Imprisoned 'Anonymous' Hacktivist Martin Gottesfeld Files His First Appeal (dailywire.com) 41
In early 2019, Martin Gottesfeld of Anonymous was sentenced under America's "Computer Fraud and Abuse Act" to 10 years in federal prison for his alleged role in the 2014 DDoS attacks on healthcare and treatment facilities around Boston. (Gottesfeld was sentenced by the same judge who oversaw the Aaron Swartz case.)
Gottesfeld has just filed his first appeal, and Slashdot reader Danngggg shares this new interview with Gottesfeld's attorney Brandon Sample. The upshot? Brandon Sample: If the court agrees with our arguments, for example, on the Speedy Trial Act, then that would result in dismissal of the indictment against him. And so, he would have no conviction at that point. There's a variety of different outcomes that could potentially flow from the arguments that have been raised in the appeal. If he wins, say for example, the argument that his lawyer should have been allowed off the case, well, then that would undo the conviction as well, and he would be entitled to another trial.
If the indictment is dismissed, then the government is going to have to make a decision about whether or not this is really a case that they want to prosecute all over again...
Daily Wire: Do you see this being successful, a strong case?
Brandon Sample: The appeal? I think we have a really good chance. I do.
Gottesfeld has just filed his first appeal, and Slashdot reader Danngggg shares this new interview with Gottesfeld's attorney Brandon Sample. The upshot? Brandon Sample: If the court agrees with our arguments, for example, on the Speedy Trial Act, then that would result in dismissal of the indictment against him. And so, he would have no conviction at that point. There's a variety of different outcomes that could potentially flow from the arguments that have been raised in the appeal. If he wins, say for example, the argument that his lawyer should have been allowed off the case, well, then that would undo the conviction as well, and he would be entitled to another trial.
If the indictment is dismissed, then the government is going to have to make a decision about whether or not this is really a case that they want to prosecute all over again...
Daily Wire: Do you see this being successful, a strong case?
Brandon Sample: The appeal? I think we have a really good chance. I do.
Oh, this prick (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't DDoS hospitals dumbshit (even if some doctors working there are pricks).
somewhat related: https://abcnews.go.com/Interna... [go.com]
Re:The hospital deserved it (Score:4, Insightful)
Children's was cleared of any medical malpractice at the trial earlier this year. That was a civil trial, so the jury acquitted them on preponderance of evidence, not the much easier reasonable doubt standard for criminal defense.
That doesn't mean the hospital was *right*. It must means that under the circumstances the hospital's actions were reasonably defensible. The hospital suspected the parents of Munchausen-by-proxy, and it turns out that when she was returned to her parents she underwent a number of drastic medical procedures (including a colostomy) that were completely unrelated to the original diagnosis from Tufts her parents were so insistent upon.
I don't think this necessarily shows bad faith on the part of the parents, but a much more subtle problem: if you go looking for an alternate diagnosis, eventually you will always get one, eventually. That's actually a bad thing.
I personally went through a similar situation; my daughter was committed to the psych ward in Chicago's Mercy Hospital for what *I* believed to be an infectious encephalitis, and the hospital didn't do the basic things they needed to rule that out (e.g. a lumbar puncture).
I'm going to give people two pieces of advice that will prevent what happened in the Pelletier case. First, don't lose your cool. Pelletier's father freaking out when they suggested possibility of a psychiatric diagnosis aroused the hospital's suspicions. Second, don't try to fight the hospital all by yourself. That's your primary care physician's job.
As a doctor, your primary care physician automatically commands respect, and he understands how the system works. When I contacted my daughter's primary he demanded to speak with the hospital's chief medical in ten minutes, and the hospital complied. The hospital immediately moved her out of the psych ward, performed the lumbar puncture, then ordered a neurological examination that resulted in her immediate transfer to the Tier III neuro ICU. Today she's made a full recovery, which would not have happened if she spent weeks in the psych ward. Untreated, the condition she had has an 80% mortality rate.
I totally understand Lou Pelletier's anger when he felt the hospital was going down the wrong path, but in a medical crisis you have to keep your head. Angry outbursts just cause the hospital to adopt an adversarial stance, and you can't win a confrontation with a hospital, at least not in the window of opportunity you need to win in. Hospitals are immense, complicated bureaucracies that you won't have time to understand.
Bottom line: you need to have a primary care physician to act as your advocate, one whose judgment you trust, and can keep the hospital honest while maintaining his own level head.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So the upshot is that by failing to offer the deference due to the nobility the father condemned his daughter to a soviet style psychiatric diagnosis in spite of other doctors that had already diagnosed a physical condition?
Now, we don't just need a lawyer to go to court, we need a special advocate before entering the hospital as well?
It's well and good to try to be cool headed, polite, and clear thinking, but sometimes that goes out the window in situations that involve a loved one going to the hospital. P
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. I understand that things get a bit odd when mental health is in question, but there needs to be a lot more checks and balances there.
Re: (Score:2)
The upshot is the father acted like a head case and was treated as a head case.
Re: (Score:2)
And so was the daughter. Would you like to be treated according to the behavior of your looniest relative?
Re:The hospital deserved it (Score:4, Informative)
As for my daughter, she *was* dying, and the hospital *wasn't* doing anything about it. I had more cause than Pelletier to be angry. In my case the hospital also lied to me about their failure to do appropriate tests then refused to show me my daughter's medical records. They hinted that if I exercised my medical power of attorney to check her out that they would call the police on me and I'd be in legal trouble -- which was complete bullshit, but probably effective with the poor, uneducated families they usually "serve".
I was furious, and *that's* when I decided to reach out to the primary care doctor. As a parent you have to recognize when your feelings, even when they're fully justified -- and they always *feel* justified. When you're angry, you can't think critically. Pelletier freaked out because he didn't like the way the doctors' thinking was going, which only *confirmed* the doctors' opinions.
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, Pelletier did reach out to the other doctors who had already been treating his daughter. So picture your state had the hospital dismissed your family doctor as duped by you, then moved to get child services involved to take custody of your daughter away from you.
I'm not claiming the father was some paragon of virtue here, just that that's no excuse for how the hospital behaved.
They hinted that if I exercised my medical power of attorney to check her out that they would call the police on me and I'd be in legal trouble -- which was complete bullshit, but probably effective with the poor, uneducated families they usually "serve"
That is exactly the sort of thing that must stop.
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, Pelletier did reach out to the other doctors who had already been treating his daughter.
That sounds like what I'm suggesting, but it's actually profoundly different. You need to have *one* doctor who will be your advocate throughout the entire process, who will collate all the medical opinions you receive, explain them to you, and help you think about them critically.
Just bringing more doctors in the mix is a recipe for disaster. You won't just be like the man with two watches, you'll be like a man with a collection of watches, each with a different take on how to measure time. Worse, the
Re: (Score:2)
The rules for not losing custody of your kid when the hospital is doing the wrong thing seem to be getting a little complicated here. There should be a booklet or something, many people might not know all of them.
Possibly an interesting note, I read a write up of one case where parents actually took their teen out of the hospital by stealth (since they were physically blocked when they tried to do it the normal way). They ended up peeling out of the pick-up area with orderlies actually clutching at her. The
Re: (Score:2)
When somebody sues you, but they don't have the evidence to prove their case, that does not "clear" you. It just means you avoided liability.
Re: (Score:2)
I do know about the case, I'm commenting on what this guy did.
Re: (Score:2)
He was careful to DDOS things like their PR and fundraising and not anything involving admissions or patient care.
Re: (Score:2)
Mistakes can happen, so he should be happy he didn't cause anymore damage than he did.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, it was risky. However, he should be punished for the damage he actually did, not the theoretical maximum damage he could have done had he screwed up. Otherwise, every incident of jaywalking would be prosecuted as causing a 30 car pile-up with fatalities.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh horse shit, you sjames are acting as an accomplice in attacking hospitals in a terroristic fashion by lying to give comfort to the terrorist.
Neither you nor he were ever given, or possess now, information about how these hospitals had their computer systems and networks designed.
Nobody with industry experience would believe that you have the information necessary to dive up your attack like that. What you're helping him with is to attack hospitals, full stop.
Re: (Score:2)
So I guess you believe that defense attorneys should go to prison with their clients, perhaps the jury as well in the event they find "not guilty"?
I wouldn't want to live in your hellworld.
Re: (Score:2)
No patient records were interfered with; mainly he messed with a fundraising campaign. It's still a dick move, but he is not, as some local papers called him, a "cyberterrorist".
Re: (Score:2)
Don't DDoS hospitals dumbshit
I say give 10 lashes to anybody that called him a "hacktivist."
BREAKING NEWS! (Score:2)
Attorney says his client likely to win case! Unbelievable!
Re: BREAKING NEWS! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
> The penalty for ANY deliberate DoS attack should be at least ten years hard labor
May I respectfully disagree? Some DOS or "denital of service" is from simply encouraging people to access a website manually due to a public announcement: being "slashdotted" is a real problem for many modest websites. a DDOS, a distributed denial of service attack with a botnet, does show malice.
Re: (Score:3)
DDoSing a hospital may not be in the same category of pure evil as a ransomware attack, but it can still kill people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would also say that the attackers aren't the only ones that should be held accountable.
I'd also like to go after the botnet herders amassing so many zombies in the first place, and the spammers that send out the malware that infects them.
Finally, I'd like ISPs to be held accountable for not putting zombie broadband users under quarantine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's too late to fix that now, so bellyaching about it is pointless. However, a ten year mandatory hard labor prison sentence is an excellent deterrent, and I argue it's a perfectly
Re: (Score:2)
It's amazing how many people apparently believe that "traitor" legally means "person I don't like."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny how white supremacists, groups who are literally killing Americans [nytimes.com] and attacking police [cnn.com], designated as domestic terrorists [msn.com], are left out of your rant.
Christ, what an asshole (Score:2)
Even this kid-gloves article makes him look like an asshole who refuses to take responsibility for anything.
Marty would oftentimes, when there would be disputes or disagreements between him and his counsel . . . when Judge Gorton presided over those proceedings, he would accede to the request by the attorney and close the courtroom.
Marty’s asserting that that violated his right to a public trial.
It takes chutzpah to argue that granting your attorney's request for privacy while you bicker with him denied you the right to a public trial.
Start sending prisoners to China (Score:2)
Starting with this asshole (you don't DDOS my internet). We should export all of our prisoners to Chinese prisons. This will lower our cost and make the prison sentences much more effective.
Re: (Score:2)
If he's talented at all, he won't stay in their prison. He'll be made to work for one of their black hat teams.
Martin Gottesfeld of Anonymous (Score:2)
Anonymous is not a group. It is a movement.
Re: Martin Gottesfeld of Anonymous (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Offtopic & Flambait in the summary (Score:2)