Campus cops treat Ubuntu use as sign of criminality

[gaf-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org (Jerry Feldman)]

Jeff,
I certainly agree.
The police are not going to harass a student unless they have some=20
reason. And, you are correct about cell phones, et. al. Apparently there =

was some kind of complaint, legitimate or otherwise.  We'll see how this =

one plays out. I'm sure the police only know what Windows looks like,=20
and would suspect anything else.

On 04/18/2009 09:42 AM, jkinz-+hffLmS/kj4 at public.gmane.org wrote:
> I certainly agree that they have effectively crippled this person's
> life. It's becoming more and more clear today that the police can use
> their powers in a retaliatory manner, incompatible with the idea that a=

> person is innocent until proven guilty.
>
> [  Side note:=20
> Tasers, originally approved to give officers a life saving alternative
> to deadly force, are often used that make it clear the police officer i=
s
> using them because he does not like the attitude of the individual bein=
g
> tasered.
>
> Is this behavior a new trend or we just seeing it more often due to the=

> proliferation of video cameras and cellphone cameras?
>
> With our increasing dependency on technology and its integration
> into our lifestyles, we, as individuals are becoming more and more
> vulnerable to denial of service attacks, even ones created by the
> agencies responsible for protecting society. What was once the realm of=

> science fiction novels, pervasive societal control over individuals is
> becoming more and more a reality.=20
>
> The husband of a married couple in Dubai, was recently arrested in his
> apartment minutes after quitting his job. The reason for his arrest is
> that he had no income, and significant debt, which is illegal there
> unless you happen to be rich or a Dubai citizen. The husband is in jail=

> and the wife is stranded, homeless in this land with a poor record on
> human right
> End Side Note: ]
>
> Part of the information about this BC student case is that the
> individual was already known to campus police for involvement in e-mail=

> harassment of a faculty member to the point of affecting their health,
> and allegations that he was somehow involved in the use of, or the
> actual stealing of laptops. Again all that information is in the form
> of allegations. Nothing is proven. However I understand that the way
> the police work is that once someone becomes "known" to them, they will=

> treat that individual more prejudiciously than the next individual.
>
> As to the fact that the police took all of the individual's electronic
> gadgets and paraphernalia, cellphone etc. that apparently is what
> the electronic forensic training advises them to do. Whether that is
> actually part of a valid investigation technique or simply a way to
> be nasty to the individual is another question. :-) it certainly true
> that in some cases it's just part of being nasty and in other cases the=

> police need all the cables etc. because they don't have any themselves
> and in order to access the equipment they have to borrow from the
> alleged criminal. :-)
>
> The cellphone is certainly a special device. A computer in its own
> right, it's also the ultimate tracking cookie. Unless the student had a=

> chance to wipe it before it was confiscated it contains a list of all
> his contact information, records of whom he has been speaking to and
> when, and may even contain incriminating files, pictures etc.
>
> Is the only alternative to all go live naked in the woods ? :-)=20
>
> (Note - i could only live naked in the woods if it included
> coffee and warm weather all the time.... :)=20
> oh, and broadband.
>
>  =20


--=20
Jerry Feldman <gaf-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id: 537C5846
PGP Key fingerprint: 3D1B 8377 A3C0 A5F2 ECBB  CA3B 4607 4319 537C 5846