Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Adrian Lamo has died

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 248 posts

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#201

Post by heyyyouu »

CydeWeys wrote: post #44
patrickaljord wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, he was a traitor, and he betrayed the trust of a true hero I used to agree with this but honestly, the second Manning contacted him, he was complicit with the crime being committed and would have been sent to the same horrible hole Manning was sent to. It was irresponsible of Manning to put Lamo in this situation, as an ex-convict he would have gotten life in prison, probably solitary confinement…

> I used to agree with this but honestly, the second Manning contacted him, he was complicit with the crime being committed Are you sure this is true? You don't have a duty to report anything just because you become knowledgeable of it. Mere knowledge doesn't make you complicit.

You need to brush up on your criminal law, at least in the US and especially when it comes to federal crimes.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#202

Post by heyyyouu »

Zak wrote: post #57
rwmj wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Traitor" is a pretty powerful word. A more realistic way to look at it is that someone—using a persistent method of communication—told him that they had committed a very serious crime¹, and he then had to choose between covering it up or going to the police. Covering it up or ignoring it could have meant he was an accessory. ¹ Whether it should be a serious crime or not is irrelevant here.

Under US law, most people in most situations are not obligated to report crimes they become aware of. Accomplice liability only comes into play when a person intentionally, actively aids a person to commit, conceal or profit from a crime, or to escape prosecution. Inaction doesn't count.

But under federal statues they can and will prosecute you; whether or not you actually deserve it.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#203

Post by dragonwriter »

CydeWeys wrote: post #44
patrickaljord wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On the other hand, he was a traitor, and he betrayed the trust of a true hero I used to agree with this but honestly, the second Manning contacted him, he was complicit with the crime being committed and would have been sent to the same horrible hole Manning was sent to. It was irresponsible of Manning to put Lamo in this situation, as an ex-convict he would have gotten life in prison, probably solitary confinement…

> I used to agree with this but honestly, the second Manning contacted him, he was complicit with the crime being committed Are you sure this is true? You don't have a duty to report anything just because you become knowledgeable of it. Mere knowledge doesn't make you complicit.

> You don't have a duty to report anything just because you become knowledgeable of it.

On its face, the federal misprision statute might appear to require exactly that, but it requires active concealment, not mere failure to report.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#204

Post by dragonwriter »

heyyyouu wrote: post #201
CydeWeys wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I used to agree with this but honestly, the second Manning contacted him, he was complicit with the crime being committed Are you sure this is true? You don't have a duty to report anything just because you become knowledgeable of it. Mere knowledge doesn't make you complicit.

You need to brush up on your criminal law, at least in the US and especially when it comes to federal crimes.

> You need to brush up on your criminal law, at least in the US and especially when it comes to federal crimes.

You should provide your argument rather than waving your hands non-specifically at federal criminal law.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#205

Post by Myrmornis »

tptacek wrote: post #90

Reminder: Lamo is a public figure but also a real person with real relationships with people who will read this thread. You are all commenting on a Facebook thread written by Lamo's dad about the death of his son.

> You are all commenting on a Facebook thread written by Lamo's dad about the death of his son.

I think I understand why you wrote that, but I don't agree. Posts here should be thoughtful and respectful, certainly. But it is not Facebook. I am not an expert about this person who has died, but it appears his story has a public interest dimension. HN is an appropriate place for such discussion. Furthermore, I think you need to remember that this is a global community, containing many people far away from events in the USA. In the event of any death, the vast majority of HN readers are not members of the in-crowd who had some personal connection to that person. This site has a large global readership; it isn't and cannot be a "community" in the local sense that you and dang seem to be portraying it as. (Also, friendly reminder, dang is the moderator but AFAIK you aren't).

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#206

Post by azinman2 »

dnautics wrote: post #18
cypherg wrote: post #11

This guy was seriously mentally troubled, and that's too bad. Chelsea Manning (Bradley/Bradass at the time) confieded in Adrian, Adrian snitched, and the rest is history. He did what he thought was right, but the consequences were absolutely disastrous. Kids, don't be a snitch.

I don't think that Adrian did it out of a sense of rightness. He did it because he had no choice. Adrian was basically suspicious that he was being monitored by the FBI (he had just come out of a judgement where he was prohibited from using computers, so this is not an unreasonable thing to believe), so it was either say nothing and get two people in trouble or say something and keep it to just one. Simply put, as mu…

I 100% disagree with you. Plus Manning was wreckless (my own perspective, which is hardly unique).

Source: I’ve known Adrian personally for decades.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#207

Post by throwaway2312 »

VonGuard wrote: post #22

So, I'm gonna lay it out here as I am having a bad day and don't feel like censoring myself. I'd known Adrian since 1998. He came to 2600 meetings in SF and was a fixture there. In that time, he generally didn't make any friends. While he was gay, he was also stalking a lady at the meetings, and being super creepy about it. Eventually, he left SF and was homeless. He got in trouble for hacking the NYT and making hims…

Is 2600Meetings still active ? I wanted to attend one of the meetings.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#208

Post by azinman2 »

VonGuard wrote: post #22

So, I'm gonna lay it out here as I am having a bad day and don't feel like censoring myself. I'd known Adrian since 1998. He came to 2600 meetings in SF and was a fixture there. In that time, he generally didn't make any friends. While he was gay, he was also stalking a lady at the meetings, and being super creepy about it. Eventually, he left SF and was homeless. He got in trouble for hacking the NYT and making hims…

I also know Adrian from 2600 meetings, starting in about 1992. I have invited him into my home and had him stay a while on various occasions.

He’d always been comfortable in our friendship.

I find your summary distasteful and not accurate. You should have enough respect for life to not take the opportunity to trash someone on their death announcement.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#209

Post by dragonwriter »

checkyoursudo wrote: post #85
CydeWeys wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I used to agree with this but honestly, the second Manning contacted him, he was complicit with the crime being committed Are you sure this is true? You don't have a duty to report anything just because you become knowledgeable of it. Mere knowledge doesn't make you complicit.

I don't know specifically in Manning's case, but yes, in general in the US, knowledge that a crime is about to be, is being, or has been committed can make you an accomplice and expose you to criminal liability. In not all cases will knowledge alone necessarily be enough to convict you, but that doesn't mean a prosecutor might not try. An ex-con should probably not take the chance that a prosecutor will ignore prior…

> I don't know specifically in Manning's case, but yes, in general in the US, knowledge that a crime is about to be, is being, or has been committed can make you an accomplice and expose you to criminal liability.

This is incorrect. Being an accomplice generally requires active counsel or assistance to a crime before it happens (the usual “accomplice before the fact”, or “aiding and abetting”) or active concealment (which goes by a number of terms, including “accomplice after the fact”.).

There are a few special cases where particular people have special duties to report specific crimes, but that is not the norm in general.

Re: Adrian Lamo has died

#210

Post by kevinelliott »

azinman2 wrote: post #197

This is somewhat a shock to me, and I’m curious to know what happened. Adrian and I became friends when we were both about 12. We met at 2600 meetings in the embarcadero in SF. We soon were buddies, going “trashing” downtown finding all kinds of crazy things corporate SF left out for trash: working DAT backup drives, 17” view sonics (prized at the time), blueprints for a bank (!), entire trash bags full of credit car…

I too use to go to the 2600 meets at the Embarcadero in SF and go trashing.
Post reply on HN