decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
First 104 pages of Aaron Swartz Secret Service File Released - Who is the female on page 97? ~pj
Monday, August 12 2013 @ 06:49 PM EDT

Kevin Poulsen at Wired reports that the first 104 pages of Aaron Swartz's Secret Service files are available now, with a lot more to come, as a result of court ordered release. There are apparently 14,500 more pages to come.

Look at page 97. It's redacted so the identity of the woman is kept confidential, but it appears from the notation that a woman was in contact with authorities and informing them of conversations between her and Swartz.

The notation on that page reads:

[Redacted] said that she also spoke with Swartz after the search of his residence. [Redacted] said that Swartz told her that agents came into his house and took part of his book. [Redacted] said that Swartx also said that agents came into the Safra Center and took his controller for Rock Band. [Redacted] said that Swartz told her that the agents were frustrated and that they did not find what they were looking for. [Redacted] said that Swartz told her that the agents took his phones....[Redacted] said that Swartz started a Google Group called Guerilla Open Access.
So after the raid, Swartz spoke with a female friend, or someone he wrongly imagined was a friend, who then told the raiders what his reaction to the raid had been and told them about Guerilla Open Access. So. Who fits that description? What isn't clear is whether it was an informer in a traditional sense or someone contacted by them, as opposed to the other way around, just a person being interviewed in connection with the case.

For comparison purposes and to be thorough, here's the account by Quinn Norton, who was visited by the Secret Service after the raid:

In early March I was staying at a friend's loft in the Bay Area. Someone knocked at the door of the loft, and I ran downstairs, still dressed in my pajamas, and answered the door. It was a tall man and a short woman in blazers and unmatched trousers. They had the dowdy cleanliness of law enforcement. They said they were from the Secret Service and that they wanted to ask me a few questions. Shocked and unsure of myself, I let them in to talk to me. One should never, ever do this.

They asked about Aaron, I told them I didn't know anything. They pointed out that he'd called me, and asked what he told me. I told them I hadn't asked anything about his arrest, and they were incredulous.

Eventually I ran out of things to tell them, and they produced the real reason for their visit: a subpoena.

Either the woman on page 97 is a different friend, or Norton left out, or misremembered, some important details.

For us, outsiders to the case, it probably doesn't matter who it was. What we can learn, however, is what experts have said over and over again: don't speak to any police types without your lawyer present. Ever.


  


First 104 pages of Aaron Swartz Secret Service File Released - Who is the female on page 97? ~pj | 74 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Could have been a real friend
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 07:16 PM EDT
Or it was just a friend phoning a friend after talking with Aaron. An
acquintance of a "suspected terrorist" (or whatever the term for an
undesirable person may be) is just a single hop away and not an "ordinary
citizen" (Obama terminology) that would have reasonable expectation to be
able to lead a private communication.

That's the problem with universal surveyance: it leads to a situation where true
and false friends do the same kind of damage and you can't confide in anybody
any more. Where you have to take the same precautions as a criminal just to
lead a normal life.

Except that you are disadvantaged by a lack of practice compared to criminals,
and the idea of state and society are not to be the enemy but rather an enabler
of normal human interactions.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Corrections Thread
Authored by: artp on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 07:18 PM EDT
"Errrror" -> "Error" in the Title Block, please.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Comes Goes Here
Authored by: artp on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 07:20 PM EDT
For text version of HTML markups of transcripts of the
"Comes v. MS" case listed in the link above.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic Thread
Authored by: artp on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 07:21 PM EDT
Lots of room for Off Topic here.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

News Picks Thread
Authored by: artp on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 07:21 PM EDT
URL, please.

---
Userfriendly on WGA server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Who is [redacted]?
Authored by: Wol on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 08:00 PM EDT
Quite possibly Aaron's girlfriend !!!

iirc, if you read her account, she talked to the Feds a fair bit. Her attorney
was an ex-prosecutor and encouraged her to talk ...

I got the impression she said far too much, was encouraged to talk by her legal
representation, and ended up regretting it hugely. There's a reason MOST
attorneys tell you to keep your mouth shut!

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | # ]

PJ, I Really Wished You Hadn't Asked: Who is the female on page 97?
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 08:02 PM EDT
Feelings are still running VERY strongly on this and the potential for an
'internet witch hunt' are anywhere from high to guarenteed.

There will be much work to be done as we move forward through 14k+ pages and
falling for the prosecutor's trap on the first day is not the best way to use
limited resources.

[ Reply to This | # ]

First 104 pages of Aaron Swartz Secret Service File Released - Who is the female on page 97? ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, August 12 2013 @ 10:28 PM EDT
"For us, outsiders to the case, it probably doesn't matter
who it was. What we can learn, however, is what experts have
said over and over again: don't speak to any police types
without your lawyer present. Ever."

And not even then! Just say nothing! Refuse to speak. Don't
answer questions. And DO NOT volunteer any information!
Whatever you say, WILL be used against you!

[ Reply to This | # ]

Who is the female on page 97? ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 13 2013 @ 12:14 AM EDT
Is it possible that page 97 notes are not actually from an interview conducted
by law enforcement? There is a lot redacted around what is on page 97. If it
was actually an interview why not leave in some of the info like the page
headers with names etc... redacted, much like the information on the following
page which is clearly from an interview, as it so states in the header.

The information on page 97 has no context. So we assume it was an interview.
Is it possible that the reason for such heavy redaction is to protect the method
of obtaining the information. There is no indication on page 97 of to whom the
"she" was speaking nor how it got into the file.

I'm not saying that it was not from an interview with LE. It may well have
been. I'm just saying that there is not enough information here to convince me
that this was actually an LE interview.

cc

[ Reply to This | # ]

Don't Talk to Police. A MUST SEE talk
Authored by: Winter on Tuesday, August 13 2013 @ 02:58 AM EDT

Watch this. If you have not watched it already, really, really do watch this.

This should be mandatory viewing in high school. You will hear a professor at law and a police officer telling you Never, ever, under any circumstance should you talk to the police without your lawyer present. And even with your lawyer present you should say only the absolute minimum possible.

It is a classic:

Don't Talk to Police

Rob

---
Some say the sun rises in the east, some say it rises in the west; the truth lies probably somewhere in between.

[ Reply to This | # ]

First 104 pages of Aaron Swartz Secret Service File Released - Who is the female on page 97? ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 13 2013 @ 04:34 AM EDT
when are we going to take back our country from the police state?

[ Reply to This | # ]

First 104 pages of Aaron Swartz Secret Service File Released - Who is the female on page 97? ~pj
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, August 13 2013 @ 05:05 AM EDT
I'd be more inclined to believe that the information on page 97 was from an illegal wiretap, probably via the NSA.

From her account,

They asked about Aaron, I told them I didn't know anything. They pointed out that he'd called me, and asked what he told me.
So they already knew he'd called her. Like most good lawyers the Schutzstaffel... oh, silly me, that's the wrong SS, the Secret Service probably knew (or had a good idea of) the answers to their questions before asking them. As we've heard with the DEA stuff, they were probably filling in the details with "parallel construction" so that it could be used as evidence.

j

[ Reply to This | # ]

The Nation of the Free
Authored by: cricketjeff on Tuesday, August 13 2013 @ 06:39 AM EDT
Now we bask in sunny uplands in the Nation of the Free
Doing nothing we're ashamed of so we don't mind who can see
But it really doesn't matter they won't come for you and me
We are safe in pretty houses made of glass

I don't underpay my taxes (well not much at any rate)
So the government won't hurt me it's a law abiding state
Who would never make me doubt that the Policeman is my mate
We are safe in pretty houses made of glass

If my teenagers get silly they can trust the men in blue
I could never raise a rebel who would look for something new
Every child should be a robot who will bid free speech adieu
We are safe in pretty houses made of glass

Everyone who won't believe me is a terrorist or fool
There's no need for private spaces is you all obey my rule
And forget about the freedoms that they offered you in school
We are safe in pretty houses made of glass

Any politician reading hang your head in abject shame
Constant oversight's you're duty but you only play the game
In a state less free than China you can't see it's you to blame
Can't you see you've built a fortress out of glass?







---
There is nothing in life that doesn't look better after a good cup of tea.

[ Reply to This | # ]

[Redacted] on Page 97
Authored by: rsteinmetz70112 on Tuesday, August 13 2013 @ 10:50 AM EDT
Maybe it's just me and I'm missing something but I don't see anything in that
notation that would have ultimately hurt Mr. Swartz's case.

The friend told them she had talked to Swartz (apparently they already knew that
Swartz had spoken to Norton - probably from looking at his cell phone call log)
and that he told her what was seized under the search warrants. They already
knew what they seized.

She also told them "Swartz started a Google Group called Guerilla Open
Access", that seems something they would have inevitably discovered on
their own fairly quickly.

Quinn Norton has admitted telling the authorities about the Manifesto. In her
account she says "Eventually I ran out of things to tell them" without
describing what things she told them. If this describes those thing it seem she
was telling them things she thought they already knew.

On the Other Hand to my eyes this page looks like it may be a redacted email. It
does not follow the format of the memorandum of interviews and lacks a lot of
formatting. It could well be from the agents who spoke to Quinn Norton in San
Francisco.

---
Rsteinmetz - IANAL therefore my opinions are illegal.

"I could be wrong now, but I don't think so."
Randy Newman - The Title Theme from Monk

[ Reply to This | # ]

Secret star chamber courts?
Authored by: DannyB on Tuesday, August 13 2013 @ 01:23 PM EDT
What we can learn, however, is what experts have said over and over again: don't speak to any police types without your lawyer present. Ever.
I see a problem there.

We already have
  • Secret courts
  • Secret laws
  • Secret interpretations of laws
  • Secret court opinions
  • Secret spying on citizens
  • Secret prisons
  • Secret 'enhanced interrogation techniques' in secret prisons
  • Secret international 'extraditions' to these secret prisions, without the inconvenience of lawyers, trials or rights
We probably already have:
  • Secret police
But you just don't know about them yet -- because they are secret!

You can probably see where I am going here.

How long before courts can simply use 'enhanced interrogation techniques'? Not for any improper purpose, mind you, but simply to streamline the judicial process and in the name of judicial efficiency?

---
The price of freedom is eternal litigation.

[ Reply to This | # ]

14,500 pages?
Authored by: albert on Thursday, August 15 2013 @ 11:45 AM EDT
What on earth could this be? Did they print out ALL the data Swartz downloaded?
If these are investigative reports, I suggest some serious revamping of the
governments procedures.

This is just crazy.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )