Report From The Courthouse. II
October 25, 2010
Well, I am back from the Courthouse once again. Just like last time, I was interviewed
to be a member of a jury, and, once again, was politely excused. The hangup this
time was a question that I think will resonate with the board members.
This time, a key piece of evidence had been gather via "computer forensics", which apparently meant using "Encase" and a "write blocker". Because the witnesses would be giving only a basic description of how these technologies work, the prosecution attorney didn't want anyone on the jury who has a knowledge beyond basic computer skills.
There were actually two questions. The first one was "Do you know much about computers?". Talk about a loaded question. I imagine that just about every board member has enough knowledge to exceed the limit of this prosecutor's tolerance level. She elicited the facts that yes, I write computer programs, and yes, I have even done a forensic analysis, and amazing, I hadn't even used any commercial products to diagnose the problem but had created my own. [Hint: "find . -mtime ..."]
Finally, she asked "Given how knowedgeable you are, surely you would expect the witnesses to explain in great detail how these programs work, right?" She was not expecting the answer I gave. Instead of saying yes, I said: "NO, I wouldn't find it useful at all. HOWEVER, I would want to know how they VALIDATED that their programs worked the way they were supposed to."
My exit from the courtroom was faster than that of Phil Hughes from the mound.
Source: Investor Village SCO Board [ http://www.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=1911 ]