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

3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

pdfserver.amlaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 138 posts

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#41

Post by xal »

otterley wrote: post #34

It's important to understand here that the judgment was not vacated on grounds that had anything to do with the crime charged -- the Court didn't conclude that he wasn't guilty. Instead, it was vacated for lack of venue. In other words, he got off on a technicality.

Well, while technically you are right (heh), there is actually an opinion stated on the whole case as well:

We also note that in order to be guilty of accessing “without authorization, or in excess of authorization” under New Jersey law, the Government needed to prove that Auernheimer or Spitler circumvented a code- or password-based barrier to access.

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#42

Post by _delirium »

amitparikh wrote: post #39

I find it fascinating that the precedent for the decision -- to vacate charges due to improper venue -- is established by the court by going all the way back to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The proper place of colonial trials was so important to the founding generation that it was listed as a grievance in the Declaration of Independence. See The Declaration of Independence para. 21 (U.S. 1776…

That's a little weaker than precedent; they're mostly citing it just as generic historical background, support for the introductory scene-setting observation that venue is an important matter rather than a mere procedural technicality. But their actual analysis of whether venue is proper in NJ, and whether vacating the conviction is proper if not, doesn't rely on that.

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#43

Post by otterley »

xal wrote: post #41
otterley wrote: post #34

It's important to understand here that the judgment was not vacated on grounds that had anything to do with the crime charged -- the Court didn't conclude that he wasn't guilty. Instead, it was vacated for lack of venue. In other words, he got off on a technicality.

Well, while technically you are right (heh), there is actually an opinion stated on the whole case as well: We also note that in order to be guilty of accessing “without authorization, or in excess of authorization” under New Jersey law, the Government needed to prove that Auernheimer or Spitler circumvented a code- or password-based barrier to access.

That's not an opinion, that's just a legal citation. The Court expressly avoided an opinion: "we need not resolve whether Auernheimer’s conduct involved such a breach..."

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#44

Post by Spooky23 »

otterley wrote: post #34

It's important to understand here that the judgment was not vacated on grounds that had anything to do with the crime charged -- the Court didn't conclude that he wasn't guilty. Instead, it was vacated for lack of venue. In other words, he got off on a technicality.

It's not that simple. Venue was key to establishing the severity of the crime.

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#45

Post by aroch »

rdl wrote: post #27

Does weev get any compensation? I get that he's now retroactively never been convicted of a felony, but he was in prison focused on protecting his corn bread for a couple years. Clearly this affects his employability, as well as his general happiness, having been deprived of both liberty and safe corn bread for a while. Civil suit against ATT? Wrongful prosecution against the feds?

AT&T isn't a named party and did not bring the suit. Their civil liability is pretty much zero as far as I understand it.

Wrongful prosecution is, for all intents and purposes, impossible to prove.

Because it was overturned on appeal and the determination was not on the merits (ie. what he did isn't actually illegal) but instead on procedural grounds he loses a bunch of options for remedy.

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#46

Post by [deleted] »

rdl wrote: post #27

Does weev get any compensation? I get that he's now retroactively never been convicted of a felony, but he was in prison focused on protecting his corn bread for a couple years. Clearly this affects his employability, as well as his general happiness, having been deprived of both liberty and safe corn bread for a while. Civil suit against ATT? Wrongful prosecution against the feds?

[deleted]

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#47

Post by matznerd »

rdl wrote: post #28
examancer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After writing my comment I went looking for a summary/analysis and discovered how recent the news is. There was really nothing out there. Speed of dissemination definitely trumps ease of reading, so, yeah, I was wrong. The OP clearly should have linked to the source here.

I saw it from one of the attorneys on the appeal, and even she was saying she'd have to more fully read it to explain it, so I figured I'd just post. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/appeals-court-rev... is the first article.

Ars is generally a pretty good source for these types of things.

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#48

Post by 300bps »

tptacek wrote: post #2

The Appeals Court acknowledged that there were lots of issues at play in the appeal, but that they only had to judge one of them to vacate the conviction. The prosecutors selected New Jersey as the venue for the case, despite the fact that Aurnheimer and his co-conspirators hadn't been located in NJ, and AT&T's servers weren't in NJ. The rationale was that some of the addresses disclosed belonged to NJ residents. Not…

The rationale was that some of the addresses disclosed belonged to NJ residents.

I guess he should be tried in every state and several other countries then to account for the 114,000 people that were part of the list.

Reading the appellate ruling, U.S. District Judge Susan Wigenton's decisions make her seem like she's off her rocker. Beyond that, it's amazing how he was treated in court by the judge:

As [the prosecutor] spoke, a U.S. marshal approached Auernheimer from behind and told him to put away his phone. Other marshals pushed his head against the defense table and handcuffed him.

[the judge] declared a recess, and the marshals escorted Auernheimer to a side room. When he returned a few minutes later, he was shackled, with a chain around his waist and handcuffs attached to the chain.

Sentenced to 3.5 years in jail for loading a URL from a publicly accessible web page that required no login, no password.

Re: 3rd Circuit vacates Weev's conviction [pdf]

#50

Post by geuis »

So I just finished reading the judgement. The one point that is unclear to me is the charge of violating the CFAA. The secondary charge related to NJ is thoroughly debunked and is the basis of the vacated judgment. But since the CFAA is a federal statute, isn't venue irrelevant since all venues in the case are in the US?

Is this an instance where, now having been vacated on the basis of venue, weev can't be retried with the CFAA? Double jeopardy etc.

Post reply on HN