Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
The Courts Crime IT Your Rights Online

Juror Explains Guilty Vote In Terry Childs Case 537

alphadogg writes "Terry Childs, the San Francisco network administrator who refused to hand over passwords to his boss, was found guilty of one felony count of denying computer services, a jury found Tuesday. Now, one of those jurors (Jason Chilton, juror #4) is speaking out in an interview with IDG News Service's Bob McMillan: 'The questions were, first, did the defendant know he caused a disruption or a denial of computer service. It was rather easy for us to answer, "Yes there was a denial of service." And that service was the ability to administer the routers and switches of the FiberWAN. That was the first aspect of it. The second aspect was the denial to an authorized user. And for us that's what we really had to spend the most time on, defining who an authorized user was. Because that wasn't one of the definitions given to us.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Juror Explains Guilty Vote In Terry Childs Case

Comments Filter:
  • by sribe ( 304414 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @02:19PM (#32034248)

    "If you skate close to the edge of the ice, you're likely to fall in," and I guess that's what Terry did here, and he got burned."

    You should get a +5 funny just for the mixed metaphor ;-)

  • by blair1q ( 305137 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @03:39PM (#32035622) Journal

    Little petty tyrant wannabe. ...and the /.'ers who wannabe him...

  • by insertwackynamehere ( 891357 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @04:05PM (#32036006) Journal

    Hans Reiser is just another inept murderer, the fact that happened to be good at something else is irrelevant.

    no but you see he had aspergers and all the great people have aspergers anyway thats why i cant get a prom date and why its acceptable to commit murder havent u heard of einstein

  • by SleazyRidr ( 1563649 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @04:27PM (#32036316)

    Will those that defend him here find a way to bring him onboard at their organizations?

    I have seen more than a few comments to this effect. Whether these were made by people with authority to act on them, or by teenagers in their mothers' basements is still an open question.

  • by Archangel Michael ( 180766 ) on Thursday April 29, 2010 @06:24PM (#32037944) Journal

    I've actually done something like what you're suggesting that we don't do, that is competing with higher ups.

    In my case the higher up was trying to write me up (preface to firing). My boss was trying to nitpick a "rule" about "Unauthorized network connections with unknown hosts" (I was using Bittorrent to download a Linux ISO), saying that I violated the rule/policy.

    I looked at him squarely in the eye, and asked him if he was sure that any "unauthorized network connection with unknown hosts" was a violation of this rule. He stated that it was. I asked again, ARE YOU SURE. He responded that he was.

    I then informed him that I would be bringing charges against him and everyone else in the district who used a web browser, and the whole IT dept for running webservers, as every connection to any server that wasn't authorized was a violation of the literal letter of the policy, exactly as he was trying to enforce with me.

    His ashen face was classic. That was the end of that.

All laws are simulations of reality. -- John C. Lilly