Replies

Thank you for the case name and the quote. It still seems risky, unless "unreasonable" reliably means "illegal." Might be worth the risk in this case, given protections against whistleblowers, but the precedent comes from a drug case. Drugs complicate things a bit. Because an illegal drug is an illegal substance, anyone who steals some can't be prosecuted for theft because an illegal substance can't be licit property. (He could, however, be busted for possession!) The same principle applies to breaching illegal contracts.

I'm getting a bit of an education, I have to say. Anyways, the miscreants are well below the Mafia when it comes to covering their tracks. (This time, anyway.) Should this scandal lead to a prosecution, I'm sure that a capable prosecutor will have enough evidence to make the case without reliance upon the leaked documents. I'm sure you know how Al Capone was turned into a convicted criminal.

This is cutting edge stuff, excellent fodder for a criminal procedure exam -- does anybody know where the hackers are domiciled? That might throw a wrinkle into the case!

And it's interesting to me that the senders and the receivers seem to have acknowledged authorship/receipt/authenticity, that might constitute an admission.

But of course if there are enough 'real' scientists left to raise a ruckus, these folks are through in the field, regardless of the legal consequences.