Posted on 12/09/2009 12:19:26 PM PST by Gomez
“She is good looking....I couldn;t HELP but HATE her”!
If you’re going to be a criminal, Windows is the OS you need. No one would even try such a defense with OS X or Linux.
“The little scum bag was bragging about doing in on-line after wards.”
—
Yes, and they traced him by the e-mail address that he used to brag about it with.
Not only that, but after the FBI tried to find him, he had help wipping the hard drive clean. No trace of anything was left, according to reports.
However, I did read the cached “administrator” notes on his website, and he stated how much contempt he had for Sarah Palin because she had so many children and attended Church regularly. He also called her the “C-word” (Netroots MO).
In the beginning he appeared to offer cooperation with the FBI, but seems that later he renigged on that promise.
Am sure that David Kernell’s lawyers feel empowered because Obozo now sleeps in the White House.
The Kid is definately “sick”, but in a fair trial this should be a slam dunk conviction.
Some of that spyware is really sophisticated.
Yeah but he was specifically looking for her own personal email address. And he went online and told everyone after wards that he was looking for juicy info on her. The spyware didn’t make him say that. He is toast and he knows it
It seems like it'd be easy to get some tech expert to check the code on any viruses on his computer to see if they were programmed to do this, and possibly to find how it was installed on his computer.
Kind of along those lines.
This explains the climategate emails. Oh wait, never mind.
His dad’s a Democrat operative. He bragged about what he did. Trojan? Yeah, right.
He’d have to have the stupidest jury in the world and/or a completely Democrat jury in order to get off. Both are entirely possible.
The hard drive was wiped, so I don't know what reliable forensic analysis would be possible. On the other hand, my understanding is that other evidence exists which would render the 'spyware' defense not credible. If he could feign ignorance of what had been going on (beyond the fact that his computer seemed to have died for some reason) such a defense might work, but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
bookmark
This kind of defence can work at times, and has worked. But there is too much corrobating evidence and clear motives for it to be effective in this case. It is an indication they are very very worried about losing the case and possible sentence.
The family would be better off getting rid of the lawyers, saving money and buying lube instead.
Dog ate my homework excuse?
So that wasn’t really him bragging about the thing later?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.