Hacker Behind Largest Credit Card Number Heist Now Claiming US 'Authorized' His Crimes

from the good-luck-there... dept

Last year, we had a discussion around the movie-like backstory behind Albert Gonzalez, and a few other hackers, who were accused of gathering the largest number of credit card numbers ever, in a series of security breaches. One of the key points, of course, was that Gonzalez was on the government payroll at the time of the hacks, acting as an informant and a security expert. Gonzalez took a plea bargain, and ended up with a twenty-year sentence a little over a year ago. However, he’s now trying to go back on that, and is claiming that he actually had government authorization for the hacks themselves, and complained that his lawyers failed to defend him properly (a common complaint among those who lose). The filing is an interesting read, and given what I’ve seen recently about government plea bargain deals, it definitely would not surprise me to find out that the government offered something in a plea deal that it did not live up to — and that it put pressure on Gonzalez to accept it. Of course, chances are that this appeal is going nowhere fast. The likelihood of success is pretty damn slim, so I fully expect that this appeal will go nowhere.

Filed Under: ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Hacker Behind Largest Credit Card Number Heist Now Claiming US 'Authorized' His Crimes”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Hero says:

Re: Re: Well, yeah

Or perhaps good lawyers don’t take cases they know they will lose, because the realize the client is guilty as sin, and there is no way they won’t be convicted.

Bull. I’ve seen plenty of lawyers taking cases bad cases they knew they were likely to loose, provided that the client could afford to pay their fees, that is. And many more lawyers refusing good cases just because the client couldn’t afford to pay. Your idea that lawyers choose cases on their odds of winning rather than the clients ability to pay sounds like a ludicrous attempt to hide the truth. Devil’s Coachman? Sounds about right.

WysiWyg (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Well, yeah

Actually I think there might be something to this. Now I don’t know EXACTLY how these things work, but I’m pretty sure you win/loss ratio is a part of judging if you’re “good” or not. And that it directly affect how much money you can make.

Obviously “can I win this?” isn’t the only thing they take into account, but rather “will this benefit me in the long run?”.

Leave a Reply to The Devil's Coachman Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...