Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime Government The Internet

Anonymous' Barrett Brown Raided By FBI During Online Chat 208

Posted by Soulskill
from the caught-on-tape dept.
SternisheFan sends this excerpt from Wired: "For the second time this year, self-proclaimed Anonymous spokesman Barrett Brown was raided by the FBI. The latest dramatic incident occurred late Wednesday evening while Brown and another woman identified by some as his girlfriend were participating in an online chat on TinyChat with other individuals. Two minutes into the recorded chat session, loud voices could be heard in the background of Brown's residence in Texas while the woman in the room with him was in front of the computer screen. She quickly closed the computer screen, but the audio continued to capture events in the room as the FBI appeared to strong-arm Brown to put handcuffs on him. Brown could be heard yelling in the background. A spokeswoman in the Dallas County sheriff's office confirmed to Wired that Brown was raided last night and was booked into the county jail around 11 p.m." (Warning: the video embedded with the article contains mature language.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Anonymous' Barrett Brown Raided By FBI During Online Chat

Comments Filter:
  • Just self defense (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cpu6502 (1960974) on Friday September 14, 2012 @04:15PM (#41340039)

    In my opinion every individual has a right to defend himself when an intruders (or intruders) suddenly busts down the door and puts you in fear for your life. I would have no problems if a resident shot & killed the intruders.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      True, but if they're wearing police uniforms you'll almost certainly get your butt kicked if you resist arrest. And they'll shoot back.

    • by kurt555gs (309278)

      You can in Indiana! Really.

      • You can in Indiana! Really.

        Missouri too, provided they do not identify themselves as LEO's prior to kicking in the door.

        Even then... anybody can buy blue shirts and badges from a variety of online retailers, and there have, locally, been several incidents in recent years of people impersonating cops so they can rob/rape/whatever.

    • If I were constantly being harassed and raided by the police, I'd simply cut a 6'x6' hole in my floor just inside the front door and staple a rug across it. Start using the garage door and keep it closed from the inside. Next time they entered without knocking they'd end up in my basement.
      • by shiftless (410350)

        For bonus points put some long spikes at the bottom.

      • If I were constantly being harassed and raided by the police, I'd simply cut a 6'x6' hole in my floor just inside the front door and staple a rug across it. Start using the garage door and keep it closed from the inside. Next time they entered without knocking they'd end up in my basement.

        1) How do you plan to get in if it's closed from the inside?

        2) In Canada, setting "traps", even in your own home, is a crime in and of itself. This is to protect fire/ambulance as well as police officers that may need to enter, sometimes to save YOUR sorry ass. Does the US not have an equivalent to this law?

    • If it's true that he was raided by the FBI they don't just do that. They are likely going to make him an offer he cannot refuse.

      Brown isn't going to remain active in Anonymous for much longer if he ever was to begin with.

      • by rtb61 (674572)

        Brown's outspoken activities hardly speak of anonymity, which largely precludes him acting on behalf 'Anonymous', one of the major principles of 'Anonymous' is the acts being protested are the sole focus of the protest and are not about promoting the protester. So to publicly claim to be a spokesperson for 'Anonymous' is more about self promotion and has very little to do with 'Anonymous'.

        Although it is beginning to sound like another FBI overreach, threatening to destroy someone is acceptable as long no

  • Not news (Score:4, Insightful)

    by girlintraining (1395911) on Friday September 14, 2012 @04:16PM (#41340059)

    "In other news, the spokesperson for an organization responsible for dozens of high profile electronic attacks, distributing classified data, and hundreds of other felonies was taken into custody today..."

    Agree or disagree with Anonymous, it shouldn't be a surprise that he took the ride.

    • Re:Not news (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Hatta (162192) on Friday September 14, 2012 @04:59PM (#41340659) Journal

      In other news, we're still waiting for Lloyd Blankfein, CEO of a company responsible for hundreds of felony counts of perjury and fraud, to take the same ride. The rule of law is dead in America.

    • by mmell (832646)
      Add to this the allegation that he made public threats against an F.B.I. agent and the agent's family . . .

      But everyone here is right . . . the F.B.I. shouldn't have gone all S. S. on this guy. Now, if the agent who was threatened had come alone and blown Brown's brains out I would've found that perfectly acceptable. Of course, that agent would now be in custody facing charges of murder; but I'd like to think that a self-defense plea would work for him there.

      Yes, I know - I'm not supposed to RTFA befor

    • by elucido (870205)

      "In other news, the spokesperson for an organization responsible for dozens of high profile electronic attacks, distributing classified data, and hundreds of other felonies was taken into custody today..."

      Agree or disagree with Anonymous, it shouldn't be a surprise that he took the ride.

      Yeah but at this point he cannot be considered as the spokesperson anymore. He just got raided, why would any active hacker or activist trust him now that he has been raided and arrested by the FBI? They can plant bugs in his house, they can force him to cooperate, so it's basically over for him. His days as an online spokesperson/activist are over and he will be lucky if he avoids prison.

  • So uh what are the charges?
    • or to release sensitive data. and if he's spokespersoning for Anonymous, he's an accessory at the least. they could also go RICO (Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization) on Anonymous, it's a great little Swiss Army Lawbook for repeat offenders. so it's definitely FBI material, and Brown might well find himself without much of a legal defense.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 14, 2012 @04:19PM (#41340101)

    Barrett Brown is not Anonymous. Most of the Anons I know worth their salt think of him as a fraud. This is the problem of a leaderless, hierarchyless political movement: anyone can claim affiliation. All Barrett did was claim to orchestrate some invisible campaign against Mexican drug gangs, of which no evidence was ever actually presented, and idiot reporters lined up to print his lies verbatim.

    Barrett Brown claimed affiliation with Encyclopedia Dramatica, another Internet community, on Twitter recently. Current and former ED admins lined up to denounce him as never being known there.

    Barrett Brown is a liar and a fraud. His days are up now that he's finally committed the crime of threatening an FBI agent. There's no way he's getting bail.

    • by Sydin (2598829) on Friday September 14, 2012 @04:38PM (#41340413)
      So he's an attention whore. That's all fine and dandy, but the last time I checked the FBI had better things to do. You just said it yourself: There's no evidence at all that he had anything to do with anonymous, its activities, or any of its affiliated groups, everything about the guy can be laid at the feet of the media, who are more than happy to sensationalize lies. If the layman on the internet knows that, the FBI knows that. So why are they raiding his house? What's there to gain? Well, it sends a strong message. It scares people. Oh right, that's what the FBI is for these days. Barrett Brown's lack of affiliation with anonymous isn't what makes this newsworthy, it's that despite knowing that, the FBI were more than happy to ruin him in order to send a message.
      • he threatened an fbi agent

        it's really not that complicated

        • by BlueStrat (756137)

          he threatened an fbi agent

          it's really not that complicated

          Here's the YT video in question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TOW7GOrXNZI [youtube.com]

          Strat

          • by tqk (413719)

            Here's the YT video in question: ...

            Yeah, and about thirteen minutes into it, I'm thinking he wants to get busted because it's a cheap and simple way to bust into heroin rehab.

            Why is anyone wasting time on this again?

        • by elucido (870205)

          he threatened an fbi agent

          it's really not that complicated

          If he did that then he's a friggin idiot and deserves what he got. Doesn't he know the law? Doesn't he know what happened to Jim Bell?

      • by mmell (832646)
        Better things to do than arrest people who threaten their officers and their families? In a HIGH VISIBILITY, PUBLIC FORUM, no less?
      • by Kaenneth (82978)

        "Well, it sends a strong message. It scares people."

        And we all know the word for that.

      • Whats the message they are sending though? If I were a legit member of anonymous, knowing that Brown was not a member - what am I suppose to take from this? That the FBI has no idea who they really are (good thing for anonymous), that they are the bad guys (the point anonymous exists) and will destroy ones life on a whim (already knows this)? From the sounds of it, my reaction would be the same that was in the video - LOL, OMG, that sux! and continue chatting.

        Personally, I sincerely hope the FBI didn't r
      • by elucido (870205)

        So he's an attention whore. That's all fine and dandy, but the last time I checked the FBI had better things to do. You just said it yourself: There's no evidence at all that he had anything to do with anonymous, its activities, or any of its affiliated groups, everything about the guy can be laid at the feet of the media, who are more than happy to sensationalize lies. If the layman on the internet knows that, the FBI knows that. So why are they raiding his house? What's there to gain? Well, it sends a strong message. It scares people. Oh right, that's what the FBI is for these days.

        Barrett Brown's lack of affiliation with anonymous isn't what makes this newsworthy, it's that despite knowing that, the FBI were more than happy to ruin him in order to send a message.

        Do you think that matters? If the FBI is at war with Anonymous they can make use of Mr. Brown.

    • Barrett Brown is not Anonymous. Most of the Anons I know worth their salt think of him as a fraud. This is the problem of a leaderless, hierarchyless political movement: anyone can claim affiliation. All Barrett did was claim to orchestrate some invisible campaign against Mexican drug gangs, of which no evidence was ever actually presented, and idiot reporters lined up to print his lies verbatim.

      Barrett Brown claimed affiliation with Encyclopedia Dramatica, another Internet community, on Twitter recently. Current and former ED admins lined up to denounce him as never being known there.

      Barrett Brown is a liar and a fraud. His days are up now that he's finally committed the crime of threatening an FBI agent. There's no way he's getting bail.

      What I mean is he will never again be considered a part of any serious activist movement. Once they know he got raided by the FBI they know he's the new FBI bitch. Many people suspected that Sabu was the FBI bitch after he got raided but somehow people still trusted him and look what happened there?

      If an activist gets raided by the FBI they need to find a new profession because their activism days are over. They can look forward to lifetime surveillance from that point on and pressure potentially for 10 or

  • Any version anywhere where you can actually understand what they are saying/yelling?
    • by TheSwift (2714953)
      I think there's a transcript on pastebin if you look through the article. Not sure I'm convinced that it caught all of those words though. They sound pretty unintelligible to me. Moreover, how did they know he was getting handcuffed? For all we know, he may have just seen a light shining in his window and he started having a seizure and began screaming.
      • The article does link to the site (pastebin?) where it says an audio is. If someone can post a link to it... I watched some of the video, this guy is not "operating on all cylinders", as they say. Right off he states he been off heroin for over a year. Maybe he is, who the f knows for sure. He sure doesn't act sober to me.
  • "mature"??? (Score:2, Redundant)

    by mark-t (151149)

    I'd question calling offensive language "mature", when that's not really the case.

    Not that I'm saying that adults don't often talk like that... I know many that do. But in my own experience, it really seems to me that such offensive language is far more frequently used by younger people than by older.

    It reminds me of how some kids will sometimes start smoking because they think it's "grown-up", whereas almost everybody who smokes these days actually started before they even turned 18.

    • by fsterman (519061)

      Seriously, when did Slashdot turn into FM radio?

    • You got modded redundant, it should be insightful. He isn't 'mature'. He stopped growing emotionally the day he started abusing drugs, and that's the reason he talks like the kids you know, 'cause inside, he's still a little boy. A lot of people who look old enough to be called adult really still think like children. You made a good observation there, imo.
  • Submitter here. I'd like to express my gratitude here, to "Soulskill", and all the other /. editorial staff. I've had a few of my submissions 'cleaned up', and made better by their work. (See, I haven't yet figured out how to embed links professionally here.) They make my submissions far more professional looking, and add their own expert knowledge to them. This site has 'schooled' me greatly over the last few years. So, "KUDOS" to all the people who make this such a great site to visit. S.F. :-)
  • by gelfling (6534) on Friday September 14, 2012 @06:43PM (#41341781) Homepage Journal

    Curb stomp him and throw his dead body on his mom's lawn.

  • by SternisheFan (2529412) on Saturday September 15, 2012 @07:19AM (#41345365)
    You are not in the right when you threaten to somehow commit violence on another person. It's the law, and it's a damn good law. Brown, whose brain appears to not have yet recovered completely from his drug using days, crossed that line. He brought this attention on himself. He's not a hero, he's not rational, he acts pretty deranged. What he really is is another good example to young people why they should not allow themselves to get involved with opiate consumption of any sort, heroin or it's legal prescription pill form. If you're hooked on it now seek help and treatment, before you end up like this poor tortured soul. Heroin addiction is not cool, and it causes you to make some real bad life decisions. Like this guy has. Life's 'heros' are, imho, the people who live within the law, all other's are just 'posers'.

Possessions increase to fill the space available for their storage. -- Ryan

Working...