<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>The Moderate Voice - Latest Comments in Palin Hacker accused of previous computer hijinks </title><link>http://themoderatevoice.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://themoderatevoice.disqus.com/palin_hacker_accused_of_previous_computer_hijinks/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:33:51 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Palin Hacker accused of previous computer hijinks </title><link>http://themoderatevoice.com/society/law-legal-matters/legal-matters/23379/palin-hacker-accused-of-previous-computer-hijinks/#comment-2995048</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Rudi:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;you took the words out of my, er, keyboard.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;btw, love the avatar, one of my favorite birds. :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">onleyone</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:33:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Palin Hacker accused of previous computer hijinks </title><link>http://themoderatevoice.com/society/law-legal-matters/legal-matters/23379/palin-hacker-accused-of-previous-computer-hijinks/#comment-2994291</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Orin Kerr ( &lt;a href="http://volokh.com/posts/1223484862.shtml" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://volokh.com/posts/1223484862.shtml"&gt;here &lt;/a&gt;) and Scott Horton ( &lt;a href="http://harpers.org/archive/2008/10/hbc-90003672" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://harpers.org/archive/2008/10/hbc-90003672"&gt;here &lt;/a&gt;) have good posts about the DOJ witch hunt against the kid. Both say he's probably guilty of criminal hacking, but only at a misdemeanor level.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;As Orin Kerr explains here, hacking someone’s email account and making use of the information gained is a crime; it may either be a felony or a misdemeanor, depending upon the hacker’s intentions. And here’s the rub. In order to dramatize the case and get a felony indictment, the prosecutors needed to allege that it was “committed in furtherance of a criminal or tortuous” act. Here’s Prof. Kerr, again on the case:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;    Oddly, though, the indictment doesn’t exactly state what the crime or tort is that the intrusion was designed to further. It just states that the intrusion was “in furtherance of the commission of a criminal act in violation of the laws of the United States, including 18 U.S.C. Section 2701 and 18 U.S.C. Section l030(a)(2)” But Section 2701 and Section 1030 are the intrusion statutes themselves! It makes no sense to allow a felony enhancement for a crime committed in furtherance of the crime itself; presumably the enhancement is only for intrusions committed in furtherance of some other crime. Otherwise the felony enhancement is meaningless, as every misdemeanor becomes a felony.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;Now the Bush DoJ would never be guilty of a partisan attack...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">rudi</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:08:48 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>