MetaChat - facebook status used as alibi

Mr. Reuland acknowledged that, in principle, anyone who knew Mr. Bradford’s user name and password could have typed the Facebook update, but he regards it as unlikely.

“This implies a level of criminal genius that you would not expect from a young boy like this; he is not Dr. Evil,”

Really? Genius?! I think this dude Reuland has a pretty low bar for what constitutes "criminal genius."

posted by amro 12 November | 11:15

Oh, and the "young boy" is 19 years old.

posted by amro 12 November | 11:16

Yeah, but that's his defense attorney talking, right? Of course he's going to present it like that.

posted by gaspode 12 November | 11:19

The article didn't even answer the most important question:

Where were his pancakes?

posted by desjardins 12 November | 11:23

The district attorney subpoenaed Facebook to verify that the words had been typed from a computer at an apartment at 71 West 118th Street in Manhattan, the home of Mr. Bradford’s father.

If I had been a juror in that case, that evidence alone would have been enough to sink the prosecution's case. That's reasonable doubt, right there.

posted by jason's_planet 12 November | 11:40

For many years until the digital immigrants die off, Facebook is going to be a great place for law enforcement to catch criminals. There are already stories of how lawyers in divorce cases love Facebook, because, say, someone will claim to not have any money for child support but then purchase a ring for his girlfrield--and then brag about it on Facebook. This guy totally didn't get the whole anonymous thing.

posted by Melismata 12 November | 12:20

Yeah, but that's his defense attorney talking, right? Of course he's going to present it like that

Yeah, but I'm a defense attorney too, and I know from experience that you can't say dumb stuff like that and not expect to get laughed at by your adversary.

posted by amro 12 November | 12:22

I thought pancakes threads were something from the other site.

posted by dhartung 12 November | 12:41

But he's talking to the media after he's already gotten the charges dropped? We don't know how he presented it to the opposing counsel. Not like that, then huh?

posted by gaspode 12 November | 12:55

Not that long ago a creative director was suspected of attempted murder due to and had an alibi through Facebook.

posted by dabitch 12 November | 12:59

For many years until the digital immigrants die off, Facebook is going to be a great place for law enforcement to catch criminals.

Yeah. Personally, I can't see why anyone with an ounce of common sense would disclose anything that might be legally actionable on Facebook. Facebook is notorious for its open-door policy towards subpoenas and informal requests from law enforcement; when the cops say "jump", Facebook says "How high and would you like fries with that, sir?"

posted by jason's_planet 12 November | 13:01

gaspode, yeah, I guess at this point he can put it however he wants.

posted by amro 12 November | 13:30

Facebook is notorious for its open-door policy towards subpoenas and informal requests from law enforcement; when the cops say "jump", Facebook says "How high and would you like fries with that, sir?"

And what is wrong with that? Why should Facebook spend an ounce of energy on making it easy for people who break the law? Your tone sounds like you think Facebook is kissing the cops' butts; I don't see why that's a problem.

Especially if the criminals in question qualify for Darwin awards...

posted by Melismata 12 November | 13:33

My tone is the result of a conscious choice to use slightly more colorful language in order to make a point.

As for the "shoulds" . . .

*shrug*

It's their website; they can run it however they please. Just noting that if you ever engage in any activity that might attract the attention of the law, talking about it online is generally a bad idea. And that discussing it on Facebook is an extremely bad idea, given their relationship with law enforcement.

posted by jason's_planet 12 November | 13:43

Just noting that if you ever engage in any activity that might attract the attention of the law, talking about it online is generally a bad idea. And that discussing it on Facebook is an extremely bad idea, given their relationship with law enforcement.

Agreed. Plus, if you're talking about your illegal behavior on your Facebook, one of your 384 friends could also turn you in, so it's not like Facebook would even need to get involved.

posted by ThePinkSuperhero 12 November | 14:01

'pode, I am emailing you may FB password. Could you type in some sort of dipshit update for me at exactly 3:47pm your time tomorrow?

OK thx.

posted by danf 12 November | 14:22

hee hee

posted by gaspode 12 November | 14:26

oh give me a goddamned break. They're already criminals who need to get Darwin-awarded because some jackass prosecutor in one of dozens of countries with all sorts of laws wants some info? Don't get me wrong if I ran the website I'd comply too (or hide under the table and have my CEO make that call) but the naiveté and rah-rah-turn-them-in-ness is remarkable.

posted by Firas 12 November | 14:44

If I had been a juror in that case, that evidence alone would have been enough to sink the prosecution's case. That's reasonable doubt, right there.

Wow, you have a pretty low threshold for reasonable doubt. Wanna commit a crime? Have someone update your facebook page. Reasonable doubt!

It certainly could have been faked. It certainly doesn't take a criminal genius. On a weak case, maybe it causes doubt. On a strong case calling it reasonable doubt is comical.

posted by justgary 12 November | 14:48

You know, that danf is some sort of CRIMINAL GENIUS.

posted by richat 12 November | 15:04

SHHHHHHHHHHH

(actually its to cover an illicit affair)

(oh shit!. . .my wife knows about this site and has met a bunch of you!)

(I'll need to do away with you all. . .so 'pode, I'll keep in touch about when I need those FB updates.)

posted by danf 12 November | 15:07

It's kinda funny...I was thinking more about this, and mentioned it to a co-worker or two. As they pointed out, pretty much any smart phone can run software that WOULD allow you to tunnel into your home machine, and post a status update FROM that machine. I'm not sure FB would be able to sort out the difference between the two situations. And, while my mom's not going to be doing this, it's not really limited to the CRIMINAL GENIUSES out there, unless any savvy IT pro is a criminal genius. Hmmm....

posted by richat 12 November | 15:28

danf, how are you going to do away with the 'pode, hmm? Hmmmm? Criminal Genius my big toe.

And this is why we need metachat. For things we don't tell the 384 "friends."

posted by rainbaby 12 November | 16:00

Wow, you have a pretty low threshold for reasonable doubt. Wanna commit a crime? Have someone update your facebook page. Reasonable doubt!

No, no, no. You misread what I said. It would have taken an update from the apartment itself to introduce reasonable doubt.

As they pointed out, pretty much any smart phone can run software that WOULD allow you to tunnel into your home machine, and post a status update FROM that machine. I'm not sure FB would be able to sort out the difference between the two situations. And, while my mom's not going to be doing this, it's not really limited to the CRIMINAL GENIUSES out there, unless any savvy IT pro is a criminal genius.

If the prosecution could prove that this guy had that level of sophistication and could conceivably have done that, I might have given their case some credence. That said, however, most "savvy IT pros" tend not to have pending charges for previous stickups, as Bradford did. Remember the song about how some will rob you with a six-gun and others with a fountain pen? Savvy IT pros tend to be the guys who'll rob you with a fountain pen, or the contemporary equivalent.

posted by jason's_planet 12 November | 16:13

'pode, for her help, will be the last to go.

You'll be in the middle, somewhere. . .that little theatrical trick (rubber knife? cap gun?) might go horrible askew.

posted by danf 12 November | 16:18

You are in a maze of twisty little facebook updates, all alibis.

posted by dabitch 12 November | 16:21

It's kinda funny...I was thinking more about this, and mentioned it to a co-worker or two. As they pointed out, pretty much any smart phone can run software that WOULD allow you to tunnel into your home machine, and post a status update FROM that machine.

If the thief knew how to tunnel and do all that computer-y stuff, he'd have an IT job.

Obviously, he typed the status update, then, over the Enter key, he put a rock held by a rope going through a pulley at the ceiling, tied the other end to a pillar, and put a lit cigarette on that rope, which would burn it once the cigarette is all gone. That's how CRIMINALS do stuff.

posted by qvantamon 12 November | 20:30

And what is wrong with that? Why should Facebook spend an ounce of energy on making it easy for people who break the law? Your tone sounds like you think Facebook is kissing the cops' butts; I don't see why that's a problem.

I'm no legal expert, but in my eyes it's the same 'right to privacy' principle that explains why things like search warrants exist. It's a fair argument that access to your Facebook profile is in a different league than access to your home, but as more people put more private information online and into the trust of companies, this interaction becomes more worthy of debate. I hate to be 'slippery slope' about anything, but in my opinion any allowance that rests on "it's okay, because they'll only use it on bad guys" needs to be examined more closely.

posted by chrismear 13 November | 07:40

hear hear, chrismear! (or is it here here? i never knew....)

posted by aniola 13 November | 21:27

12 November 2009