Wow !

[The Camel]

I wish I could take back almost every post I have made now I understand better what has happened.

The Two Ronnies one was ok Phil.

[lazaroonie]

I guess you would debate whether or not it had been obtained illegally, now I don't know any details about what happened and I'm not a lawyer but if Jane had any legitimate access (maybe she had her own account etc) to the PC then I imagine it would be acceptable as evidence (e.g. paedophiles discovered by computer repair shops).

Yes, there is that, plus I know little about the specifics of this instance. I don't know enough about computers either, I had no idea that my computer logged details of what had been moved, by whom, when and to where.

Generally they don't. I think it was Laz who brought that up a while back.

MSN chat logging is an optional feature too.

i dont think I did, but it is possible. I attended a conference a few years back given by west midlands police on the subject of forensic computing, and if the general public knew what was possible , then they would never touch a computer again.

btw, for all the wannabee detectives, you need to familiarise yourself with the police and criminal evidence act (PACE) of 1984, regarding the collection and use of evidence.

[Bongo]

My mistake, it was Shogun:

ie. I have been working on PC's for 20+ years, and I have never seen any way that a PC records that files were copied to a particular mobile device.  It says just that in Kev's blog, he has evidence, he says.  I dont think it is true.  I dont know any way in Windows that this could be done, maybe someone can enlighen me.  The log files would be bigger than you could understand.

Forensics is a bit different to something the average person can find though.

[TightPaulFolds]

btw, for all the wannabee detectives, you need to familiarise yourself with the police and criminal evidence act (PACE) of 1984, regarding the collection and use of evidence.

How would it be applied to the hypothetical case of a civilian gathering files from another person's machine with/without their tacit permission?

[StuartHopkin]

Makes no difference.

The convo's could be used to help the investigation but they could never be used as actual evidence as you could never prove the integrity of the copy.

[Bongo]

depends where else they've been logged really.

[StuartHopkin]

depends where else they've been logged really.

Yo Bill, verify this?

Suppose so actually.

[Ironside]

depends where else they've been logged really.

Yo Bill, verify this?

Suppose so actually.

every email every msn message every pm on blonde is logged by your isp AFAIK
which is why you never give card details unless your on a secure network

[bobby1]

I wish I could take back almost every post I have made now I understand better what has happened.

The Two Ronnies one was ok Phil.

that was my only highlight.

[Bongo]

+ 2 ISPs, + whatever else the police/government/intelligence services have in place wrt logging (there is a legal require for at least some logging and the last government were trying to get more). Could even be more here depending on what msn client they were using etc.

Also any corroborating evidence.

And no one has said whether or not the Police came and took evidence from the PC. They could have done so before Jane's alleged attempts.

And that's just what I've thought of in 30 seconds.

[StuartHopkin]

+ 2 ISPs, + whatever else the police/government/intelligence services have in place wrt logging (there is a legal require for at least some logging and the last government were trying to get more). Could even be more here depending on what msn client they were using etc.

Also any corroborating evidence.

And no one has said whether or not the Police came and took evidence from the PC. They could have done so before Jane's alleged attempts.

And that's just what I've thought of in 30 seconds.

All good points.

You would have thought the police would get something right once or twice with all the info available to them.

[thetank]

But remember that watching it with glee & lionising it & the perpretator, is very different to watching it & being appalled. How would anyone know - apart from those in the Chat Log - how recipitents reacted?

Another "not easy" decision upcoming.

Please be careful in commenting on this stuff.

I don't like this. We're to remain calm and not judge Kev until we see the chat logs, but then do the exact opposite and jump to conclusions and condem the man as soon as we do see them?

I've not seen the video (thank christ) and I'm not too keen to see the chat logs as they're likely to be disgusting too. I can have an educated guess as to what type of thing is in there.



However, before I throw a man into a deep hole and throw away the ladder, I'd like to base it on a bit more than their instant reaction to a video in a text based msn chat.

 I'd want to bear in mind several things.

What a person types isn't always the same as what they feel.

To what extent it was clear from the video that an egregious crime had been commited. (Kev has said via Booder that he didn't know that the people in the film were anything other than willing participants when they saw it)

Is Kev going to get on with people 20 years younger than him by being the headmaster all the time. It's much easier to laugh along, and if you're in that mindset, even though he might have felt uncomforatble with the video, it takes a lot to break out of the mold and blow the whistle. Was Kev a hero - no. Is there any middle ground between hero and scum as we sit and judge from our comfortable computer chairs?

When I first heard about the video I was shocked and stunned. Hadn't heard anything like it before. I heard about it in a different context though, listen while I tell you about this terrible thing. Kevcame across it in a different context, look at this video of a funny thing.
Processing what exactly was going on might have taken me a while if I recieved the input in that context. If I was all pally pally with the cool kidz on the msn in a conversation and I was shown it then I'd like to think I'd react with disapproval. Don't know with 100% certainty though as I've never been in that spot. (I'd also like to think if I was brought up in poverty in Berlin in the 1920s, indoctrinated into the Hitler Youth in the 1930s and in the German Army with my brothers in the 1940s that I would somehow have a moral epiphany and courage enough to stand up and say hey lads, lets not be complicit in this holocaust thing. You know what though, I'll never know.)



It's clear that Laxie has been a victim of a nasty crime. I certainly don't want to go down the route of attacking her character to defend Kev.

I'm not changing my signature though, I still think Kev is a decent guy and I'd be happy to have pints with him again. He can be an idiot and a plonker but I knew that before all this shit came out. It would be easy for me to express outrage and distance myself from Kev because he was unlucky enough to have come into contact with this video, and didn't recognize (as we all do now with our 20:20 hindsight vision) that it was a cue for every decent human being to pick up the shiny sword and a the sturdy shield and fight for justice.

The way some people are talking on here you'd think Kev was a willing participant in a gang rape rather than some guy that said lololol in a private conversation when showed a fucked up video where he wasn't sure wtf was going on.

[Bongo]

+ 2 ISPs, + whatever else the police/government/intelligence services have in place wrt logging (there is a legal require for at least some logging and the last government were trying to get more). Could even be more here depending on what msn client they were using etc.

Also any corroborating evidence.

And no one has said whether or not the Police came and took evidence from the PC. They could have done so before Jane's alleged attempts.

And that's just what I've thought of in 30 seconds.

All good points.

You would have thought the police would get something right once or twice with all the info available to them.

I think that's stretching things a bit far, chap!

[The Camel]

But remember that watching it with glee & lionising it & the perpretator, is very different to watching it & being appalled. How would anyone know - apart from those in the Chat Log - how recipitents reacted?

Another "not easy" decision upcoming.

Please be careful in commenting on this stuff.

I don't like this. We're to remain calm and not judge Kev until we see the chat logs, but then do the exact opposite and jump to conclusions and condem the man as soon as we do see them?

I've not seen the video (thank christ) and I'm not too keen to see the chat logs as they're likely to be disgusting too. I can have an educated guess as to what type of thing is in there.



However, before I throw a man into a deep hole and throw away the ladder, I'd like to base it on a bit more than their instant reaction to a video in a text based msn chat.

 I'd want to bear in mind several things.

What a person types isn't always the same as what they feel.

To what extent it was clear from the video that an egregious crime had been commited. (Kev has said via Booder that he didn't know that the people in the film were anything other than willing participants when they saw it)

Is Kev going to get on with people 20 years younger than him by being the headmaster all the time. It's much easier to laugh along, and if you're in that mindset, even though he might have felt uncomforatble with the video, it takes a lot to break out of the mold and blow the whistle. Was Kev a hero - no. Is there any middle ground between hero and scum as we sit and judge from our comfortable computer chairs?

When I first heard about the video I was shocked and stunned. Hadn't heard anything like it before. I heard about it in a different context though, listen while I tell you about this terrible thing. Kevcame across it in a different context, look at this video of a funny thing.
Processing what exactly was going on might have taken me a while if I recieved the input in that context. If I was all pally pally with the cool kidz on the msn in a conversation and I was shown it then I'd like to think I'd react with disapproval. Don't know with 100% certainty though as I've never been in that spot. (I'd also like to think if I was brought up in poverty in Berlin in the 1920s, indoctrinated into the Hitler Youth in the 1930s and in the German Army with my brothers in the 1940s that I would somehow have a moral epiphany and courage enough to stand up and say hey lads, lets not be complicit in this holocaust thing. You know what though, I'll never know.)



It's clear that Laxie has been a victim of a nasty crime. I certainly don't want to go down the route of attacking her character to defend Kev.

I'm not changing my signature though, I still think Kev is a decent guy and I'd be happy to have pints with him again. He can be an idiot and a plonker but I knew that before all this shit came out. It would be easy for me to express outrage and distance myself from Kev because he was unlucky enough to have come into contact with this video, and didn't recognize (as we all do now with our 20:20 hindsight vision) that it was a cue for every decent human being to pick up the shiny sword and a the sturdy shield and fight for justice.

The way some people are talking on here you'd think Kev was a willing participant in a gang rape rather than some guy that said lololol in a private conversation when showed a fucked up video where he wasn't sure wtf was going on.

Fantastic post Tank.

While I don't agree with all of it, it certainly is food for thought.

[StuartHopkin]

+ 2 ISPs, + whatever else the police/government/intelligence services have in place wrt logging (there is a legal require for at least some logging and the last government were trying to get more). Could even be more here depending on what msn client they were using etc.

Also any corroborating evidence.

And no one has said whether or not the Police came and took evidence from the PC. They could have done so before Jane's alleged attempts.

And that's just what I've thought of in 30 seconds.

All good points.

You would have thought the police would get something right once or twice with all the info available to them.

I think that's stretching things a bit far, chap!

Ha ha, im not their biggest fan to be honest. I dont mind Sting though.

I 100% agree with Tank's post though.

With no offence to Laxie meant here at all, but I could not care less what Kev may or may not have known, said, or laughed at whilst sat infront of his computer in the privacy of his home.

It is no ones business but his.