Jim Bell raid

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

A southern Washington newspaper, The Columbian (apparently published in
Vancouver) provides a "greeked" (e.g., squiggles instead of text) version of
its front page at http://www.columbian.com (you'll have to pick the frame for
"The latest Columbian headlines") - and today's page one above-the-fold
headline is "Affidavit: Internet essay solicits murder". 

It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal. 


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQCVAgUBM0QP37Fh6pHCoCA5AQGqFAP/XajMlyEjtiDeYHYjHeL3B03TqCaCh6t4
kbCuPzoV2zsMIfSpoVcctHiorqYnMt2oemfHwfUT9cubnVwZYMzHZzsaqQjd+OqN
2z/Hnlo4vBFb73+lYWYPTqWydI0qAGZlDS9zbBwUNqP1eQL4rgEJxq6RzdfRcsqU
5MEWLzlfxZ4=
=rzdS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles@netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.

On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, Greg Broiles wrote:

-> A southern Washington newspaper, The Columbian (apparently published in
-> Vancouver) provides a "greeked" (e.g., squiggles instead of text) version of
-> its front page at http://www.columbian.com (you'll have to pick the frame for
-> "The latest Columbian headlines") - and today's page one above-the-fold
-> headline is "Affidavit: Internet essay solicits murder".
-> 
-> It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
-> haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal.

I read the essay when it was published (a year or two ago?).  As I remember
it, it simply extrapolated the consequences of encryption and anonymity to
their logical conclusions.  Specifically, that social control could be
exerted through a "lottery" for "predicting" the dates of death for certain
unpopular politicians.  He stressed the untraceability, unaccountability,
and as far as possible, legality of everything proposed in his essay.

There was some debate concerning the essay which I did not follow.  So, I
don't know what concensus was finally reached.  But, his proposal seemed
generally workable to me.  I would definately not consider the essay to
be evidence of him being a "goddamn loon" anymore than Greg Broiles' post
being evidence of him being a goddamn idiot.  However, the majority of the
public who form their oppinions through newpaper headlines and the like 
certainly are.

Jim Bell's essay is, IMO, definately free speech.  And, as you can see from
the IRS Inspection report, he was not charged with anything relating to the
essay itself.  In fact, the raid happened a long time after he published
the essay, and may truely be unrelated.


 ............................................................................
 . Sergey Goldgaber <sergey@el.net>      System Administrator        el Net .
 ............................................................................
 .   To him who does not know the world is on fire, I have nothing to say   .
 .                                                      - Bertholt Brecht   .
 ............................................................................

In message <Pine.LNX.3.95.970403153051.3400K-100000@void.el.net>, Sergey Goldga
ber writes:
:
:Jim Bell's essay is, IMO, definately free speech.  And, as you can see from
:the IRS Inspection report, he was not charged with anything relating to the
:essay itself.  In fact, the raid happened a long time after he published
:the essay, and may truely be unrelated.
:

Of course, the papers only talk about this.  Anytime they get to use two
cool buzzwords like "Interet" and "Militia", they're happy.  They're even
happier when they get to use them in the same sentince.  It'll sell.

--Chris

------------
Christopher Blizzard
AppliedTheory Communications, Inc.
blizzard@appliedtheory.com
------------

Christopher Blizzard wrote: 
> In message <Pine.LNX.3.95.970403153051.3400K-100000@void.el.net>, Sergey Goldga
> ber writes:
> :Jim Bell's essay is, IMO, definately free speech.  And, as you can see from
> :the IRS Inspection report, he was not charged with anything relating to the
> :essay itself.  In fact, the raid happened a long time after he published
> :the essay, and may truely be unrelated.

> Of course, the papers only talk about this.

  Buy a clue, dudes.
  The application for a search warrant made it more than plain that
the main basis for the search and seizure fishing expedition mounted
by the Feds was based largely on his promotion of AP.
  Only a few, sparse lines of the application are related to valid
IRS concerns re: taxes, etc. 
-- 
Toto
"The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre"
http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/xenbody.html

On Tue, 8 Apr 1997, Toto wrote:

-> Christopher Blizzard wrote: 
-> > In message <Pine.LNX.3.95.970403153051.3400K-100000@void.el.net>, Sergey Goldga
-> > ber writes:
-> > :Jim Bell's essay is, IMO, definately free speech.  And, as you can see from
-> > :the IRS Inspection report, he was not charged with anything relating to the
-> > :essay itself.  In fact, the raid happened a long time after he published
-> > :the essay, and may truely be unrelated.
-> 
-> > Of course, the papers only talk about this.
-> 
->   Buy a clue, dudes.

I wouldn't bother with my nitpicky distinction below if it weren't for this
patronizing comment.

->   The application for a search warrant made it more than plain that
-> the main basis for the search and seizure fishing expedition mounted
-> by the Feds was based largely on his promotion of AP.
->   Only a few, sparse lines of the application are related to valid
-> IRS concerns re: taxes, etc. 

The search warrant was not made public on the cpunks list.  As you can see
form the above excerpt, I was commenting on the "IRS Inspection" report, which
was virtually the first description of Jim Bell's arrest, long before there
were even requests for information on the procedures for obtaining the
search warrants, etc...

After following the debate, I would definately agree that AP played an
important part in sparking the paranoia of the govt. officials to arrest
Jim, which in turn sparked off paranoia on the list, and rather reactionary
comments towards AP, and reactionary flames towards the reactionaries.  :)
Hopefully this trend won't continue.


 ............................................................................
 . Sergey Goldgaber <sergey@el.net>      System Administrator        el Net .
 ............................................................................
 .   To him who does not know the world is on fire, I have nothing to say   .
 .                                                      - Bertholt Brecht   .
 ............................................................................

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 04:56 AM 4/9/97 -0400, Sergey Goldgaber wrote:
>The search warrant was not made public on the cpunks list.  As you can see
>form the above excerpt, I was commenting on the "IRS Inspection" report,
which
>was virtually the first description of Jim Bell's arrest, long before there
>were even requests for information on the procedures for obtaining the
>search warrants, etc...

I realize that we're talking about net-time, but "long before" seems like a
poor way to describe the 2-2.5 days between the appearance of the "IRS
Inspection" report (which was, in fact, the transcription of newspaper story)
and the WWW publication of the warrant & accompanying material. Also, Declan
was posting details from the warrant within 24 hours of the initial message.

>After following the debate, I would definately agree that AP played an
>important part in sparking the paranoia of the govt. officials to arrest
>Jim, which in turn sparked off paranoia on the list, and rather reactionary
>comments towards AP, and reactionary flames towards the reactionaries.  :)
>Hopefully this trend won't continue.

As far as I can tell, the events of last week haven't changed people's
opinions of AP at all - people who thought it was interesting/useful still
do, and people who thought it was uninteresting/stupid still do. I can't
speak for other posters to the list, but I'm inclined to distance myself from
AP not because I'm scared of a government raid, but because I think it's
theoretically uninteresting/unremarkable, politically/tactically poorly
considered, morally indefensible, and irresponsibly misleading to the extent
it purports to discuss US law. I don't want my comments about Jim Bell's
right to discuss his silly ideas to be confused with apologies or approval
for the ideas themselves. 

I believe Jim has every right to write essays about AP, give speeches &
seminars about AP, talk about "wonderful things" all that he likes, etc. But
the "marketplace of ideas" model, whereby good speech is expected to negate
bad speech, depends on the willingness of other people to provide "good
speech", or at least call "bad speech" into question. I think AP is "bad
speech" in the same way the "the earth is flat" is bad speech; it is (and
ought to be) legal to say it, but it's also a non-useful idea, which I hope
will be abandoned in favor of more useful ideas.

I've been ignoring (pre-raid) discussions about AP because I think that an
eternal recycling of arguments is uninteresting and unproductive. I think
that the search of Jim's house, and its relationship to his free speech
activities, is interesting - not because of the [lack of] quality of his
ideas, but because I think this may be a case where law enforcement used its
power to search & seize property in a punitive fashion. And that concerns me,
because I think that isn't uncommon where the target is a "dissident", of one
flavor or another; and I think that dissidents don't/shouldn't lose their
civil rights as a consequence of their status. ("when they came for .."
argument incorporated herein by reference.)

(The search is also interesting for reasons unrelated to Jim and his ideas,
because it provides insight into the level and type and timing of law
enforcement access to the net, treatment of a "confidential informant", and
protocol/procedure for search & seizure of computers and potentially
encrypted data, etc.)  

But that doesn't mean that the dissidents get special respect or treatment
for poor thinking. I think AP is poorly reasoned and poorly researched. (And
I think that "dissident" + "poor analysis/research" + "obsessive focus" =
"loon", hence my original comments.) 


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQEVAgUBM0twXP37pMWUJFlhAQFOgAf8DMhc37rtTZYbZ1pqLTD9r18GsKE56f5T
egrme9gOvQ4uAES1E4LJ2EEbeN7KTZoOWZUHIBA7PitlRn5uXC/TAS3KNcJo5RJH
uH07kH3g0LpeLlArxjTJ+QWt9WTxZ5ri3dNmG1mfuTGZPELZTTeYpLNJQuiO5xhl
0ua68YsHgj0L+e1FPZ0QPwzFDlHuUFuewn1K+hldpbK0GXSDOV9LwtAezzUR0oZw
l5TI7LanD1amR0ii71eMzJx9XtWdjLT4OBMmMNjT4z+BJprW+Qnqm3C9Cq7py4r3
TzhBnRxkOZ58tzeKGn1SDTT/sIVQ5e6P/9QldM1uCR4K+pCXQDOi7A==
=sN8V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
Greg Broiles                | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell:
gbroiles@netbox.com         | 
http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.
                            |

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Wed, 9 Apr 1997, Greg Broiles wrote:

- -> At 04:56 AM 4/9/97 -0400, Sergey Goldgaber wrote:
- -> >The search warrant was not made public on the cpunks list.  As you can see
- -> >form the above excerpt, I was commenting on the "IRS Inspection" report,
- -> which
- -> >was virtually the first description of Jim Bell's arrest, long before there
- -> >were even requests for information on the procedures for obtaining the
- -> >search warrants, etc...
- -> 
- -> I realize that we're talking about net-time, but "long before" seems like a
- -> poor way to describe the 2-2.5 days between the appearance of the "IRS
- -> Inspection" report (which was, in fact, the transcription of newspaper story)

Time flies fast on the Internet; or haven't you noticed?  Three days of rather
heated discussion took place between the time the arrest was announced and 
your message saying that you had the warrants, etc.

- -> and the WWW publication of the warrant & accompanying material.

I saw no mention anywhere on the list of those documents being available,
only that you were considering making them available.

By the way, at the time I wrote my quoted response, you yourself had as
little "clue" as most anyone else:

 -> Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 12:16:19 -0800
 -> From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@netbox.com>
 -> To: cypherpunks@toad.com
 -> Subject: Jim Bell raid
 -> 
 -> A southern Washington newspaper, The Columbian (apparently published in
 -> Vancouver) provides a "greeked" (e.g., squiggles instead of text) version of
 -> its front page at http://www.columbian.com (you'll have to pick the frame for
 -> "The latest Columbian headlines") - and today's page one above-the-fold
 -> headline is "Affidavit: Internet essay solicits murder".
 -> 
 -> It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
 -> haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal.

My message followed three hours later.  I see it was directed against your
hasty "loon" conclusion.  This explains the tone of your later message,
along with your determination.  It seems like you're taking this a little
personally.

- -> Also, Declan
- -> was posting details from the warrant within 24 hours of the initial message.

All he said was that he had them.  No details.

And all this is so nitpicky that I can't believe I even bothered originally
replying to you, merely because of the patronizing tone of your message.
I must have been having a bad day.  Today is worse, though, witness the
present message.

The rest of your post is at least intelligently worded, however, so I'm glad I
persevered through it.

- -> As far as I can tell, the events of last week haven't changed people's
- -> opinions of AP at all - people who thought it was interesting/useful still
- -> do, and people who thought it was uninteresting/stupid still do. I can't
- -> speak for other posters to the list, but I'm inclined to distance myself from
- -> AP not because I'm scared of a government raid,

Perhaps you should be!  Where's that healthy cypherpunk paranoia?  :)

- -> but because I think it's theoretically uninteresting/unremarkable, 

I think its rather interesting, at least as far as discussions of
possible consequences of cryptography are concerned.  And theory that
brings together technology and ethics is all the most interesting.

- -> politically/tactically poorly considered

His original posting was ill considered, I agree.  He did consider it much
more in the following years, you must concede.  Bell did not, afterall,
propose that we fight a land war in China.  This scheme relies mostly
on encryption and anonymity, which takes care of the tactical part.
His political agenda is at least self consistant.

- -> morally indefensible, and 

What a cro-magnon sentiment, and coming from such a bright lad.  :)
(Sorry, my turn to be patronizing :)

Morality is logically indefensible.  If it weren't for your earlier
disclaimer, saying that you're speaking only for yourself, I'd go off
on a philosophy/ethics rant.

- -> irresponsibly misleading to the extent it purports to discuss US law.

I've got to hand it to you there.  No where does he claim to be a lawyer.
However, he does give the impression of knowing the law.

- -> I don't want my comments about Jim Bell's right to discuss his silly 
- -> ideas to be confused with apologies or approval for the ideas themselves.

Duly noted.

- -> I believe Jim has every right to write essays about AP, give speeches &
- -> seminars about AP, talk about "wonderful things" all that he likes, etc.

Agreed.

- -> But
- -> the "marketplace of ideas" model, whereby good speech is expected to negate
- -> bad speech, depends on the willingness of other people to provide "good
- -> speech", or at least call "bad speech" into question. I think AP is "bad
- -> speech" in the same way the "the earth is flat" is bad speech; it is (and
- -> ought to be) legal to say it, but it's also a non-useful idea, which I hope
- -> will be abandoned in favor of more useful ideas.

Ah, an advocate of the survival of the fittest idea, and a utilitarian to boot.
Well, may your memes flourish.  However, to be consistent, you must admit
that the fittest and more "useful" ideas may have nothing to do with your
defenses of particular politics, morals, or laws.  In fact, they have as
much, or more, to with the environment that they are in as their content.
Thus, there is no "bad speech" or "good speech".  Certain ideas simply "win"
in certain circumstances.  Had the circumstances been slightly different,
different ideas would have "won".

- -> I've been ignoring (pre-raid) discussions about AP because I think that an
- -> eternal recycling of arguments is uninteresting and unproductive.

I'm following you.

- -> I think
- -> that the search of Jim's house, and its relationship to his free speech
- -> activities, is interesting - not because of the [lack of] quality of his
- -> ideas, but because I think this may be a case where law enforcement used its
- -> power to search & seize property in a punitive fashion. And that concerns me,
- -> because I think that isn't uncommon where the target is a "dissident", of one
- -> flavor or another; and I think that dissidents don't/shouldn't lose their
- -> civil rights as a consequence of their status. ("when they came for .."
- -> argument incorporated herein by reference.)

I definately and wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments here.

- -> (The search is also interesting for reasons unrelated to Jim and his ideas,
- -> because it provides insight into the level and type and timing of law
- -> enforcement access to the net, treatment of a "confidential informant", and
- -> protocol/procedure for search & seizure of computers and potentially
- -> encrypted data, etc.)

Si.

- -> But that doesn't mean that the dissidents get special respect or treatment
- -> for poor thinking. I think AP is poorly reasoned and poorly researched. (And
- -> I think that "dissident" + "poor analysis/research" + "obsessive focus" =
- -> "loon", hence my original comments.)

I disagree with your acusation concerning "poor analysis/research".  Thus
I can not agree with even your definition of "loon".  Besides, there are
other possible, sometimes contradictory, variables fitting in to this 
oversimplistic equation that would also = "loon".  For example, 
"sheep" + "religion" + "obsessive focus" = "loon"
"freethinker" + "athiest" + "obsessive focus" = "loon"
"cypherpunk" + "statist" + "obsessive focus" = "loon"

Then there's:

"obsessive focus" = "loon"

which brings up another view, namely:

"obsessive focus" = "dedication"

As far as "poor analysis/research" in and of itself goes: there have been
plenty of groundbreaking works which had very poor analysis, but were
invaluable in "showing the way".  Many of their authors were very dedicated.
And some were even, !gasp!, "dissident".  At the very least, dedication 
has often led to the publicization of ideas which are thereafter better
researched by others (we can call them "drones", "librarians", "technicians",
or even "computers").

In any case, I've long gone past the point of rambling... and long past
the general topicality of cypherpunks, so I'll shut up.

Now...  Goodnight.  :)

And, don't take this post too seriously as it is 3:41 AM here, and I'm
past the point of starting to nod off...........

zzzz......


 ............................................................................
 . Sergey Goldgaber <sergey@el.net>      System Administrator        el Net .
 ............................................................................
 .   To him who does not know the world is on fire, I have nothing to say   .
 .                                                      - Bertholt Brecht   .
 ............................................................................

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/pgp-faq/faq-05.html explains this signature.

iQCVAwUBM0yaLcgbnd/MibbZAQHxPwP+KeWM7kuEs4n8aTFCiNzy39dkVvyuZR8R
f/K23g2HjPSp9h9vDk0PBiPU6ZYBy9IitnW2bgURrKl3bxwlzNgwpS5s01MMc9H2
JFWL+33DoxnaZMQk0Rz7nvVcXuan4RkT+p64e35bX5kVpJTxpLBK/XpG5BtBVP82
1owNdLBDpFs=
=2TqK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Timothy C. May wrote:

> Let's not make the Cypherpunks firing squad a circle.

  Although Tim has been on the rag lately, perhaps this bit
of humor is a sign that his period (pardon the pun) of male
menopause is over.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Wouldn't you like to know?
Hey!Youstinkingcops!I'musingPGPsoyouguyscanjustgofuck
yourselfifyouthinkyou'regoingtoreadmyshit.
=uO3j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
Toto
"The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre"
http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/xenbody.html

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 01:32 PM 4/9/97 -0600, you wrote:
|Timothy C. May wrote:
|
|> Let's not make the Cypherpunks firing squad a circle.
|
|  Although Tim has been on the rag lately, perhaps this bit
|of humor is a sign that his period (pardon the pun) of male
|menopause is over.

This sort of snide sexist humor has no place here.

Alec
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQCVAgUBM0wQQiKJGkNBIH7lAQGBaQQAsuFkZj/9SiPCQQVBRXTGJNCwd0vK2y//
+FPs5naC0/xxEVR/K5TA2gP9L9LxQ9E8/XPV7UuMUnlac57TKhfZWA3R5nsEDwt2
lQ0ypCjeQjDodAOI5IkBLBOTXm+TUBFWlU7XyDk/xP23IOkCPFETU28qOAkbO3eq
K81NNgvfnPs=
=3mlt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Alec <camcc@abraxis.com> writes:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> At 01:32 PM 4/9/97 -0600, you wrote:
> |Timothy C. May wrote:
> |
> |> Let's not make the Cypherpunks firing squad a circle.
> |
> |  Although Tim has been on the rag lately, perhaps this bit
> |of humor is a sign that his period (pardon the pun) of male
> |menopause is over.
>
> This sort of snide sexist humor has no place here.

What sort of humor does have a place here?

Timmy's racist rants about petards and crazy Russians?

---

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM
Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, Greg Broiles wrote:

> A southern Washington newspaper, The Columbian (apparently published in
> Vancouver) provides a "greeked" (e.g., squiggles instead of text) version of
> its front page at http://www.columbian.com (you'll have to pick the frame for
> "The latest Columbian headlines") - and today's page one above-the-fold
> headline is "Affidavit: Internet essay solicits murder". 

I have the Columbian with the front page articles.  (They have two.  One
titled _Federal agents 'overreacting,' says Vancouver target of raid_ and
the other titled _Assassination scheme on Internet_.)  The articles are in
the Columbian's standard style. (i.e. slanted towards sensationalizm and
general tabloid sleeze with lots of quotation marks.)

> It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
> haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal. 

What is "Criminal" is getting more and more broad.  (My personal belief is
that if the Government wanted to discredit AP they would just send Mr.
Bell on a speaking tour.)

Maybe the raid was just making an "example" as to what could happen to
those who threaten the state. (No matter how badly.)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 12:16 PM 4/3/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote:

>It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
>haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal. 

The government persists in harassing or arresting people in these 1st
Amendment cases even though they know they will not even be able to survive a
motion to dismiss.  It seems to be recreational for them.  You can tell
they're not serious because they didn't arrest Jim.   

JB has certainly managed to get noticed amongst all the "noise" out there in
the world.  Very difficult to do.  And it's getting worse with the Nets.  How
many death threats must whitehouse.gov get these days?  They probably lack
the person power to investigate all of them.  

This will be another one where the raid gets publicity and the failure to
prosecute is only noticed by a few.  When they drop him, he should trumpet it
far and wide.  The dropping of the Jake Baker case got little publicity and I
even had another lawyer on one of the law lists say that he thought they
might try for another indictment.  I knew they'd never get anywhere.

In those very rare cases where you get a guaranteed government loss criminal
investigation/prosecution the party involved should verbally abuse the
government and point out their manifest pathetic weakness.  It is very rare
to be in that situation because the government won't usually back a loser.  I
urged Phil Z. to take an aggressive approach in his case but he felt
uncomfortable about the idea.  Perhaps as a "leftie" he granted the inherent
authority of the government and was reluctant to bash it.

So, JB, find a Portland cybercafe and let 'em have it.

DCF

"Obligatory John Donne quote:  Do Not Ask For Whom the Bell Tools.  It Tolls
For Thee."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 4.5

iQCVAgUBM0RxR4VO4r4sgSPhAQFEDQP/b8QTvGKipSK4sUDvKIIznESmPQRncGP9
i2venrurNxIiHWorP+C+lpDdrXlC+lrcOfT6WLBFkV7UZTF5qduTqavtXYvCA+7W
1aF6CrE9dWUZNzjnpxMI2t3/Wpr/F7JF+nE1r2R3d6/pCtYZPw3gDeraS34hWXqp
tDeuUYPEOyg=
=0Znu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

To all lawyers out there: aren't there PUBLIC RECORDS that contain
teh search warrant with the probably cause explanation and other
material? It would be interesting to send a letter to some court
and ask for all public record stuff about jimbell.

just an idea

igor

Duncan Frissell wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> At 12:16 PM 4/3/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote:
> 
> >It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
> >haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal. 
> 
> The government persists in harassing or arresting people in these 1st
> Amendment cases even though they know they will not even be able to survive a
> motion to dismiss.  It seems to be recreational for them.  You can tell
> they're not serious because they didn't arrest Jim.   
> 
> JB has certainly managed to get noticed amongst all the "noise" out there in
> the world.  Very difficult to do.  And it's getting worse with the Nets.  How
> many death threats must whitehouse.gov get these days?  They probably lack
> the person power to investigate all of them.  
> 
> This will be another one where the raid gets publicity and the failure to
> prosecute is only noticed by a few.  When they drop him, he should trumpet it
> far and wide.  The dropping of the Jake Baker case got little publicity and I
> even had another lawyer on one of the law lists say that he thought they
> might try for another indictment.  I knew they'd never get anywhere.
> 
> In those very rare cases where you get a guaranteed government loss criminal
> investigation/prosecution the party involved should verbally abuse the
> government and point out their manifest pathetic weakness.  It is very rare
> to be in that situation because the government won't usually back a loser.  I
> urged Phil Z. to take an aggressive approach in his case but he felt
> uncomfortable about the idea.  Perhaps as a "leftie" he granted the inherent
> authority of the government and was reluctant to bash it.
> 
> So, JB, find a Portland cybercafe and let 'em have it.
> 
> DCF
> 
> "Obligatory John Donne quote:  Do Not Ask For Whom the Bell Tools.  It Tolls
> For Thee."
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 4.5
> 
> iQCVAgUBM0RxR4VO4r4sgSPhAQFEDQP/b8QTvGKipSK4sUDvKIIznESmPQRncGP9
> i2venrurNxIiHWorP+C+lpDdrXlC+lrcOfT6WLBFkV7UZTF5qduTqavtXYvCA+7W
> 1aF6CrE9dWUZNzjnpxMI2t3/Wpr/F7JF+nE1r2R3d6/pCtYZPw3gDeraS34hWXqp
> tDeuUYPEOyg=
> =0Znu
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 



	- Igor.

Yes, there are. I have a copy of the search warrant, IRS affidavit, and
list of seized items. Beyond that, there's nothing else in the court
record. And the U.S. Attorney isn't saying much.

-Declan

On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:

> To all lawyers out there: aren't there PUBLIC RECORDS that contain
> teh search warrant with the probably cause explanation and other
> material? It would be interesting to send a letter to some court
> and ask for all public record stuff about jimbell.
> 
> just an idea
> 
> igor
> 
> Duncan Frissell wrote:
> > 
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > 
> > At 12:16 PM 4/3/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote:
> > 
> > >It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
> > >haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal. 
> > 
> > The government persists in harassing or arresting people in these 1st
> > Amendment cases even though they know they will not even be able to survive a
> > motion to dismiss.  It seems to be recreational for them.  You can tell
> > they're not serious because they didn't arrest Jim.   
> > 
> > JB has certainly managed to get noticed amongst all the "noise" out there in
> > the world.  Very difficult to do.  And it's getting worse with the Nets.  How
> > many death threats must whitehouse.gov get these days?  They probably lack
> > the person power to investigate all of them.  
> > 
> > This will be another one where the raid gets publicity and the failure to
> > prosecute is only noticed by a few.  When they drop him, he should trumpet it
> > far and wide.  The dropping of the Jake Baker case got little publicity and I
> > even had another lawyer on one of the law lists say that he thought they
> > might try for another indictment.  I knew they'd never get anywhere.
> > 
> > In those very rare cases where you get a guaranteed government loss criminal
> > investigation/prosecution the party involved should verbally abuse the
> > government and point out their manifest pathetic weakness.  It is very rare
> > to be in that situation because the government won't usually back a loser.  I
> > urged Phil Z. to take an aggressive approach in his case but he felt
> > uncomfortable about the idea.  Perhaps as a "leftie" he granted the inherent
> > authority of the government and was reluctant to bash it.
> > 
> > So, JB, find a Portland cybercafe and let 'em have it.
> > 
> > DCF
> > 
> > "Obligatory John Donne quote:  Do Not Ask For Whom the Bell Tools.  It Tolls
> > For Thee."
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: 4.5
> > 
> > iQCVAgUBM0RxR4VO4r4sgSPhAQFEDQP/b8QTvGKipSK4sUDvKIIznESmPQRncGP9
> > i2venrurNxIiHWorP+C+lpDdrXlC+lrcOfT6WLBFkV7UZTF5qduTqavtXYvCA+7W
> > 1aF6CrE9dWUZNzjnpxMI2t3/Wpr/F7JF+nE1r2R3d6/pCtYZPw3gDeraS34hWXqp
> > tDeuUYPEOyg=
> > =0Znu
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 	- Igor.
> 
>

Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> Yes, there are. I have a copy of the search warrant, IRS affidavit, and
> list of seized items. Beyond that, there's nothing else in the court
> record. And the U.S. Attorney isn't saying much.

This is cool. Could you post them? That woul;d be interesting.

igor


> -Declan
> 
> On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote:
> 
> > To all lawyers out there: aren't there PUBLIC RECORDS that contain
> > teh search warrant with the probably cause explanation and other
> > material? It would be interesting to send a letter to some court
> > and ask for all public record stuff about jimbell.
> > 
> > just an idea
> > 
> > igor
> > 
> > Duncan Frissell wrote:
> > > 
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > 
> > > At 12:16 PM 4/3/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote:
> > > 
> > > >It looks to me like this is real. Yow. Jim Bell is a goddamn loon, but I
> > > >haven't seen him write anything that I thought was criminal. 
> > > 
> > > The government persists in harassing or arresting people in these 1st
> > > Amendment cases even though they know they will not even be able to survive a
> > > motion to dismiss.  It seems to be recreational for them.  You can tell
> > > they're not serious because they didn't arrest Jim.   
> > > 
> > > JB has certainly managed to get noticed amongst all the "noise" out there in
> > > the world.  Very difficult to do.  And it's getting worse with the Nets.  How
> > > many death threats must whitehouse.gov get these days?  They probably lack
> > > the person power to investigate all of them.  
> > > 
> > > This will be another one where the raid gets publicity and the failure to
> > > prosecute is only noticed by a few.  When they drop him, he should trumpet it
> > > far and wide.  The dropping of the Jake Baker case got little publicity and I
> > > even had another lawyer on one of the law lists say that he thought they
> > > might try for another indictment.  I knew they'd never get anywhere.
> > > 
> > > In those very rare cases where you get a guaranteed government loss criminal
> > > investigation/prosecution the party involved should verbally abuse the
> > > government and point out their manifest pathetic weakness.  It is very rare
> > > to be in that situation because the government won't usually back a loser.  I
> > > urged Phil Z. to take an aggressive approach in his case but he felt
> > > uncomfortable about the idea.  Perhaps as a "leftie" he granted the inherent
> > > authority of the government and was reluctant to bash it.
> > > 
> > > So, JB, find a Portland cybercafe and let 'em have it.
> > > 
> > > DCF
> > > 
> > > "Obligatory John Donne quote:  Do Not Ask For Whom the Bell Tools.  It Tolls
> > > For Thee."
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > Version: 4.5
> > > 
> > > iQCVAgUBM0RxR4VO4r4sgSPhAQFEDQP/b8QTvGKipSK4sUDvKIIznESmPQRncGP9
> > > i2venrurNxIiHWorP+C+lpDdrXlC+lrcOfT6WLBFkV7UZTF5qduTqavtXYvCA+7W
> > > 1aF6CrE9dWUZNzjnpxMI2t3/Wpr/F7JF+nE1r2R3d6/pCtYZPw3gDeraS34hWXqp
> > > tDeuUYPEOyg=
> > > =0Znu
> > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 	- Igor.
> > 
> > 
> 



	- Igor.

I've had a couple requests to redistribute or post the info I have on Jim
Bell. I've decided not to. There's a good bit of personal information in
there, including his SSN and information about financial investments, that
I don't feel comfortable posting. I suspect Jim has enough problems
already.

Yes, I know, "information will be free" and all that, but I don't have to
be the cause of its release.

-Declan

Declan McCullagh wrote:
> 
> I've had a couple requests to redistribute or post the info I have on Jim
> Bell. I've decided not to. There's a good bit of personal information in
> there, including his SSN and information about financial investments, that
> I don't feel comfortable posting. I suspect Jim has enough problems
> already.
> 
> Yes, I know, "information will be free" and all that, but I don't have to
> be the cause of its release.
> 

Oh, OK, I did not know.

Anyway, how does one request that information? What should the letter
to the court say? And what is the address of teh court?

	- Igor.