. Getting April was a coup. Part of the prosecution's strategy has been to with hold evidence and try to push things along. This continuance along with the orders for discovery, means they might actually be able to prepare their defense. Something they haven't even been able to think about for 3 years. Right now, nothing is going to get Kevin out. And, yes it is sad, even outrageous, that having the government do what they are supposed to is a victory. Another a piece of the puzzle that people may not be aware of is that this is Pfaelzer's last criminal case. Which is why, I am sure, she is so anxious to get it started. Anyway, hope that clarifies things a bit. Doug ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 05 Dec 1998 05:10:38 +0000 From: kerry Subject: Re: [mitnick] Reporters/quiet What the judge said was along these lines (probably slightly paraphrased): "I don't know what Mr. Mitnick's friends have been up to, but someone from North Carolina has requested my financial disclosure reports. Whoever this Kerry (my last name) is, why would someone from NC be requesting my financial disclosure reports." And she put the govt on notice that "if anything happened".... and left it at that. Her tone was described to me several times as being angry. Lest everyone think I somehow have access to all of Pfaelzer's financial info and know everything about her, let me say that the public report says almost nothing about it. Maybe there is another report somewhere else that I didn't get, but if she filed this report herself, she should know there's nothing there that anyone could use to harass her. Most of the pages had blank lines; and there's nothing in there about her salary or anything like that. I seriously doubt there is any "anything" that could happen. Maybe it's just the principle of the thing. People so paranoid they think "hackers" are out to shut off your power if you slip and let them find out what color your house is. This case is far too complex for them to be going off on tangents which are non-issues. They need to focus on THE CASE, and I think we all do. kerry *********************************************************** F R E E K E V I N http://www.KevinMitnick.com ------------------------------ Date: 4 Dec 98 22:10:45 MST From: Maras Erlenic Subject: Re: [Re: [mitnick] Doug Thomas/Mitnick article] i couldnt agree more. one of the biggest injustices of the mitnick trial is how long he's been in jail without trial. then his attourney goes off and requests MORE time!!! i dont get it. kevin lost again; there was no victory as his lawyer is saying... > On Fri, Dec 04, 1998 at 03:33:54PM -0500, Bobwil623@aol.com wrote: > > > > maybe i missed something in Doug Thomas' article, found at... > > > > http://www.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/16627.html > > > > call me crazy, but isn't there a slight, unanswered, unaddressed problem > > of the FBI planting an informant in mitnick's former defense attorney's > > office? > > that's far from the only thing. > > it's utter bullshit how this is being hailed by kevin's lawyer as some > sort of great victory. all kevin got was a three month extension of his > lease in prison. nobody's talking about bail anymore. he still won't be > allowed to have visitors outside of immediate family and his lawyer. > > but the part that really got me was seeing the extension granted *because* > of the government's failure to provide evidence and then the judge goes > and chews out the *defense* for requesting a delay! not a word of > criticism directed towards the prosecution, at least none that i saw > reported. this doesn't bode well for the trial. > > all of the real issues, inhumane treatment, no bail, ridiculous amount > of time incarcerated, government informants, failure of the prosecution > to provide evidence - none of that appears to have been addressed. yet > we're being told this is a victory. > > forgive me if i skip the parade. > > emmanuel ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ------------------------------ End of mitnick-digest V1 #211 *****************************