Re: [Full-Disclosure] Drunkeness

On Sat, 06 Dec 2003 04:39:43 GMT, Paul Farrow <pfarrow@flamenetworks.co.uk> said:
> consider that drunkeness would be a good excuse for taking over say, a
> university network, or a government server...
> although i must admit i have done neither, would drunkeness hold up in
> court as a suitable excuse, or would insanity be a better line to
> follow? :)

Forget an insanity defense, unless the accused really *was* so far out of it
that "right" and "wrong" didn't have the standard meanings. As Hinkley is
now finding out, you end up in a little room until *everybody* is convinced
you're harmless. Usually you end up staying locked up longer than if you had
copped a plea, so it's mostly of no use unless you're trying to get out of
a capital offense (have to be a *really* interesting govt server to qualify ;)

Similarly, drunkenness (or being under the influence of other pharmeceuticals)
wouldn't hold up unless you could show that you didn't take the stuff. "Well
your honor, I was at this party and I was the designated driver, so I was just
drinking Coke, and some asshole kept putting rum in when I wasn't looking..".
You'll probably have to produce witnesses that place you and the asshole at
the party, and finding the bottle of rum and dusting it for the asshole's prints
would be a good idea too.. :)

Your best bet is finding some other avenue of "wasn't me, I didn't do it"
defense - the guy who alledgedly whacked the Port of Houston asserted that
his machine was trojaned by the actual culprit.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html