Mastermind and the road to Damascus

[Ian Batten]

On 28 Feb 2009, at 23:11, Brian L Johnson wrote:
>>
>
> Exactly.  I'd obviously be prevented from taking further photos  
> whilst I was being 'talked to', but my existing photos would already  
> be safe because I would no longer have them.  "Photos, constable?   
> What photos?"

Yes, and I"m sure you enjoyed finding the ambiguities in the school  
rules and showing you were cleverer than teacher.

However, I'd suggest that if the police wanted to get arsey, you'd be  
a long way from ``safe''.  I don't say this in order to defend the  
law, which is largely silly, but to prevent the sudden clash between  
speculation on ukcrypto and actually getting arrested.

You're seen pointing a camera at things the police claim fall under  
the various remits.  You are unable to produce the innocent  
photographs that you were taking of policeman's helmets, or indeed any  
photographs taken within the past hour, because the photographs are in  
the possession of a confederate whom you refuse to name and you are  
therefore arrested on suspision of a complex plot to take photographs  
and conceal them. Unable to produce the exculpatory photographs, you  
are charged with collecting information of potential use to  
terrorists, and adverse inferences are drawn from your pre-meditated  
scheme to conceal the photographs you were taking.  How will it look  
to a jury when you are charged with conspiracy with person or persons  
unknown to assist the commission of acts of terrorism?

You're seen pointing a camera at things the police claim fall under  
the various remits.  You are able to produce the innocent photographs  
that you were taking of policeman's helmets,  because the photographs  
are in the possession of a confederate whom you name.    Although the  
photographs appear superficially innocent, it is clear that you have  
engaged in a conspiracy to take those photographs, with a complex  
scheme in place to conceal them from the police, and adverse  
inferences are drawn from your pre-meditated scheme to conceal the  
photographs you were taking.  Moreover, you are unable to prove that  
you weren't even `cleverer' and weren't sending innocent photographs  
to the confederate whom you declared but other, unspecified,  
photographs to another, unknown confederate.  How will it look to a  
jury when you are charged with conspiracy to assist the commission of  
acts of terrorism?

Now I happen to think that (a) the law in this area is largely  
insane,  (b) a jury would probably convict but (c) an appeal court  
would almost certainly overturn the conviction: there just wouldn't be  
enough evidence of intent, and the charges would be seem to boil down  
to ``baiting the police in a built-up area''.  However, before you  
decide you want to engage in sixth form semantics with the law  
(remember the next line in the song ``I fought the law''), decide if  
you really think the police will just shrug their shoulders and go  
``damn, Mr Johnson, you're just too clever for us, curse your wireless  
networking'' or arrest you and run through a lot of options to save  
face.  Yes, you'll ultimately prevail, and good luck with the rest of  
your life.

ian