twinkletwit

Anonymous is not a fixed-membership group. Anyone can decide to use the symbols of Anonymous in a variety of ways and then it becomes up to others to support those efforts. So, briefly spoken, anyone can decide to become a member at any time and it's up to the group to decide how much support they receive.

I am charged with the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act commonly known as the CFAA. This is the same law that was used to charge Aaron Swartz before he committed suicide. My support of Justina and her family was no secret, I was vocally outspoken on social media and was not seriously attempting to hide my identity because I knew I wasn't doing anything wrong.

Justina had been away from her family for 14 months before the alleged events. Everything that could have been tried was being tried and was not successful. Further, time was of the essence Justina had already been maimed and will not walk again. Her family was publicly expressing fear she would die. Nobody could tell me that if Justina had gotten home one day earlier she wouldn't be walking right now. So while it is possible that other approaches may have eventually worked time was of the essence. I liken what happened to Justina to watching somebody being assaulted in a dark ally. That's not something you just post to Facebook about or pass a petition about. That's something that requires immediate action.

I am an IT professional. Different networks and different types of networks have different vulnerabilities and attack surfaces. Prosecuting activists does nothing to properly secure swiss-cheese like networks constructed by questionably competent Boston Children Hospital's (BCH) IT department. I am very worried about the City of Boston given after the fact propaganda approach employed by BCH and the US Attorney's Office regarding these issues. I volunteered to help properly secure these vulnerable networks but was dismissed out of hand without proper consideration. Please note I was not attempting to hurt anybody and no one was in fact hurt. I am an activist. A more sinister cyber opponent could still do great harm because of the actual vulnerabilities are not being properly addressed and that is the fault of the approach taken by the US Attorney's Office, FBI, and BCH. This is security theater.

My knowledge of the BCH network came solely from publicly available information.

I think some of the technical people at the FBI have a somewhat nuanced understanding of it, but even they seems to be grasping at the core concepts. I think the people in charge of cybercrime at the Boston US Attorney's office are power-users at best and honestly seem far more concerned with the politics of the situation and their ability to use it to advance their careers than any true semblance of justice. What's more important, computer problems or a young learning-disabled teenager who will never walk again and nearly died? Unfortunately, Carmen Ortiz' office didn't see any opportunities for advancement by doing their job and protecting the Pelletier's.

No children were hurt by anything I was alleged to have done.

On the flip side though, Justina Pelletier will never walk again.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-successful-hospital-cyber-attack-that-hurt-no-one_us_5825bc49e4b0852d9ec2146b

I will act to defend the life of any child, anywhere, any time, against any consequences.