how do mitchnik and liddy get past the son of sam law?

[The Yosemite Bear]

ok, derived from another topic in another forum.

It's bothering me.
You can see Mitchnik as a comentator on all things electronic, and computer related, this is the man whose notority was breaking into the Department of Defense both in the 1980's and 1990's as both a minor and as an adult.

I can see G. Gordon Liddy talking his right wing point of view, and even ironically enough being called in as a Nixon Administration "Expert" to flame and debunk Deep Throght of late.

now there's a law that's been on the book forbidding people from profitteering on their celebraty if their celebraty is the result of criminal actions how do those two get the fuck around it?

[weemadando]

Liddy gets around it because he's sucked enough law-maker cock to have it ignored.

And Mitnick gets around it because of a lot of the bullshit that was espoused in his trial and incarceration by the prosecution that they feel would be better left untouched.

[Glocksman]

ok, derived from another topic in another forum.

It's bothering me.
You can see Mitchnik as a comentator on all things electronic, and computer related, this is the man whose notority was breaking into the Department of Defense both in the 1980's and 1990's as both a minor and as an adult.

I can see G. Gordon Liddy talking his right wing point of view, and even ironically enough being called in as a Nixon Administration "Expert" to flame and debunk Deep Throght of late.

now there's a law that's been on the book forbidding people from profitteering on their celebraty if their celebraty is the result of criminal actions how do those two get the fuck around it?

These laws are nicknamed 'Son of Sam' laws, after the first one of its kind was passed in New York.

Wikipedia has a good summary.

Son of Sam law is a law designed to keep criminals from profiting from their crimes by selling their stories to publishers. Such laws authorize the state to seize all money earned from such a deal and use it to compensate the criminal's victims.

The first such law was created in New York after the Son of Sam killings. It was enacted after rampant speculation about publishers offering large amounts of money for the serial killer's story. The law was invoked in New York ten times between 1977 and 1990, including once against Mark David Chapman.

Critics disputed the law on First Amendment grounds. Also, it was argued that it would take away the financial incentive for many criminals to tell their stories, some of which (such as the Watergate scandal) were of vital interest to the general public.

In 1987, lawyers for Simon and Schuster sued the New York authorities to enjoin enforcement of the Son of Sam law. Their case involved the book Wiseguy, written by Nicholas Pileggi about ex-mobster Henry Hill and used as the basis for the film Goodfellas. The case reached the Supreme Court in 1991. In an 8-0 ruling, the court ruled the law unconstitutional. Simon & Schuster v. N.Y. Crime Victims Compensation Board 502 U.S. 105 (1991). The majority opinion was that the law was overinclusive, and would have prevented the publication of such works as The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Thoreau's Civil Disobedience, and even The Confessions of Saint Augustine.

Though the New York law was struck down, many such laws still exist in other states, mostly because they are so rarely invoked. The Supreme Court ruling actually stated that Son of Sam laws could conceivably be constitutional, but only if written very carefully with regard to First Amendment concerns; most of the remaining Son of Sam laws are not.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_Sam_law"

Given the nature of Liddy's and Mitnick's crimes, any attempt to invoke a Son of Sam law on them would result in yet another slapdown by SCOTUS, as both computer security and Watergate are legitimately of 'vital interest to the public'.

[Glocksman]

ok, derived from another topic in another forum.

It's bothering me.
You can see Mitchnik as a comentator on all things electronic, and computer related, this is the man whose notority was breaking into the Department of Defense both in the 1980's and 1990's as both a minor and as an adult.

I can see G. Gordon Liddy talking his right wing point of view, and even ironically enough being called in as a Nixon Administration "Expert" to flame and debunk Deep Throght of late.

now there's a law that's been on the book forbidding people from profitteering on their celebraty if their celebraty is the result of criminal actions how do those two get the fuck around it?

As you noted, these laws are nicknamed 'Son of Sam' laws, after the first one of its kind was passed in New York.

Wikipedia has a good summary.

Son of Sam law is a law designed to keep criminals from profiting from their crimes by selling their stories to publishers. Such laws authorize the state to seize all money earned from such a deal and use it to compensate the criminal's victims.

The first such law was created in New York after the Son of Sam killings. It was enacted after rampant speculation about publishers offering large amounts of money for the serial killer's story. The law was invoked in New York ten times between 1977 and 1990, including once against Mark David Chapman.

Critics disputed the law on First Amendment grounds. Also, it was argued that it would take away the financial incentive for many criminals to tell their stories, some of which (such as the Watergate scandal) were of vital interest to the general public.

In 1987, lawyers for Simon and Schuster sued the New York authorities to enjoin enforcement of the Son of Sam law. Their case involved the book Wiseguy, written by Nicholas Pileggi about ex-mobster Henry Hill and used as the basis for the film Goodfellas. The case reached the Supreme Court in 1991. In an 8-0 ruling, the court ruled the law unconstitutional. Simon & Schuster v. N.Y. Crime Victims Compensation Board 502 U.S. 105 (1991). The majority opinion was that the law was overinclusive, and would have prevented the publication of such works as The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Thoreau's Civil Disobedience, and even The Confessions of Saint Augustine.

Though the New York law was struck down, many such laws still exist in other states, mostly because they are so rarely invoked. The Supreme Court ruling actually stated that Son of Sam laws could conceivably be constitutional, but only if written very carefully with regard to First Amendment concerns; most of the remaining Son of Sam laws are not.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_Sam_law"

Given the nature of Liddy's and Mitnick's crimes, any attempt to invoke a Son of Sam law on them would result in yet another slapdown by SCOTUS, as both computer security and Watergate are legitimately of 'vital interest to the public'.

[The Yosemite Bear]

gah double post

still the fact that G. Gordon gets away with being called an "expert" and slamming Feld with no mention that Liddy's back ground was that he committed crimes for the whitehouse. Mind you I have talked and interviewed the man once in college, scared the hell out of me, but he was quite intellegent though sociopathic in a way.

[Glocksman]

gah double post

still the fact that G. Gordon gets away with being called an "expert" and slamming Feld with no mention that Liddy's back ground was that he committed crimes for the whitehouse. Mind you I have talked and interviewed the man once in college, scared the hell out of me, but he was quite intellegent though sociopathic in a way.

I read an interview with him in the November 1980 issue of Playboy (I must bave been the only 7th grader who read the articles ), and he impressed the shit out of me with his forthrightness and willingness to sacrifice himself for what he* saw as a worthy cause.
I later on that month bought a copy of Will, and it made a huge impression on me.


*Personally I don't think Nixon was worth being loyal to, but that's me.

[Elfdart]

I don't know about Mitchnik, but Liddy's crimes were committed before the Son of Sam, let alone the laws passed in reaction against him. The Constitution forbids laws of ex post factor.

[weemadando]

Mitnick is left well alone due to the handling of his case. He was denied access to any electronic device for the duration of his trial and IIRC most of his incarceration as well. Because, prosecutors said, he could hack into the DoD and launch nuclear missiles (etc etc) by whistling into the phone (phreaker style).

To have that shit raised nowadays in a more sensible world with an understanding of it all would lead to a lot of public disgrace for the gov't and agencies, so they tend to ignore his actions a fair bit.

[Netko]

I don't know about Mitchnik, but Liddy's crimes were committed before the Son of Sam, let alone the laws passed in reaction against him. The Constitution forbids laws of ex post factor.

Nitpick: it's ex post facto not factor. Facto being latin for fact or act and factor being latin for maker the meaing is a little diffrent.