Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×
The Courts IT Politics

Whistleblowing IT Director Fired By FL State Attorney 569

Posted by timothy
from the also-he-was-probably-using-a-computer dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Ben Kruidbos, the IT director for the Florida State Attorney's Office who'd spoken up when important cellphone evidence he'd extracted from Trayvon Martin's cellphone was withheld by the state from the defense, was fired by messenger at 7:30 PM Friday, after closing arguments in the Zimmerman case. He was told that he could not be 'trusted to set foot in this office,' and that he was being fired for incompetence. Kruidbos had received a merit pay raise earlier this year. The firing letter also blames him for consulting a lawyer, an obvious sign of evil."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Whistleblowing IT Director Fired By FL State Attorney

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Loud and clear (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 13, 2013 @07:24PM (#44272219)

    The US government is sending a message: "We don't like whistle-blowers".

    The Florida government is sending a message: "We don't like whistle-blowers".

  • Re:Loud and clear (Score:5, Informative)

    by Penguinshit (591885) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @07:25PM (#44272225) Homepage Journal
    actually it's the Florida State government. And with Rick Scott's record of corruption, you can bet he doesn't want anyone with a shred of integrity having root access to the state's computers...
  • Re:Loud and clear (Score:5, Informative)

    by cultiv8 (1660093) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @07:30PM (#44272265) Homepage

    In Florida, transparency is not up to the whim or grace of public officials. Instead, it is an enforceable right.

    From the website of the Office of the Attorney General of Florida titled Open Government [myfloridalegal.com]. The irony is strong in this one.

  • Re:So sue 'em. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Chewbacon (797801) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @08:10PM (#44272473)
    Florida is a Right to Fire... erm, Hire state. I always confuse the two words because whenever I hear the phrase, it's always used in the context of firing people. Anyway, incompetence is a Florida-based employer's way of firing you simply because they don't like you. If you don't cross enough T's and dot enough I's it is grounds for incompetence.
  • by PopeRatzo (965947) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @08:38PM (#44272635) Homepage Journal

    It's worth knowing that the "evidence" is comprised of the personal photographs of the victim of the crime:

    described some contents of his report such as a photo of an African-American hand holding a gun, a photo of a plant resembling marijuana and a text message referring to a gun transaction.

    Are you saying that someone holding a gun is "evidence" even though there was no gun belonging to Trayvon Martin found at the scene? Or is the fact that he's a young black man holding a gun prima facie evidence that Trayvon must have really been a thug so he deserved to be killed for walking down the street with an iced tea and pack of Skittles? And, "a text message referring to a gun transaction"? Again, what would any of this have to do with the fact that George Zimmerman shot an unarmed person?

    What exactly is any of this "evidence" of? What are you trying to say, son?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 13, 2013 @09:19PM (#44272817)

    The stuff on fighting, maybe, kinda depends on the context. It might hinge on the claims the state made, like if they claimed Martin wasn't strong enough to have done any harm then it might be admitted in as counterevidence.

    If the guy being charged claims that he was attacked with unarmed attacks, and this claim is a major area of doubt, then showing that the alleged attacker is comfortable and experienced with unarmed attacks seems pretty relevant to me. Doesn't show an attack took place, of course, but it is relevant to determine how believable it is that an attack took place.

  • by JohnRoss1968 (574825) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @09:50PM (#44272963)

    Ah, so we're judging the victim here!

    So you have already decided the outcome of the trial already.
    If Martin straddling Zimmerman when he was shot (as the forensic evidence says he was) then he is not the victim, he was the perp.

  • by sumdumass (711423) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @10:03PM (#44273011) Journal

    The state also proved Zimmerman was on top while martin was on the bottom when the shot was fired.

    I think you have that wrong. The prosecution was trying to say that when the shot was fired, there was a distance between the two that would have allowed Zimmerman to retreat instead of shooting. Expert witnesses in the field of forensics say the evidence matches Martin being on the top of Zimmerman and the gun being between 2 and 4 inches with the muzzle touching his shirt. The muzzle touching the shirt is what clinches it as gravity would cause the shirt to fall away from the body. This is how the gun was X inches away but touching the shirt, in a position of being over top of someone, the shirt falls away from the body towards the gun which was held by the person on the ground and under the one shot.

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/09/forensic-expert-says-zimmerman-on-bottom-fired-at-close-range/ [dailycaller.com]

    http://hotair.com/archives/2013/06/28/prosecution-witness-in-zimmerman-trial-testifies-martin-on-top-in-fight/ [hotair.com]

    I'm not sure where or how, but there is a lot of misinformation out there about this. I know the mass media has already been caught doctoring the 9/11 recordings to make things sound different then what happened. They have posted pictures of Martin at age 12 instead of 17 in attempts to gain sympathy or whatever for him. We have documents declaring the US government being involved and aiding protesters for some reason. It is as if there is a concerted effort to cause a problem at the ending of this trial in order to push some political agenda or something.

  • Re: Do good ... (Score:5, Informative)

    by ahabswhale (1189519) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @10:31PM (#44273115)

    The safety net is bigger and more expensive than ever.

    Social security, and welfare existed long before the 60's. Food stamps and medicare are from the 60's, however, welfare was scaled back decades ago when Clinton was in office. So your notion that the safety net has exploded is patently false. That said, the costs have certainly shot up. Medicare has skyrocketed due to the crazy increases in medical costs. Social security has shot up in spite of the fact that the benefits have been reduced because people are living longer. Welfare and unemployment are up because unemployment is up.

    ...followed by inflation in the early 80s as demand for services put pressure on supply constrained by high marginal tax rates and regulations...

    The inflation in the 80s was primarily because of oil, food prices, and a falling dollar, and a reduction in productivity levels. Marginal tax rates had nothing to do with it.

  • by Penguinisto (415985) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @10:33PM (#44273121) Journal

    I agree, but if you do find a CxO with that kind of integrity, well, you really found a rare bird.

    Meanwhile, I'm watching Ms. Corey spew out excuses for having just lost the case. Seems the jury proclaimed Mr. Zimmerman Not Guilty [cnn.com].

    So not only will she have to put up with pissed-off constituents (both for Mr. Zimmerman because she pulled these hijinks, and again because she lost), now she'll likely have to put up with the potential lawsuit from the former IT dude in TFA.

    I find it extremely interesting that she's *still* trying to press her case for locking the guy up, in spite of having just lost. It tends to support the allegations about her in TFA more than ever, truth be told.

  • by 0111 1110 (518466) on Saturday July 13, 2013 @10:56PM (#44273213)

    And it's defense, not defence.

    Either spelling is acceptable. The people who invented the language spell it with a 'c'.

  • Re: Do good ... (Score:5, Informative)

    by saihung (19097) on Sunday July 14, 2013 @03:33AM (#44275085)

    Nazism and Facism, for example are types of Socialisms (despite the unwillingness of some in accepting it mostly due to ignorance).

    No. That is wrong. And while it's cute calling people who disagree with your bad facts "ignorant," that won't save you. Socialism runs the state's economic machinery for the benefit of the populace. This is its primary defining feature. Fascism runs the state for the benefit of the ruling party. This is its defining feature. The two are irreconcileable, which is why Fascists outlawed trade unions.

  • Re: Do good ... (Score:4, Informative)

    by _Sharp'r_ (649297) <sharper.booksunderreview@com> on Sunday July 14, 2013 @05:54AM (#44275647) Homepage Journal

    The defense didn't know about it until literally about 2 days before the trial. They only knew about it at all because of this whistle-blower.

    They tried to use the evidence in the trial, but the judge wouldn't let them because they didn't have witnesses on their witness list already who could testify that the texts/pictures were from Martin (i.e. Authenticate them as having come from Martin). In the process, the Judge ignored a legal precedent that because they were found on Martin's own cell phone, they could be presumed to be his enough to let the jury decide.

    Of course, the defense hadn't had any time to go find and depose all the witnesses needed to authenticate the evidence, because they only learned about the evidence right before the trial because the prosecution actively hid it's existence from them. The prosecution not intending to use the evidence in court is irrelevant. They have a duty to tell the defense about ANY evidence they find that may help the defense. Of course the prosecution isn't going to use it if they think it's bad for their case. That doesn't mean they don't have to tell the defense about it during discovery, which was well before this whistle-blower let the world know about it.

    This whole situation was one of several where if Zimmerman had actually been convicted, his lawyers would have had en excellent case to have the verdict thrown out on appeal because of reversible error by the judge.

  • Re:Oh grow up (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rockoon (1252108) on Sunday July 14, 2013 @06:46AM (#44275841)

    The average is (rounded up) 13. However, the odds of you making average are better are only 1 in 5. 4 out of 5 times, if you're given one of those random numbers, you're going to be getting a "lower than average" number.

    You just explained why the average figure is meaningless...

    He used the median instead of the average, so what is your argument?

    It seems that even though you are perfectly capable of understanding that the average is a meaningless figure and that median should be used, you are still focused on the average.

    At no point did you even make an attempt to show that those at or above the median (the 50%) are having a hard time. They aren't having a hard time, but you pretend and argue as if they are. Thats dishonesty on your part. Dishonesty is never backed by reason that passes scrutiny, for if your argument was a reasoned one that passed scrutiny then you wouldnt need to be dishonest.

    I'm guessing jealousy. Jealousy is the unreasoned motive for your dishonesty.

The perversity of nature is nowhere better demonstrated by the fact that, when exposed to the same atmosphere, bread becomes hard while crackers become soft.

Working...