[Imc-tech] Re: [Imc] Website Issue

[Mike Lehman]

John,
If you look again, you'll see that I qualified my references to McCrae
as a murderer at least twice.

First:
> ...it _seems_...
Then:
> ...a murderer may have...

I guess I just didn't feel like patronizing my audience more than that
about the level of culpability that McCrae may have. I'm sure we're all
aware that these are only alleagtions, although there _seems_ to be a
confession. And in a case where the person who did this MAY indeed have
used the IMC network to publicize his reasons for doing so, to keep
repeatedly insisting that he only "may have" done the crime, when he is
insisting (as far as we can tell) that he DID do the crime is,
ironically, patronizing to McCrae if he did indeed perform as he has
"confessed".

I guess what I see as most problematic (which maybe I should have been
more clear on) is the use of the IMC network in this way. Like all too
much of what we see on the network, this story really is only news in
the areas involved (although his implication of the IMC network by
posting it nearly everywhere does backhandedly make it news fodder
throughout the network for that reason alone now that someone is under
arrest for this crime in realtion to these postings.)

I'm sure glad he (if it is indeed so) waited until after the deed to
post about it here. It would have been an even more expolitative use of
IMC if he had made a threat to kill a cop on IMC, and then done it. BTW,
apparently whoever did it just picked the guy out at random, because he
was in uniform. I guess I have a problem with that, even though I often
don't see Officer Friendly when I see a cop myself. Of course these are
all allegations and that is why I didn't speculate on it further at
first, because I don't think the whole story is out.

On the face of it, we have an extremely disturbed individual who is
acting out whatever sick reasons he had for doing so and thereby
involving a bunch of people and institutions that ARE innocent (you and
me, and all the IMCs where he posted) and who probably don't want to be
assoiciated with his actions. And in the current political climate, I'm
sure everyone can use their imaginations about the way some people will
exploit this against us.

So that's what I'm refering to as problematic. Someone who confesses he
did it (if he did) is a far different example of what is at issue than a
case like Mumia's. And I'm not saying McCrae doesn't have the right to
post here. Just that it is problematic for a number of very obvious
reasons and that others might differ from my conclusion, which is to
leave it up, for many reasons. And that we also have the right, if we
feel thatn his use of our IMC was inappropriate, to remove his story.

For all we know, maybe the FBI was ready to bust the guy and just sent
an agent down the block to the local library to post these messages for
no other reason than to implicate the IMC network to use it against us.
Maybe McCrae had nothing to do with any of this. Maybe we want to take
it down because it is unproven, as you suggest. All these are reasons
why I posted the message and couched it in the qualified terms that I
did.
Mike Lehman


John Wason wrote:
> 
> At 01:13 PM 11/26/02 -0600, Mike Lehman wrote:
> 
> >I think there is no specific reason to hide the story at this point, but
> >others may have different levels of comfort about this. It is rather
> >problematic that a murderer may have used the IMC network as a platform,
> >but this is something that can happen anywhere on the net. So speak up
> >if you feel that we should be handling this differently until next
> >Sunday's Steering group meeting, when I'm sure that we'll discuss this.
> >
> >Mike Lehman
> 
> I don't have an opinion about the technical aspects of how you handle the
> links on the newswire, Mike.  And I haven't even looked at the posts yet.
> I'm just curious why you find it "rather problematic" that a "murderer" may
> have used - or may use in the future - the IMC network as a platform.
> 
> No doubt you have a well-reasoned opinion, and I'm anxious to hear it.  But
> meanwhile, I will continue to think of the gentleman in question as an
> "alleged murderer", innocent until proven guilty.  And I will hold to the
> belief that at least two convicted murderers who come readily to mind -
> Mumia and the Unabomber - nevertheless have worthwhile things to say.
> Their right to speak, in my mind, doesn't stop at the prison door.
> 
> Respectfully,
> 
> John Wason