View Full Version : USA Patriot Act & 16 year old boy [update]
Just thought I'd update you guys on the case.
During the raid, the FBI executed a search warrant and thoroughly searched the family home. They found absolutely nothing illegal or suspicious. No bombs, no bomb-making material or anything unlawful.
It turns out, someone hijacked the family's internet IP address and used it to make numerous phone calls and terrorist threats.
This turns out to be incorrect. Ashton Lundeby made several prank calls that included (albeit unrealistic) bomb threats. You can find them under the alias "Tyrone," on this youtube page (http://www.youtube.com/user/4ChanVent) (as you can see they recently uploaded the video "YouTube - Tyrone The Patriot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YTfbglOpm0)")
The one that most likely got him caught was YouTube - Tyrone calls Netgear 1/2 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQfCNPbdAqI) when he called Net Gear customer support, only to be informed 7:20 through that "this is a federal facility, and those terrorist threats that you made, ya, the feds will be on top of that, so good luck with that." As you can hear, the prankster didn't take it too seriously.
Fortunately for him, the Constitution still protects pranksters and false bomb threats under the 4th and 5th amendments. Unfortunately for him, the Constitution hasn't been followed for quite some time.
respect my investigative authoratay!
Golding
05-06-2009, 02:46 AM
I hate incidents like this, because even though the guy had every bit of his rights revoked on a whim, his prank call makes me feel like the scare he got was well-earned.
But yeah, it's nevertheless another example of why the Patriot Act is a disgraceful law.
silverhawks
05-06-2009, 05:45 AM
/a/...
qh4dotcom
05-06-2009, 07:57 AM
How do you know this channel and video belong to Ashton Lundeby?
Perhaps Ozzy. According to this report:
http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/2009/05/free-ashton-lundeby.html
...
At some point over the next three and a half hours, Annette and Ashton learned that the men who had barged into their home were from the FBI, and that the teenage boy, who had never been in trouble with the police, was suspected of making several bomb threats via the internet. The one that brought the FBI had been made against Purdue University in Indiana at 9:05 Central Time on February 15.
Ashton had an alibi so tight it could be used as a space capsule: On the evening in question he was at a meeting held in the Union Chapel Methodist Church in Kittrell, North Carolina until after 9:00 p.m. local time, a fact that could be confirmed by interviewing any of several dozen witnesses.
After helping his mother clean the chapel, Ashton accompanied her to a local grocery store to buy food and litter box filler for the family's three cats. Once again, this element of Ashton's alibi -- for which his mother was an eyewitness -- would be relatively simple to confirm.
The Union Chapel church is about 35 minutes away from the Lundeby family's home. Annette recalls that the family got home shortly after 10:00 on February 15, which wouldn't have given her son adequate time to log on to the Internet and make a bomb threat by 10:05 Eastern Time (which would have been 9:05 p.m. in Indiana). She also insists that her son "went straight to bed" without turning on his computer.
The FBI insists that the threat was made using Ashton's IP address. Mrs. Lundeby insists that her son was the victim of identity theft, and that he was not the family's only victim. Her late husband, a former employee of the federal Bureau of Prisons, also had his personal financial information stolen, and Annettee herself recalls that her bank account was hacked a couple of years ago.
For the past several months, she explained to Pro Libertate, "our family has been receiving bizarre and threatening phone calls from people" because of the malicious activities of at least one hacker.
"We had the police call here claiming that someone had called 911 to report drugs in our home. I told them that there wasn't anything going on here, but they were free to come and search the place to see for themselves."
That's an invitation she wouldn't extend again under similar circumstances.
According to Annette, at least one of Ashton's friends can identify, by screenname, the hacker who made life miserable for the Lundebys. Once again, there is no shortage of leads for an honest, competent, reasonably resourceful investigator to follow in establishing Ashton's alibi. The unfortunate truth is that the FBI is, as far as I can tell, entirely devoid of people meeting that description.
Annette and her children were held hostage in their home until 1:30 in the morning. The 12-year-old daughter was dragged from her bed by an armed stranger -- an act that left the girl traumatized (and one for which the assailant should be thrashed to within a centimeter of his tax-devouring existence). Annette insisted that Ashton not answer any questions without an attorney present, but she wasn't permitted to call one.
...
How do you know this channel and video belong to Ashton Lundeby?
+1
If the evidence was as air-tight as you make it out to be, the FBI would formally charge him and not use the Patriot Act to deny him his right to due process.
Kraig
05-06-2009, 08:34 AM
+1
If the evidence was as air-tight as you make it out to be, the FBI would formally charge him and not use the Patriot Act to deny him his right to due process.
I dunno, the feds could be using this as an opportunity to say "see I told you we were right", that way when they use the Patriot Act in the future less people will listen when someones cries wolf.
phill4paul
05-06-2009, 08:46 AM
I dunno, the feds could be using this as an opportunity to say "see I told you we were right", that way when they use the Patriot Act in the future less people will listen when someones cries wolf.
Could be. Yet, I fail to see how arresting a 16 yr old, whisking him away to an Indianapolis detention facility, without "reasonable cause" only "good faith", denying him familial contact for an infraction as simple as "moving his eyes" will provide them that "see I told you we were right" moment.
Anyway it is cut, including if he is guilty of making threats, seems to me an excessive use of force and manpower and not worth the denial of habeus corpus.
Kraig
05-06-2009, 08:54 AM
Could be. Yet, I fail to see how arresting a 16 yr old, whisking him away to an Indianapolis detention facility, without "reasonable cause" only "good faith", denying him familial contact for an infraction as simple as "moving his eyes" will provide them that "see I told you we were right" moment.
Anyway it is cut, including if he is guilty of making threats, seems to me an excessive use of force and manpower and not worth the denial of habeus corpus.
Oh believe me I agree completely, I'm just saying for anyone who is borderline on their support of the Patriot Act or already supports it, if it turns out that the kid really did make the bomb threats they will be convinced that the Patriot Act is a good thing and when you talk about habeus corpus their simple response will be "well he shouldn't have made the threat to begin with".
phill4paul
05-06-2009, 08:57 AM
Oh believe me I agree completely, I'm just saying for anyone who is borderline on their support of the Patriot Act or already supports it, if it turns out that the kid really did make the bomb threats they will be convinced that the Patriot Act is a good thing and when you talk about habeus corpus their simple response will be "well he shouldn't have made the threat to begin with".
LOL quite right, sometimes I forget that we liberty minded folks are not the general populace.
LibertyEagle
05-06-2009, 09:05 AM
My question is when did NetGear become a federal facility? :eek:
Kraig
05-06-2009, 09:07 AM
My question is when did NetGear become a federal facility? :eek:
I don't think they are I would think they just transferred him over without him knowing?
I dunno though, it would explain why there routers are so shitty.
phill4paul
05-06-2009, 09:08 AM
I don't think they are I would think they just transferred him over without him knowing?
I dunno though, it would explain why there routers are so shitty.
They do provide "government solutions".... federal@netgear.com
By "federal facility" I think they mean when they get threats that the feds will become the lawmen to investigate.
ergocogitamus
05-07-2009, 08:51 AM
Ozzy,
On your first post, via the association of two videos, you state that Ashton Lundeby is the Prankster caller Tyrone.
You have nothing that connect both videos or people behind the videos, or explain with facts the connections. You give no proof, other than:
a. the video of the interview with Lunderby's mother, titled "Tyrone The Patriot", and
b. the video of a prankster called Tyrone, where the person on the receiving ends says "this is a federal facility"
c. Both video have been uploaded to the same YouTube channel http://www.youtube.com/user/4ChanVent , which has a large number of videos, many from "Tyrone", of pranks calls to various organizations, with many video using prank threats of shooting, bombings, etc.
e. In the comments of the above and other videos, some anonymous comments say Tyrone is the 16 year old kid of video a. above.
Since you present no other facts, you apparently assume Lunderby, the 16 year of kid, to be Tyrone, because of association.
In other words, if
a. if a person's video is copied from somewhere, re-titled with someone's name, and uploaded to an online space, and
b. On this online space, that name appears on other videos, and
c. All the videos on this online space are of people doing bad things, and
d. Some anonymous comments on this site says a. and b. are the same person, then
Then, in your logic above, a. and b. ARE the same person.
So, lets do an exercise
a. video of mother theresa re-titled "Godzilla"
b. video of Godzilla
c. both videos shown in the Godzilla YouTube Channel
d. anonymous comments, "Gee, Mother Theresa did Godzilla things"
Therefore, Mother Theresa WAS Godzilla.
If that is not clear enough, just switch with other names.
I further bring to your attention that the video of the mother (a) was uploaded to the prankster page on May 5, 2009
YouTube - Tyrone The Patriot (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YTfbglOpm0&feature=channel_page)
yet there is an earlier and possibly first YouTube video dated May 2, 2009 where the title has no connection to "Tyrone"
YouTube - USA using Patriot Act against its own citizens (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFVQ0HZz2mc)
therefore the May 5 video is not even original, but a copie. possibly of the May 2 video (since the both start and end on the exact same segment of a news report).
[fyi. there are various other re-titled copies of the same video uploaded at later dates to other YouTube channels. It is very easy for a person to copy a YouTube video, then reupload it to an account with a new title].
It is good you made the effort and found the the videos being associated, but this is very different from fact. You present guilt by association, and apparently this association could be without the knowledge of the supposedly guilty by association party. All you have is some very circumstantial evidence, that is easily faked, not facts. I say this with constructive intentions.
The above text is not to stay that party a could not be the same as party b. There might be a connection in someway. For that matter, party a, could be many other things too. Simply, you have no facts.
Any comments afterwards based on the belief of the above association, is speculation on an issue that has no factual basis.
This speculation is mainly a distraction for those that go in that direction and detracts from the core of the issue here:
1. The government is using the Patriot Act, to super-cede Constitutional and US stated rights of Due Process, Probable Cause, right to an attorney, etc. to incarcerate, isolate, and gag its citizens.
2. Due to the purposeful governmental handling and effects of isolation in prison for over 60 days, under psychological and physical stress, the government is tampering against the right to not accuse oneself, right to remain silent, right against unusual and cruel punishment, etc.
3. Regardless of the accusation, the above rights cannot be taken away from an american citizen.
dannno
05-07-2009, 04:56 PM
UPDATE:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=191680
My question is when did NetGear become a federal facility? :eek:
Maybe they share a building with a Federal agency?
phill4paul
05-07-2009, 05:15 PM
respect my investigative authoratay!
You called it Ozzy! Respect.
Athan
05-07-2009, 07:09 PM
RESPECT!!
Can we still dis the government, Oracle Ozzy?
Carole
05-07-2009, 08:45 PM
This kid obviously had too much free time on his hands. His mother should have made him get a part time job or sent him to stay with a relative who owns a big farm in the middle of nowhere for a while. She may be guilty of abetting since possibly she knew he was fooling around on the phones.
It has always been illegal to make threats, use offensive language and make harassing phone calls over the phone. Through the mail also as I recall. Laws have been in place for decades for such offenses. They just do not use them anymore for foul language and harassing calls. Yet the threat thing probably would get one in trouble.
The Patriot Act is a bad law, but the other laws in place could easily cover the accussed's offenses.
What galls me is that kids and grownups today even bother to do such awful things. It is stupid. The best thing if he is guilty is to incur the consequences so long as they are reasonable and do not overstep the rule of law. The mother seems to have had bad parenting and is practicing bad parenting if she has been aware of and allowing this behavior.
Bossobass
05-07-2009, 08:59 PM
I couldn't care less what the specifics of the alleged crime(s) is(are), the USA Patriot Act is Gestapo bullshit.
No charges, no lawyer, no witnesses, no visitors, no rights, no hearing, no trial, a life sentence in detention with water boarding in who knows what country by whom.
Fuck me, what next?
Carrying on a mock trial in the media and in public forums is absurd, is what Americans do these days and completely misses the point.
No Bill of Rights, no America. That's one helluva bigger issue than a bomb threat. End of subject.
Bosso
angelatc
05-07-2009, 09:23 PM
http://redstateeclectic.typepad.com/redstate_commentary/2009/05/ashton-lundeby-update-not-held-under-patriot-act.html
He has lawyers.
The juvenile has appeared in court on three occasions, once in North Carolina for an initial hearing and a detention hearing, and twice in Indiana for a continued initial hearing and a status hearing," the press release relates. "At each hearing, the juvenile was represented by counsel....
More at the link, but I can't imagine why a kid needs to be transferred to the Federal facility.
it also seems plausible that the kid was set up.... dad works for prisons bureau.... dad dies.. how?.... (lots of people are enemies of prisons bureau workers but it could go far beyond that, or it could be the guy died of natural causes) the kid makes extra money on the side doing prank calls (admittedly) prank calls turn into bomb threats?... bomb threat offers are made very transparent by posting "i will make a bomb threat for you..heres my email address?? does that even seem possible? I mean, he is a kid still, and can have very bad judgement, but he seems to be fairly intelligent, so would he really make it that obvious how to find him to make these threats?..... kid allegedly has hackers and harrassing phone calls?..... one of his "friends" starts working with the FBI to set him up and records alleged conversations tying him to bomb threats.
something does seem fishy... it could be that the kid is guilty as hell, but still has some rights violated. could be something far more sinister going on... maybe that family really pissed someone off?
who knows?
According to the WiReD story, this delinquent was soliciting money to make threats on behalf of customers. He was also recorded doing so multiple times by the individual who turned him in.
The crying about abuse of the Patriot Act appears to be a false as the kid is not being held or charged with anything related to it.
The mother appears to be a very sad individual who does not understand what the word responsibility means - either for her part in parenting or her kid's part in threatening and harassing people. She is the typical enabler trying to protect her baby who happens to be growing into a monster.
$.02
Kraig
05-08-2009, 07:51 AM
I'm not at all surprised that this kid did all this, they are going to let something fresh in the Patriot Act spotlight represent it as a gross injustice. It won't be until after the public is satisfied with cases like this when they start to do the truly hideous stuff, after people don't care enough to pay attention anymore.
I haven't looked too much into this but I am really doubting the kid was setup, there are dozens and probably hundreds of kids exactly like this. Between places like youtube, gaming communities, forum communities, etc there are nearly endless fronts where a kid can make a name for himself and become an "e-celebrity". Usually they do it just by making fun of harnessing others, I have heard plenty of them. There was one kid I heard who became famous for harassing people on Ventrilo and he would indeed take payments for targeted harassment, may have even been this guy, it really does happen all the time. The mentality is probably the same that causes the show "Jackass" to exist, it's just people willing to do crazy antics to get famous.
Kids like this exist. If the Patriot Act wasn't used, then I had a lot of arguments with pro-Patriot Acters for no good reason hah.
Sucks to be the kid either way. Can't blame his mother though, or maybe you can. He did them in his room, on the computer via Skype. If she couldn't hear him then it's not her fault and it's not bad parenting really, just a kid who got in trouble.
Sucks to be the kid either way. Can't blame his mother though, or maybe you can. He did them in his room, on the computer via Skype. If she couldn't hear him then it's not her fault and it's not bad parenting really, just a kid who got in trouble.
Give me a break. This mom knew what he was doing. Her admissions to the WiReD reporter make that pretty clear. He is a sociopath and the mother is an enabling parent. Kid is lucky I'm not sitting on his jury.
Give me a break. This mom knew what he was doing. Her admissions to the WiReD reporter make that pretty clear. He is a sociopath and the mother is an enabling parent. Kid is lucky I'm not sitting on his jury.
which wired reporter? where did it say she knew?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=191680
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.