Can you appeal if you pleaded guilty?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Anonymous Hacker Gets 10 Years
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Can you appeal if you pleaded guilty?
Red Squirrel
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 9,223
I agree. It's really sad the amount of people who are in jail over non violent crime. 'Murika.
It also seems the violent cut and dry cases are the ones that drag on, and the criminal gets off easy half the time.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Okay, I know this guy. He deserved the sentence.
People are flipping out over how long the sentence is.
He broke into and compromised campus servers at the college he went to in the early 2000's.
He was expelled and not prosecuted. Did he take this chance and make something better of himself?
He was using servers for the Mac consultancy he used to work at as guinea pigs for hacking demonstrations and as erstwhile "teaching servers". He was fired and not prosecuted. Did he take this chance and make something better of himself?
He was busted for the ProtestWarrior hack where he data on thousands of credit cards and was only prevented from using them by his timely bust. He got 2 years in Greenville, IL penn as a result. Did he take this chance and make something better of himself?
On top of this he has numerous busts for violent offenses, theft, and vandalism. In short, however much he claims to be "political", the fact is, he's a lifestyle criminal.
Now, shortly after his parole period expired, he was busted for the Statfor hack (i.e. he was doing it while still on parole from his previous prison sentence).
Sorry, but he's GOING to get a longer sentence. Period.
Then there's the fact that he got caught for a very high-profile hack. Did he REALLY think that there weren't going to be people calling for his head?
And all the people talking about "time served" or "house arrest" are fucking dumbasses. He's ALREADY done 2 years and it didn't change him. And house arrest isn't really viable as preventing him from using cell phones and internet-connected computers is pretty much undoable nowadays.
This isn't some "The government is attacking an innocent hacker" bullshit.
Basically Hammond has been a complete and utter fuckup his entire adult life.
I know the guy. I actually associated with him before his bust. The guy is a menace to himself and anyone around him. He has no ethics whatsoever. He'll attack anyone he perceives as an enemy (an enemy meaning that you aren't "with him" or you happen to deny him the slightest thing). He doesn't care. And doesn't see you as human.
So I hope he enjoys his extended "time out". And I really and truly hope he finally catches a clue while in prison.
People are flipping out over how long the sentence is.
He broke into and compromised campus servers at the college he went to in the early 2000's.
He was expelled and not prosecuted. Did he take this chance and make something better of himself?
He was using servers for the Mac consultancy he used to work at as guinea pigs for hacking demonstrations and as erstwhile "teaching servers". He was fired and not prosecuted. Did he take this chance and make something better of himself?
He was busted for the ProtestWarrior hack where he data on thousands of credit cards and was only prevented from using them by his timely bust. He got 2 years in Greenville, IL penn as a result. Did he take this chance and make something better of himself?
On top of this he has numerous busts for violent offenses, theft, and vandalism. In short, however much he claims to be "political", the fact is, he's a lifestyle criminal.
Now, shortly after his parole period expired, he was busted for the Statfor hack (i.e. he was doing it while still on parole from his previous prison sentence).
Sorry, but he's GOING to get a longer sentence. Period.
Then there's the fact that he got caught for a very high-profile hack. Did he REALLY think that there weren't going to be people calling for his head?
And all the people talking about "time served" or "house arrest" are fucking dumbasses. He's ALREADY done 2 years and it didn't change him. And house arrest isn't really viable as preventing him from using cell phones and internet-connected computers is pretty much undoable nowadays.
This isn't some "The government is attacking an innocent hacker" bullshit.
Basically Hammond has been a complete and utter fuckup his entire adult life.
I know the guy. I actually associated with him before his bust. The guy is a menace to himself and anyone around him. He has no ethics whatsoever. He'll attack anyone he perceives as an enemy (an enemy meaning that you aren't "with him" or you happen to deny him the slightest thing). He doesn't care. And doesn't see you as human.
So I hope he enjoys his extended "time out". And I really and truly hope he finally catches a clue while in prison.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Look again at the logs the FBI provided of his various IRC chats. He didn't hack Statfor for political reasons. He hacked Stratfor because they were there to be hacked.
And before people go any further on "caps on hacking offenses", remember this guy stole credit card info for thousands of people and this info was used to make charges.
So he's not going away merely for hacking. But for grand theft as well. He's just serving a concurrent sentence.
Last edited by a moderator:
kbrickley
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 13, 2012
- Messages
- 7,514
This isn't completely true as laws vary greatly from state to state ... many USA states still retain the death penalty for murder (and those that don't often have life without parole as an option) ... although it is common that many murderers serve less than their full sentence, that is more of a problem with the parole system in the USA (and not the sentencing system)
The USA tends to use prison more for sentencing than most other developed countries do and with three strike laws and repeat offender laws (which this hacker seems to fit the bill for) the sentencing can be much more severe than for a first time offense
Considering this convicted felon is unremorseful and has shown a disregard for collateral damage from his activities I think he actually got off pretty light (especially since few criminals serve their full sentences in the USA) ... if he is smart then he will use this opportunity to choose a different path (if not his next sentence should be even more severe)
Red Squirrel
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 9,223
Another thing too is I find with these hack incidents the companies/orgs that got hacked are never held liable for the fact that they had a security exploit. I think they should also be held liable, especially when credit card info is involved. There is no excuse for a multi billion dollar corporation to not have enough security to stop some kid from getting in their systems.
While it sounds like this guy did deserve time, I still think 10 years is completely ridiculous. I could see maybe 1, 3? Perhaps some kind of rule where he can't touch a computer? There are other ways to take care of the problem than to send someone in a dungeon where they'll be raped and beat up every day.
While it sounds like this guy did deserve time, I still think 10 years is completely ridiculous. I could see maybe 1, 3? Perhaps some kind of rule where he can't touch a computer? There are other ways to take care of the problem than to send someone in a dungeon where they'll be raped and beat up every day.
He already served a two year sentence in federal prison for a previous conviction involving stealing credit card numbers. As soon as his supervised release was up, he immediately went back to stealing more credit card numbers. He also has several convictions for violent crimes under his belt. This is not some first time offender we are talking about, this is a career criminal who believes that he has the right to attack anyone that has political views that disagree with his.
The fact that Stratfor had bad security doesn't mitigate the culpability of Jeremy Hammond. An unlocked door or even an opened door still does not give you the right to go into someone's home and steal their stuff.
Oh contrare Mon-Frair,
There is no need to be so harsh. The Federal Government says all they have to do is get insurance for it. In fact, if a company follows the Fed's IA practices and has a breach causing damages(loss of Personal Identifying Information(PII), said company will specifically NOT be held liable and can not be sued by the little people.
http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/cybersecurity-insurance-read-out-report.pdf
DarkStar02
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,160
DarkStar02
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,160
Political pawn and scapegoat IMO.
Of course, there is nothing the in turn forces software venders to patch security flaws in their products (JAVA Anyone?). And Federal IA Practices do involve scans of systems for vulnerabilities, when know vulnerabilities are found to problems that are a vendor's responsability to fix, the flaw is ignored and the system is allowed to stay in production because there is no fix so there is nothing that can be done. They just live with the risk but there is no pressure on the vendor to fix the flaw.
With this new legislation there will be even less of a reason for a vendor to patch their crappy shit because as long as their customers(the companies using the product), follow the Fed's guidelines then they can't be sued.
In simple terms, your bank follows Fed IA Guidlines, all hunky dorry. The use a vendor product that has a known flaw but the vendor that developed and sold the product has no fix for it yet. The bank get's hacked and they loose your PII and your financial history along with many of your investment details, your IRAs, Loans, all that good stuff. Then you get hacked, the bad guys cause you and thousands of other customers terrible losses. Tough shit, you can't sue.
With this new legislation there will be even less of a reason for a vendor to patch their crappy shit because as long as their customers(the companies using the product), follow the Fed's guidelines then they can't be sued.
In simple terms, your bank follows Fed IA Guidlines, all hunky dorry. The use a vendor product that has a known flaw but the vendor that developed and sold the product has no fix for it yet. The bank get's hacked and they loose your PII and your financial history along with many of your investment details, your IRAs, Loans, all that good stuff. Then you get hacked, the bad guys cause you and thousands of other customers terrible losses. Tough shit, you can't sue.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Sorry. But "security" is a process, not a product. And there's no such thing as "enough" and no way to cover all your bases over a long enough timespan.
Why? It's his second federal offense.
He already DID 2 years. He didn't figure out that breaking into sites, stealing and then using credit cards was a Dumb Move. So, do we keep sending him away for 2 year vacations? Or do we remove him for longer periods?
Sure. You want to be the person to tell him we have to medically render him a quadriplegic? Because the whole "no computers, no cell phones" thing is pretty much unenforceable in today's society otherwise.
Right. Instead, he gets sent to a minimum or medium security facility and is put into a white collar gen-pop (the kind you seldom see depicted in movies involving prison). Rather than going to a high, max or supermax facility and getting put into solitary or in a violent offender gen-pop (the juicy kind that makes for good prison=hell films).
Hammond spent 2 years Greenville Correctional Institution. It's a medium security facility. In that entire time he wasn't beaten, raped, or otherwise despoiled.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Of course he's gonna say that.
Personally I would trust him to tell me the time of day, even if I had a clock in my field of vision.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Yep. The FBI *made* him break into those sites.
The government *made* him steal those credit card files.
The government twisted his arm to make sure they were used.
No, I'm guessing all the prior criminal activity had something to do with it. But you know years of being granted leniency for prior computer crimes probably is what led him to this mess in the first place. I mean why would he think he would be punished for fraud, grand theft, harassment, domestic violence, or violent crime
HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Yep. The FBI *made* him break into those sites.
The government *made* him steal those credit card files.
The government twisted his arm to make sure they were used.
I lol'ed a little bit
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Of course it isn't! It's not like it was THEIR honest-to-god, proletarian card was stolen! It was Them. The Corporate Fat Cats and their inhuman, soul crushing MMTM (More Money Than Me) evil that were affected. Not an actual PERSON!
DarkStar02
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,160
Yep. The FBI *made* him break into those sites.
The government *made* him steal those credit card files.
The government twisted his arm to make sure they were used.
The FBI might not have put a gun to his head but you can't tell me that he would have done the things he did without Sabu prompting him to (and feeding him information that he otherwise wouldn't have known about).
D
Deleted member 232162
Guest
I never narked on nobody.
DarkStar02
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,160
Yep. The FBI *made* him break into those sites.
The government *made* him steal those credit card files.
The government twisted his arm to make sure they were used.
And furthermore, just because he "downloaded over 200gb of emails and credit cards" doesn't mean that he was solely seeking out the credit cards to commit fraud. They were there for political reasons-- to bring their domestic spying programs to light as well as a slew of other corrupt activities. To top it all off, Sabu was the one who provided the credit cards. Hammond did NOT make any of the donations to the charities nor did he profit at all from them.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Actually, since I happen to know Jeremy Hammond on a personal level. I can say "Yes I can!"
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Yep. And he did a GREAT job there.
Nobody's at Stratfor is going to get busted. Even if there WAS something illegal going on.
Wanna know why?
So, in short, about all that was accomplished was vandalizing a site and costing a bunch of charities money.
How you can even justify his actions is beyond plexing to me.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Actually it's not that perplexing.
There's always going to be someone who's SURE that this is a giant con by "the man", and that the perp is really a victim of "the system".
Hell, this is how Hammond sees himself.
There's always going to be someone who's SURE that this is a giant con by "the man", and that the perp is really a victim of "the system".
Hell, this is how Hammond sees himself.
DarkStar02
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 2,160
How? How could he have possibly done it without Sabu feeding him the vulnerability and the CC #'s?
It wasn't about them getting prosecuted, it was about exposing their actions for the whole world to see. Like I mentioned in my previous post, he didn't personally make any of the donations to the charities or profit from it in anyway. If this guy was as sinister as you're making him out to be, wouldn't he have done something with the information for personal gain?
This isn't a con by the man and I'm not saying what he did was right. This is the man throwing the book at someone to try to make an example out of him. People get less time for much greater offenses.
Perfect example taken from the an article posted 5 hours ago I found on Google News:
http://journaltimes.com/news/local/...cle_139d0d78-51e3-11e3-ac25-0019bb2963f4.html
This has always been a problem. No uniformity across the board. ALL states should have the same punishments for crimes and judges need to be enforcing the max on repeat offenders, every time. Unfortunately it don't happen and people like the one in the article you linked will keep getting released and will most likely repeat the whole thing again.
You fail to mention that he pleaded no contest which reduced his would be 40 years to the 7 1/2 years. Probably means that prosecutors had enough to get a grand jury indictment but not enough to actually get a conviction. Possibly because prosecutors are notorioisly leary about having minors in these cases.
In this case hammonds was given multiple chances without punishment yet he kept disregarding the law. Only so much can be done. I think its disgusting that the child molestor got away so easily but prosecutors will tend to not traumatize a minor in such a case unless absolutely necessary. In hammond's case there was considerable more evidence which allowed for a greater sentence.
Manaknight
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 5,446
Hacking would be my guess....
though a lot of it seems less hacking more thuggery to get their backdoors put in place.
still to be fair it's a case of do as I say not as I do.
for the actual dude, i'm on the fence on this one, this guy seems like more of a dick criminal than a legit hacker. i am usually with them until random peoples credit cards go missing...if he nabbed the emails and say like..their corporate american express and bought horse porn with it...then that is a statement i can get behind.
the charity thing is just problems on problems due to chargebacks etc...
don't know I like anonymous for the most part...but yeah this dude doesn't seem quite on the level for a hacktivist.
wabbitseason
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,511
I don't get the hate directed at anonymous on this site. Most of their aims are pretty reasonable, and they usually take the rational side of issues. Hate scientology? Defend girls who've been raped by exposing their rapists? I have no problem with anonymous.
This is an outrageous sentence.
This is an outrageous sentence.
I think he likes the idea of someone using his credit card without his permission on something he had no idea existed.
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Where, EXACTLY, was it said that Sabu fed him the vulnerability?
And since Jeremy was the one who broke into Stratfor, how did *Sabu* "feed him" the credit card numbers?
And you know he didn't...how?
Plus there's the fact that using someone else's credit cards to buy YOURSELF something is basically saying "I live *here* and am too dumb to live. Come and arrest me now."
Yeah. JEREMY got less time for a similar offense about 6-7 years ago. He went away for 2 years. That didn't convince him that electronic vandalism and credit card theft/fraud is Not A Good Thing. And he did it again.
So, now his punishment is more severe.
Jesus "Greater offense get less" "Greater offenses get less". Sure! On a FIRST TIME BASIS! Why can't some of you people wrap your heads around that he's getting such a long sentence, at least partially, because it's a second offense? Seriously! CLUE!
[/QUOTE]
That's a local jurisdiction. Rules there vary greatly. I know of someone in Cincinati who went away for a similar offense, but is spending LIFE in prison.
Jeremy was in the federal system. Because he was breaking into things across state lines.
COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BEAST!
D
Deleted member 126051
Guest
Which he pretty much is.
Agreed. I don't necessarily *like* people who break into others' systems. But as long as no damage is done, I'm more likely to call "no harm no foul".
I *really* dislike Hammond on a personal level. But I have at least a modicum of respect for some of the things he was doing or trying to do. Putting together HackThisSite, attempting to get sustainable hackerspaces up and going in the Chicago area, etc. If it hadn't been for the blatant thievery and vandalism, as well as his shitty attitude, and zealot demeanor, I probably could have liked the guy.
Unfortunately, Hammond's entire life is about stealing anything that's not nailed down. And if it is, he steals a claw hammer first.