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

Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

floridatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 67 posts

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#51

Post by JPKab »

cpncrunch wrote: post #13
jeremysalwen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your claims are not supported by the article linked.

If you look at the first article, you will see that it does in fact support the facts I presented: [1] The state epidemiologist asked her supervisor to temporily remove the data: "“Per Dr. Blackmore, disable the ability to export the data to files from the dashboard immediately. We need to ensure that dates (date fields) in all objects match their counterpart on the PDF line list published,”" [2] Rebekah assumed this…

Your correct, but she became a useful tool for MSNBC and the Democratic party in the effort to turn any GOP governor who wanted to open their states up into evil, callous villains. As a result, any attempt to inject the reality of her being completely wrong and rightfully fired immediately solicits downvotes from the resident partisan hacks on HN. They don't get the fact that she made false claims in May about a conspiracy to hide deaths, and has a history of being sensationalist and dishonest.

Rebekah Jones reminds me of Alex Jones:

Loyal following, every bad thing that happens to her further bolsters her conspiratorial claims, and she grossly exaggerates her own credentials.

You're not saying she deserved the police raid and neither am I. We are just trying to point out the reality that she isn't some whistleblower hero but that doesn't fit the political narrative that the partisan hacks on here have accepted so we will be downvoted into oblivion.

The partisan hacks will continue to call her a data scientist when she never even called herself that and is not remotely trained for that because it makes their narrative more powerful. That's what politicization does: any statement of fact that counters the narrative will be ignored or rejected or reacted to with hostility.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#52

Post by colechristensen »

foepys wrote: post #44
colechristensen wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She didn’t let them in for twenty minutes, hung up on the phone and wouldn’t answer the door. That’s how you get officers fired up and concerned for their safety.

> That’s how you get officers fired up and concerned for their safety. What a sad statement about the US. There is something fundamentally wrong when police has to be so afraid of a person without any violence charges that they bring in the same specialists they use to resolve hostage or active shooter situations.

But they didn't, this wasn't a SWAT team.

They were all wearing short sleeves. At least one of them was wearing a bullet proof vest.

You can watch the body cam video, the police are just annoyed.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#53

Post by colechristensen »

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #49
colechristensen wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems reasonable enough. Look at your logs, find an IP that did the unauthorized thing, do a WHOIS, then call the ISP and ask who had that IP at the time. Is it possible to fabricate all of this evidence? Sure, but finding the lady's IP in order to have it confirmed by Comcast seems pretty sophisticated without a pretty advanced conspiracy. One would assume a lot of that would come out at trial, if the defense c…

>... I thought people were generally above that here. This place has never, not once, been "above that". What you are astonished at is that the discourse is anti-right wing. Other times when it is pro-right-wing/an-cap/libertarian/anti-POC you don't notice it because that's the baseline for normalcy for the userbase.

There's a difference between having a political slant and straight up denying reasonable action because it is against someone of your political alignment.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#54

Post by colechristensen »

int_19h wrote: post #37
colechristensen wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She didn’t let them in for twenty minutes, hung up on the phone and wouldn’t answer the door. That’s how you get officers fired up and concerned for their safety.

You don't need to "get officers fired up" to get them concerned for their safety to the detriment of basically everybody else - the training that they get from the likes of Dave Grossman is basically all about getting them "fired up" permanently. Numerous examples of cops going in guns blazing, shooting dogs that run away from them, shooting random people, throwing flashbangs like they are candy etc. Thing is, nothin…

None of that happened here, they didn't appear to use any force besides one officer maybe having his gun out.

They stood outside knocking on the door for twenty minutes rather annoyed.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#55

Post by cpncrunch »

gamblor956 wrote: post #41
cpncrunch wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you look at the first article, you will see that it does in fact support the facts I presented: [1] The state epidemiologist asked her supervisor to temporily remove the data: "“Per Dr. Blackmore, disable the ability to export the data to files from the dashboard immediately. We need to ensure that dates (date fields) in all objects match their counterpart on the PDF line list published,”" [2] Rebekah assumed this…

Your facts support the claim of censorship. As noted in the article you cite, the reason the state epidemilogist wanted the data removed was to stop journalists from asking about covid confirmation dates, which were earlier than the state was claiming. Rebekah pushed back with her supervisor, who agreed that the request was censorship. The state (not her supervisor), acting at the behest of the governor, then removed…

>the reason the state epidemilogist wanted the data removed was to stop journalists from asking about covid confirmation dates

No, that is just your assumption, but is not supported by the facts. According to the article, the data disappeared for an hour, and then came back again. That is hardly censorship.

> then removed Rebekah the following morning, alleging a "pattern" of insubordination though they could only ever document the 1 instance.

Given that she has been booked on police battery, and has 3 felonies (one for sexual cyberstalking, and another for robbery), it wouldn't really be surprising.

https://tallahasseereports.com/2020/05/20/rebekah-jones-firi...

https://www.lsureveille.com/daily/crime-briefs-student-charg...

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#56

Post by aaomidi »

colechristensen wrote: post #27
aaomidi wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what the parent is asking tho. They're saying how do you actually pin it on them.

You ask the ISP who owns the IP who was using it at a specific time, when it turns out to be your former employee’s home, you ask for a search warrant to sieze her computers as evidence. Then you try to match logs on a device with logs on your servers, and additional evidence perhaps as well in order to establish beyond reasonable doubt that this woman did indeed do what is being accused.

Yes because ip spoofing doesn't happen.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#57

Post by zaroth »

aaomidi wrote: post #56
colechristensen wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You ask the ISP who owns the IP who was using it at a specific time, when it turns out to be your former employee’s home, you ask for a search warrant to sieze her computers as evidence. Then you try to match logs on a device with logs on your servers, and additional evidence perhaps as well in order to establish beyond reasonable doubt that this woman did indeed do what is being accused.

Yes because ip spoofing doesn't happen.

So your conspiracy theory is someone sent the message and spoofed Jone’s IP address in order to frame her? Give me a break.

In any case, the right response is to serve a warrant and check her devices to see if there’s substantiating evidence.

It wasn’t any random IP. It was her IP.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#58

Post by zaroth »

nobody9999 wrote: post #29
colechristensen wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone? Having not read the court filing that granted the search warrant I know nothing about the information supporting the seizure. I know that she tried to make an emotional appeal on social media, I know that she has been accused of really sketchy behavior with a coworker, and I know that people who read her messaging are going to jump to conclusions about her being wronged with no information besides her being…

>Why did she delay officers executing a legally granted search warrant for twenty minutes, hanging up on them and refusing to answer the door? I can think of several reasonable reasons why she might do so: 1. To contact the court WRT the validity of such a search warrant; 2. To contact an attorney to obtain legal advice WRT how to respond to an attempt to enter and search her home; 3. To remove her small children (wh…

23 minutes. The police showed overwhelming restraint in not breaking the door down. Whatever she was doing, she could have been trying to destroy evidence the entire time. The police serving a warrant aren’t supposed to wait outside for half an hour for you to answer the door.

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#59

Post by zaroth »

colechristensen wrote: post #47
x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judges rubber stamp warrant requests, and nothing that she is alleged of doing requires cops to show up with body armor and assault rifles.

I mean wearing a bullet proof vest for a search warrant seems a reasonable enough precaution. https://www.clickorlando.com/news/florida/2020/12/10/video-s... There's the video, they're all wearing khakis, the officer talking to the woman has a not-so-stylish short sleeved plaid shirt, and one of them has some kind of stick? Not exactly a SWAT raid.

The misinformation campaign around this is intense. Assault rifles, really?

Re: Experts: Evidence to support search warrant on Rebekah Jones' home flimsy

#60

Post by zaroth »

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #31
colechristensen wrote: post #25

This is complete BS. The complaint alleges that 1750 messages were posted on an communications system urging employees to blow whistles. Those messages were linked to an IP address which Comcast pointed at Jones’ home. Is that enough for a conviction? No, it’s not hard to establish reasonable doubt with that. But that’s damn well enough for a search warrant to sieze electronics from somebody’s home. Being fired for i…

The point is why on earth would you send essentially a SWAT team for such a warrant. And no, it's not unsurprising that the data used to back a warrant or prosecution would be falsified. The US system is rife with all kinds of people being railroaded with shaky witness and cops lying about events.

There was no SWAT team. They rang the bell, stood outside her house, called her on the phone multiple times, and eventually resorted to... knocking loudly.
Post reply on HN