zaphod@madnix.uucp (Ron Bean) (06/21/91)
Well, now I've heard updates on Craig Niedorf, Steve Jackson Games, and Len Rose. Has anyone heard from Rich Andrews? Did he ever get his 3B2 back? If so, was it in working condition? If not, who has it and why? Did David Tamkin get to read his email, and is anyone following up on that thread? Also, similar questions regarding any others who had equipment siezed but weren't charged with anything? >The EFF: I think they *mean well*, a lot like the ACLU. But they fail >to realize the huge number of freeloaders going along for the ride, ^^^^^^^^^^^ >for whom social responsibility in computing is a big laugh. On the contrary, I'm sure they're well aware of it. They just don't think it justifies abandoning their goals. It's no different from people in the law enforcement community who don't mind harrassing innocent citizens who "fit the profile", and occasionally sending them to jail by mistake. BTW, how do you know it's a "huge number", and not a vociferous few? zaphod@madnix.UUCP (Ron Bean) {harvard|rutgers|ucbvax}!uwvax!astroatc!nicmad!madnix!zaphod [Moderator's Note: The way it has been told to me, Rich Andrews cooperated completely with the government from the beginning ... maybe even from *before* the beginning, if you get my drift. When I talked to him just after the Phrack/911 story came out, he did not seem too terribly concerned about the 'raid' on his home, the welfare of his equipment, etc. He did say to me in a phone call back then 'there was a lot he was not permitted to say at the time ...' nor has he said anything since. Perhaps he would like to respond publicly now; or perhaps Mssrs. Godwin and Jim Thomas have some background they'll share with the Digest. PAT]
"David W. Tamkin" <dattier@gagme.chi.il.us> (06/26/91)
Ron Bean wondered in volume 11, issue 491: > Well, now I've heard updates on Craig Niedorf, Steve Jackson Games, > and Len Rose. Has anyone heard from Rich Andrews? Did he ever get his > 3B2 back? If so, was it in working condition? If not, who has it and > why? Did David Tamkin get to read his email, and is anyone following > up on that thread? Also, similar questions regarding any others who > had equipment siezed but weren't charged with anything? I've not heard from Rich since his telephone conversation with Pat and I. He did have accounts on some other public sites around metropolitan Chicago, but he didn't make much use of them; I remember only one posting from him after jolnet shut down. Gagme had been getting its netnews from jolnet; its sysadmin found another feed and life went on here. No, I never did get to read the mail, but I had cleared my mailbox before starting to read news, and given what was going on at Rich's place that afternoon, I'm sure that there was no off-site mail ar- riving and that the new mail indicator was for a letter from Rich (I always had mesg set to N there because his children and their friends were such pests) telling me to log off. Why he didn't send me some sort of root-privileged broadcast I'll never know. David W. Tamkin Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 dattier@gagme.chi.il.us 708 518 6769 312 693 0591 GEnie:D.W.TAMKIN CIS:73720,1570 MCIMail:426-1818 [Moderator's Note: Now I am hearing from usually reliable sources that Rich had been involved in some other (non-computer-related) malfeasance, and the feds had no touble whatsoever getting him to work along on the computer investigation in exchange for making life easier for him on the other charges. I'm told he is completely out of the computer scene at this time and happily intends to stay that way. He does not wish to correspond with us. So be it. PAT]
"William Vajk (igloo" <learn@piroska.uchicago.edu> (06/29/91)
> [Moderator's Note: Now I am hearing from usually reliable sources that > Rich had been involved in some other (non-computer-related) malfeasance, > and the feds had no touble whatsoever getting him to work along on the > computer investigation in exchange for making life easier for him on > the other charges. I'm told he is completely out of the computer > scene at this time and happily intends to stay that way. He does not > wish to correspond with us. So be it. PAT] Having had only a smattering of dirt about other difficulties, I have scheduled research sessions at several courthouses to locate actual information and not disseminate rumors. It is a question regarding which of three possible counties causing me the momentary difficulty. Your comment regarding "no trouble whatsoever" isn't quite true, Pat. The feds went to the U. S. Magistrate and secured a search warrant. Rich didn't simply hand over his equipment because they wanted it (in spite of the fact that he gave such an impression in a phone conversation I had with him at that time.) I searched for the warrant and affidavits. It took two working days at the federal courthouse to locate and copy the information as the Magistrate's court in Chicago does not maintain an index of cases. I immediately faxed several pages to Len's attorney in Maryland and followed up by mailing a complete copy to them as the justification for the seizure of jolnet was based in part on information acquired in the Rose seizure and interrogation. At least Sheldon Zenner had the common courtesy to send a thank you note to me when I shared pertinent information he didn't have and needed. When you say that Rich is "completely out of the computer scene at this time" you must mean as a hobby, bbsing, and usenet participation. I doubt Rich is completely netless. He is, as reported to me by a former colleague of his within the past thirty days, in a computer consulting business in a two man office. Bill Vajk