Courts and bug product

[Nicholas Bohm]

Ian Batten wrote:
> 
> On 14 Feb 2008, at 12:16, Nicholas Bohm wrote:
>>>>
>>> The obvious objection to that is ``the prosecution have exotic GCHQ 
>>> technology to establish what is being said from these murky 
>>> recordings you've given us, we don't''.
>>
>> Hand over a second set as cleaned up - "equality of arms" under ECHR 
>> Art 6 fair trial.
> 
> <devil's advocate>
> And shazam, the defence have a massive demonstration of the capabilities 
> or otherwise of the spooks. Even a transcript has that problem: you can 
> listen to the tape, then see what could be transcribed with spook 
> technology and what couldn't, then check with your clients what they 
> were doing during the bits that couldn't be transcribed.  Tapes, ceiling 
> fans, Radio 1: what works best?
> </devil's advocate>
> 
> I assume this is the sort of argument that explains why the spooks don't 
> want evidence admitted.

I expect you're right, though I'm unpersuaded that present generations 
of amateurs will get far ahead with it, and the professional enemies 
probably know it all anyway.  It's all part of the familiar arms race - 
"la lotta continua" as the Italians used to say.

Nicholas
-- 
Salkyns, Great Canfield, Takeley,
Bishop's Stortford CM22 6SX, UK

Phone  01279 870285    (+44 1279 870285)
Mobile  07715 419728    (+44 7715 419728)

PGP public key ID: 0x899DD7FF.  Fingerprint:
5248 1320 B42E 84FC 1E8B  A9E6 0912 AE66 899D D7FF