Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations Rhinorhino on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Micro$oft screws up again!!! 11
- Thread starter SF18C
- Start date
- Status
sleipnir214
Programmer
This case never went to trial. Mr. Neale originally accepted a plea bargain offered by the DA and plead guilty to a misdemeanor, not the felony for which he was originally charged.
The pre-trial activities of a defense attorney are very different from the activities of a defense attorney durning trial.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
The pre-trial activities of a defense attorney are very different from the activities of a defense attorney durning trial.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
SemperFiDownUnda
Instructor
Dimandja -
I completely agree but if company A can prove that they produced the questions, via records of the teams of tech writers they employ and the documents they write and the company B plead the fifth the burden of proof to me would have been provided. It is not company A's responsibility to show how company B obtained the material.
As Cajun points out I was talking about crimial charges
Civial charges ar much different then criminal. If MS was just money grubbing then civial court would have been the way to go while criminal charges lay more in the realm of doing things for the write reason in many cases in my eyes.
If a plea bargin was accepted then it seems that guilt is there in some form most likely. Why the DA accepted etc is open to debate. If what Slepeir's quote from the article is true seems that Neale could have probably went to court and had the case thrown out but that seems to not be the case if he accepted the plea bargin. If the DA didn't have enough evidence to prosecute the charges of trade secrets then you have to agian wonder why Neale accepted the plea. I'm sure there is a lot more politics here then we are seeing and the fact that different news agencies are reporting different stories on what happens I wouldn't hold to much trueth from any one agency.
sleipnir214 - because search warrants where not produced correctly doesn't mean justice was served. In my view that mean that
A) Justice was not served in the first case for Mr Neale in that he was searched unlawfully.
B) Justice was not served in the first case for MS if the warrants where written up improperly in the first place
And these 2 points don't change the possibility of Mr Neale use of material that is not his for profit which not only adversely impacts MS and those certified around the world in MS technology but those organisations that legitimately create their own material to distribute for the purpose of aiding those that are going for their certification.
Again don't assume I'm not wanting a trial here. But seriously can any say that Neale's web site legitimately obtained questions from the MS exams? Any one that has seen the site and seen the questions and have taken MS exams can state that the number of questions that are almost identical in wording to the MS exam questions....it can't be chance....Its like the 1000 monkeys at type writers banging randomly away at keys writing the complete works of Shakespeare....sure there is a chance they could do it but do you honestly believe that it would happen.
Hope I've been helpful,
Wayne Francis
If you want to get the best response to a question, please check out FAQ222-2244 first
I completely agree but if company A can prove that they produced the questions, via records of the teams of tech writers they employ and the documents they write and the company B plead the fifth the burden of proof to me would have been provided. It is not company A's responsibility to show how company B obtained the material.
As Cajun points out I was talking about crimial charges
Civial charges ar much different then criminal. If MS was just money grubbing then civial court would have been the way to go while criminal charges lay more in the realm of doing things for the write reason in many cases in my eyes.
If a plea bargin was accepted then it seems that guilt is there in some form most likely. Why the DA accepted etc is open to debate. If what Slepeir's quote from the article is true seems that Neale could have probably went to court and had the case thrown out but that seems to not be the case if he accepted the plea bargin. If the DA didn't have enough evidence to prosecute the charges of trade secrets then you have to agian wonder why Neale accepted the plea. I'm sure there is a lot more politics here then we are seeing and the fact that different news agencies are reporting different stories on what happens I wouldn't hold to much trueth from any one agency.
sleipnir214 - because search warrants where not produced correctly doesn't mean justice was served. In my view that mean that
A) Justice was not served in the first case for Mr Neale in that he was searched unlawfully.
B) Justice was not served in the first case for MS if the warrants where written up improperly in the first place
And these 2 points don't change the possibility of Mr Neale use of material that is not his for profit which not only adversely impacts MS and those certified around the world in MS technology but those organisations that legitimately create their own material to distribute for the purpose of aiding those that are going for their certification.
Again don't assume I'm not wanting a trial here. But seriously can any say that Neale's web site legitimately obtained questions from the MS exams? Any one that has seen the site and seen the questions and have taken MS exams can state that the number of questions that are almost identical in wording to the MS exam questions....it can't be chance....Its like the 1000 monkeys at type writers banging randomly away at keys writing the complete works of Shakespeare....sure there is a chance they could do it but do you honestly believe that it would happen.
Hope I've been helpful,
Wayne Francis
If you want to get the best response to a question, please check out FAQ222-2244 first
sleipnir214
Programmer
You're confusing expediency with justice.
If I'm facing getting back half of my impounded possessions by pleading guilty to a misdemeanor or fighting an expensive felony trial in court, I'd probably be tempted to take the plea, too.
I get back $200,000 immediately, or I pay my lawyer $300,000 to possibly get back $400,000. It becomes a matter of economics, not justice.
And if Microsoft's interests were not served because of a flawed search warrant, Microsoft had better hope their lawyers have learned an important object lesson. That being to make sure the information you give procecutors is accurate.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
If I'm facing getting back half of my impounded possessions by pleading guilty to a misdemeanor or fighting an expensive felony trial in court, I'd probably be tempted to take the plea, too.
I get back $200,000 immediately, or I pay my lawyer $300,000 to possibly get back $400,000. It becomes a matter of economics, not justice.
And if Microsoft's interests were not served because of a flawed search warrant, Microsoft had better hope their lawyers have learned an important object lesson. That being to make sure the information you give procecutors is accurate.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
Wayne,
In the US at least, there are rules to be followed in a court of justice. Simply clamoring that someone is guilty does not send them to the gallows. One has to be "found" guilty. That is why your opinion about this case is only that: an opinion. Let the court, if it ever comes to that, find them guilty.
Dimandja
In the US at least, there are rules to be followed in a court of justice. Simply clamoring that someone is guilty does not send them to the gallows. One has to be "found" guilty. That is why your opinion about this case is only that: an opinion. Let the court, if it ever comes to that, find them guilty.
Dimandja
CajunCenturion
Programmer
You are correct Dimandja, accusing someone does not make them guilty. And if Mr. Neale was truly innocent, all he had to do was to show that he got his data from a legitimate source and case closed. Done deal on day 2 of the whole fiasco. The fact that he didn't, or couldn't, and it doesn't matter which cost him a lot of money.
You seem to be forgetting that when Mr. Neale originally accepted a plea bargain offered by the DA he was admitting his guilt, albeit to a lessor charge.
I am convinced that there is something else undercutting this entire procedure that none of us know about.
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
You seem to be forgetting that when Mr. Neale originally accepted a plea bargain offered by the DA he was admitting his guilt, albeit to a lessor charge.
I am convinced that there is something else undercutting this entire procedure that none of us know about.
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
Accepting a plea bargain does not infer guilt. It is a legal maneuver used by both parties to resolve intractable disputes. Or the party may be unwilling to disclose proprietary information if a trial is held. There is a million reason why people - and the government - may want to cope a plea rather than go to trial: and, admission of guilt is not necessarily one of them.
Of course, as you say:
Dimandja
Of course, as you say:
Dimandja
CajunCenturion
Programmer
Accepting a plea bargain does not infer guilt with respect to the original charge(s). It is an admission, or at least acceptance of guilt to a lessor offense.
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
CajunCenturion
Programmer
All that I've seen in the press was that it was a misdemeanor offense rather than a felony.
Going back to what sleipnir214 said:
But if I can show that I obtained my information though legitimate sources, duh!!
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
Going back to what sleipnir214 said:
That is understandable and even practical.sleipnir214 said:
But if I can show that I obtained my information though legitimate sources, duh!!
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein
sleipnir214
Programmer
You'd have to demonstrate alternate sources for information to someone capable of making the determination. The prosecutor's office in this case does not sound like such an entity, if the warrant irregularities and charge inappropriateness are any indication.
<facetious>
Since the DA's office impounded his kids' video game console, he had motivation to expeditiously get their game returned
</facetious>
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
<facetious>
Since the DA's office impounded his kids' video game console, he had motivation to expeditiously get their game returned
</facetious>
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
sleipnir214
Programmer
And after what happened to Steve Jackson Games, I'm always a bit doubtful of the correctness of computer seizures in the state of Texas.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
SemperFiDownUnda
Instructor
sleipnir214 - while I appreciate what you are saying you are assuming that the problems with the search warrents where microsofts fault. This is just as bad as what others are accusing me of....convicting Neale before he is tried.
Dimandja - I'm well aware of the US legal system. I am American. I know a bit about both civil, criminal and military justice systems and the differences between them. You might not be meaning to do this and it might be me not conveying what I'm trying to say but I'm not saying [/quote]Simply clamoring that someone is guilty does not send them to the gallows[/quote]
and as far as
So what I'm saying is that I have personally seen Neale's sites recieve questions. Deny how he got questions all you want. I'm sure MS and other training centres can prove how they got their questions. Here we have Mr Neale with his web site that asked people to submit questions and answers from their own certification test that is unwilling to show that he got the questions another way and you are saying that he's been wronged. I admit that with mistakes in the search warrants that he's been denied proper legal procedures but honestly is your hatred for MS that big that you will say there isn't enough to bring this case to court? And since this was a criminal charge MS don't have as much say on what goes on as they will in a civil court.
Believe what you want. Deny the evidence out there. That is your choice.
Hope I've been helpful,
Wayne Francis
If you want to get the best response to a question, please check out FAQ222-2244 first
Dimandja - I'm well aware of the US legal system. I am American. I know a bit about both civil, criminal and military justice systems and the differences between them. You might not be meaning to do this and it might be me not conveying what I'm trying to say but I'm not saying [/quote]Simply clamoring that someone is guilty does not send them to the gallows[/quote]
and as far as
Well it is not just my opinion that Neale has obtained questions illegally. I know students of mine that have put questions up there. I've even had to block his sites in our education center. Its a FACT. Now what gets done about that fact is up to the judicial system. Just like if you see someone shoot another person. It isn't your opinion that the person shot the other person it is a fact and you witnessed it....now if the goverment doesn't prosecute then that is a seperate matter. If Neale won't say how he got the questions legally and MS can show that he has their questions then its then the responcibility of the court case to prove the why for either side. Just as there may have be a legit reason for someone to shoot someone else. I haven't once said this shouldn't goto trial. I'm saying the evidence is there to move ahead with a court case.
So what I'm saying is that I have personally seen Neale's sites recieve questions. Deny how he got questions all you want. I'm sure MS and other training centres can prove how they got their questions. Here we have Mr Neale with his web site that asked people to submit questions and answers from their own certification test that is unwilling to show that he got the questions another way and you are saying that he's been wronged. I admit that with mistakes in the search warrants that he's been denied proper legal procedures but honestly is your hatred for MS that big that you will say there isn't enough to bring this case to court? And since this was a criminal charge MS don't have as much say on what goes on as they will in a civil court.
Believe what you want. Deny the evidence out there. That is your choice.
Hope I've been helpful,
Wayne Francis
If you want to get the best response to a question, please check out FAQ222-2244 first
sleipnir214
Programmer
SemperFiDownUnda:
This isn't about hatred for Microsoft. This isn't about whether Mr. Neale buys and sells MCSE test questions. This is about whether Mr. Neale's activity violated Texas' trade secret law. Judge Richardson, the judge that signed the original search warrants, says there was not probable cause to issue the warrants in the first place. I think he would know.
And you're right -- if you witness a killing, you can state for a fact that A shot and killed B. But it is still for a court to decide whether A's killing of B was murder and what the punishment should be.
I do believe Mr. Neale has been wronged. His property, it has been ruled, was seized without probable cause and held for two years. During which time no charges were ever filed. If law enforcement can seize property and hold it indefinately without filing charges, everything is not right with the world.
I, for one, have made no assertions that Microsoft wronged Mr. Neale. I think the blame for this rests securely on the shoulders of the DA's office of Bexar County, Texas, for not having made sure that they knew what they were doing when they asked for the warrent. I have merely said that Microsoft's lawyers had better have learned to document their assertions better in future when they're pressing charges against people.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
This isn't about hatred for Microsoft. This isn't about whether Mr. Neale buys and sells MCSE test questions. This is about whether Mr. Neale's activity violated Texas' trade secret law. Judge Richardson, the judge that signed the original search warrants, says there was not probable cause to issue the warrants in the first place. I think he would know.
And you're right -- if you witness a killing, you can state for a fact that A shot and killed B. But it is still for a court to decide whether A's killing of B was murder and what the punishment should be.
I do believe Mr. Neale has been wronged. His property, it has been ruled, was seized without probable cause and held for two years. During which time no charges were ever filed. If law enforcement can seize property and hold it indefinately without filing charges, everything is not right with the world.
I, for one, have made no assertions that Microsoft wronged Mr. Neale. I think the blame for this rests securely on the shoulders of the DA's office of Bexar County, Texas, for not having made sure that they knew what they were doing when they asked for the warrent. I have merely said that Microsoft's lawyers had better have learned to document their assertions better in future when they're pressing charges against people.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
Does he explain why he issued them then?
[blue]"Well, once again my friend, we find that science is a two headed beast. One head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences,...but the other head of science is BAD! Oh, beware the other head of science, Arthur; it bites!!" - The Tick[/blue]
SemperFiDownUnda,
I have no hatred for MS or any other organization; I like to think I am not that petty.
All I am saying is that a "kangaroo" court is no substitute for justice. You may have your FACTS, but they still have to stand up in a REAL court.
Other than that, sleipnir214 was very eloquent in his answer to your post.
Dimandja
I have no hatred for MS or any other organization; I like to think I am not that petty.
All I am saying is that a "kangaroo" court is no substitute for justice. You may have your FACTS, but they still have to stand up in a REAL court.
Other than that, sleipnir214 was very eloquent in his answer to your post.
Dimandja
sleipnir214
Programmer
TomThumbKP:
I think that we've seen with Judge Richardson the same problem we see with judges and juries all over the world. Basic ignorance of IT and how the world's badly-fitting laws apply to it.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
I think that we've seen with Judge Richardson the same problem we see with judges and juries all over the world. Basic ignorance of IT and how the world's badly-fitting laws apply to it.
Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!
TANSTAAFL!!
I wonder what he realized between when he issued the warrants and now to make him realize he was mistaken.
[blue]"Well, once again my friend, we find that science is a two headed beast. One head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences,...but the other head of science is BAD! Oh, beware the other head of science, Arthur; it bites!!" - The Tick[/blue]
[blue]"Well, once again my friend, we find that science is a two headed beast. One head is nice, it gives us aspirin and other modern conveniences,...but the other head of science is BAD! Oh, beware the other head of science, Arthur; it bites!!" - The Tick[/blue]
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question