TELECOM Digest     Mon, 15 Jan 2007 21:48:00 EST    Volume 26 : Issue 15

Inside This Issue:                            Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Prison Time For Viewing Porn? (ABC 20-20 Staff)
    Interview With Prosecutor on the 'Child Porn' Case (ABC 20-20 Staff)
    CommunicationsDirect News Daily Update (communicationsdirect_daily)
    Newbridge 3624 Console Port - Pinout? (Keith Thelen)
    Re: NY Times Plans Major Job Cutback (Mark Crispin)
    Re: NY Times Plans Major Job Cutback (Wesrock@aol.com)
    Re: Article: T1 Connections Provide Unparalleled Data Transfer (ellis)
    Re: Making Voice Mail More Like Email (DevilsPGD)
    Re: Should Consumers Tape "Customer Service" Calls? (T)
    Re: Easy411 (Fred Atkinson)
    Re: Last Laugh! The Sickest Phish Yet! (Rick Merrill)
    Re: Last Laugh! The Sickest Phish Yet! (mc)

====== 25 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet.  All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote.  By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.

               ===========================

Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent.  Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.

We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime.   Geoffrey Welsh

               ===========================

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer; other stuff of interest, and why not
support Net Freedom Now http://www.freepress.net/netfreedom . 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:23:56 -0600
From: ABC News 20-20 Staff <abc@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Prison Time For Viewing Porn?


Prison Time For Viewing Porn?
A Teenage Boy Faces Decades in Prison For Visiting Sexually Explicit Web 
Sites -- But Was It Really Someone Else?

Sixteen-year-old Matthew Bandy was about as normal a teenager as you
could find. He actually liked hanging out with his family.

"He was a happy-go-lucky kid," said his mother, Jeannie Bandy. "Very
personable, and big-hearted. I sound like a boastful mom, but I guess
the biggest thing is that he could always make me laugh."

"We went on vacations and had a lot of fun together," Matthew said. "I
just enjoyed the life I was living. But after I was accused,
everything changed."

What was Matthew Bandy accused of? Jeannie and Greg Bandy were shocked
to discover that their son was charged with possession of child
pornography.

One December morning two years ago, Matthew's life took a dramatic
turn.  In an exclusive interview with "20/20," the Bandy family
reveals how the world as they knew it came crumbling down, and how
Matthew's life has since changed.

A Family Shattered

It has been two years since police officers stood at the doorstep of
the Bandy home with a search warrant bearing a devastating charge --
possession of child pornography.

"It was 6 a.m. It was still dark -- there was this pounding at the door," 
Jeannie Bandy said. "I was petrified."

Police officers stormed into the house with guns pointed. "The first
thing I thought was, someone's trying to break in our house," Matthew
said. "And then there [were] police officers with guns pointed at me,
telling me to get downstairs."

Greg Bandy was handed the search warrant and informed that the central
suspect was Matthew. According to the warrant, nine images of young
girls in suggestive poses were found on the Bandy family computer.
Yahoo monitors chat rooms for suspicious content and reported that
child porn was uploaded from the computer at the Bandys' home address.
But was Yahoo correct on this assumption?

"When they asked me have you ever looked up or uploaded or downloaded 
erotic images of minors, I was just taken aback and I said, 'No,'" says 
Matthew.

Nevertheless, Matthew did have an embarrassing confession. He had been 
sneaking peaks at adult erotic photos on the family computer. "I got the 
Web site from a bunch of friends at school. [It was] just adult 
pornography - Playboy-like images."

Difficult to admit, but not illegal -- or so it seemed. Still, it
didn't look good for Matt, as police confiscated the computer and left
the house that December day. A family was shattered.

"I still remember when they were cleaning up and leaving and of course
I was still in my pajamas and my bathrobe and my fuzzy slippers,"
Jeannie Bandy said. "I said, 'What do we do now? Should I contact a
lawyer?'  [The police officer] said, 'Well, they are felonies that the
state takes very serious.'"

The Bandys would soon find out just how serious the charges against
Matthew were. The family hired Ed Novak, a well-respected attorney
from a large law firm in downtown Phoenix.

"20/20" correspondent Jim Avila asked Novak what the family was up
against.

"We faced 10 years per count, there were nine counts," said Novak. "If
Matt was convicted, those sentences would have to be served
consecutively. In other words, he would have been sentenced to 90
years in prison. He would have served time until he died."

Greg and Jeannie Bandy knew their son well. They were shocked at the
serious charges against him and frightened by the prospect of such a
serious sentence.

"He's never done any drugs," Greg said. "He never drank a drop of
alcohol. He's never been a problem, never stayed out late and gotten
into trouble or anything like that."

A Sex Offender?

Arizona child pornography laws are among the harshest in the
country. As soon as Matthew was charged, he was put on virtual house
arrest, and an electronic bracelet was attached to his ankle to
monitor his movements 24 hours a day.

"It was just terrifying. I didn't know what was going on. I didn't
know why it was happening," Matthew recalled.

Matthew was in an awful predicament, and he tried to keep his house
arrest a secret. He wore longer pants to hide the ankle bracelet, but
he was scared he would be discovered.

"Yes, I was very scared," he said. "If they found out that I was
wearing an ankle bracelet all of a sudden they would be wondering, why
are you wearing that? And I had no good answer for them."

The shy young boy could not explain how such pictures appeared on his
computer hard drive. The stress of the situation got so bad for
Matthew that he told his parents the charges hanging over his head
made high school impossible.

"He said 'Mom, I'm hurting,'" said Jeannie. "'I can't sleep. I don't
want to disappoint anybody, but I just can't go on anymore.'"

Matt's dreams had been destroyed and his mother was crushed. And even
though there was no proof that Matthew personally downloaded those
nine pictures, it would be difficult to prove his innocence. Novak
said that the pictures alone were practically all the evidence the
police needed, or so the police claimed.

"I thought his chances of winning were probably 20 percent," said
Novak.  "They didn't care that I denied it," Matthew said. "They just
kept on asking me and kept on thinking that I did it. They just had it
built into their mind that this kid is guilty."

What is so frightening about Matt's case? It could happen to anyone.

"The computer had accessed a 'Yahoo' account where there was child
pornography," Andrew Thomas, Maricopa County district attorney said.
"That was the basis for the search warrants issued by a court."

Yet, the evidence submitted by the Phoenix police department did not
identify a specific user. Matt's clean reputation, his good grades and
protective family could not stand up to the cold fact that child porn
was on that computer. The police and the district attorney had the
incriminating photos from the Bandys' computer and the prosecutors
were determined to send Matt away.

A Family Fights Back

Matthew Bandy found himself outmatched in the national campaign
against child pornography -- harsh laws designed to keep track of
pedophiles and punish them severely.

"They didn't care that I denied it, they just kept on asking me and
kept on thinking that I did it," he said. "They just had it built in
their mind that this kid is guilty, and we're going to make sure that
he's convicted. No matter what the means are."

The Bandy family contends that Thomas was on a mission and that his
desire to convict was so strong that he ignored important evidence --
like the fact that Matthew passed a lie detector test. The fact that
the test indicated that Matt was telling the truth wasn't taken into
account.

And that's when the Bandy family really began to fight back. They
hired two polygraph examiners who confirmed Matthew was telling the
truth.  Then they ordered two psychiatric evaluations which concluded
that Matthew had no perverted tendencies.

ABC's Jim Avila asked Thomas about the results of the lie detectors
tests and Matt's psychiatric evaluations.

"Quite frankly, criminal defendants are not famous for being forthcoming 
with the facts," Thomas explained. "I'm not a big believer in polygraph
tests. And certainly, they're not admissible in court. At the end of the
day, we certainly felt there was a good faith reason to go forward
with the prosecution."

Despite the positive polygraphs and psychiatric exams, the district
attorney pressed on. So the Bandys and their attorney tackled the most
difficult question on the table. If Matthew didn't put the pictures on
the computer, how did they get there?

For that answer, they turned to computer forensic expert Tammi Loehrs.

"If you have an Internet connection, high speed, through, let's say,
your cable company, or through the phone company, that computer is
always on, and basically you have an open doorway to the outside,"
Loehrs said. "So the home user has no idea who's coming into their
computer."

Loehrs went into the Bandys' computer and what she found could
frighten any parent -- more than 200 infected files, so-called
backdoors that allowed hackers to access the family computer from
remote locations, no where near Matthew's house.

"They could be on your computer and you'd never know it," she said.

Loehrs says she does not believe that Matthew uploaded those images
onto his computer "based on everything I know and everything I've seen
on that hard drive."

But police still had those pictures, and the harsh child porn laws
made going to court risky for Matthew.

"All the jury would know is that there were these images on the
computer," Matthew said. "And here's me sitting in the courtroom --
let's blame him because he was on the computer, obviously he did it."

'We Had No Faith'

Even if he was only convicted on one count, Matthew would have faced
10 years in jail, and have his "life ruined," said Novak.

"We had no faith," said Jeannie Bandy. "Our lawyers had no faith. We
were told he more than likely would end up in jail."

So the Bandys took a deal from the prosecution. In exchange for
dropping all counts of child pornography, Matthew pleaded guilty to
the strange charge of distributing obscene materials to minors -- a
"Playboy" magazine to his classmates.

"To be precise, he was charged with showing [a Playboy magazine to
other 16-year-olds] before school, at lunch and after school," Greg
Bandy said.

But the Bandy family nightmare was not over. While the prosecution
deal offered no jail time for Matthew, he would still be labeled a sex
offender. Under Arizona law and in most states around the country, sex
crimes carry with them a life of branding. Matthew would be forced to
register as a sex offender everywhere he lived, for the rest of his
life.

"I have to stay away from children," said Matthew. "I cannot be around
any area where there might be minors, including the mall, or the
movies, or restaurants or even church. To go to church I have to have
written consent from our priest, I have to sit in a different pew, one
that doesn't have a child sitting in it."

'Computers Are Not Safe'

The judge couldn't believe the prosecution was insisting on sex
offender status and invited Matthew to appeal. "20/20" was there when
two years of fear and misery finally ended. A message arrived from the
judge, ironically on the computer, informing them that Matthew would
not be labeled a sex offender. Matt and his parents had won his life
back.

In the den of the Bandy home sits the family computer, now unplugged
from the Internet. The Bandys learned that, for them, the Web is simply 
too dangerous.

"It means that computers are not safe," said Jeannie. "I don't want to 
have one in my house. Under even under the strictest rules and the 
strictest security, your computer is vulnerable."

Copyright - 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily. And, discuss this and other topics in our forum at
http://telecom-digest.org/forum (or)
http://telecom-digest.org/chat/index.html

To see the associated video with this report, please go to:
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=2796316

To read other news and headlines, please go to:
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/newstoday.html

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:26:59 -0600
From: ABC 20-20 News 
Subject: Interview With Prosecutor on the 'Child Porn' Case


ABC's Jim Avila's Interview With Andrew Thomas, District Attorney, 
Maricopa County
Unedited Excerpts From The Interview Transcripts

JIM AVILA (ABC News Staff): So let's look at this case of this 15 year
old boy. First of all, what happened to the case? Police go to his
house. Guns drawn, uh, 6 o'clock in the morning, quiet cul-de-sac in
Phoenix. Wake up Mom and Dad, with guns in their faces. A gun to the
16 year-old who's up in the second floor, bring him down, accuse him
of child pornography. He's charged with nine counts. It could have
been 90 years. It's a two year process. At the end of the day, he's
charged with a crime which I doubt you've ever charged anybody with
before as an initial crime.What happened in your view?

ANDREW THOMAS (Prosectutor): Well, and and just to clarify, in terms
of the police action, uh, this office wouldn't have had control over
that, and I -- I frankly don't know the exact facts of how the
search warrants were executed. But there were search warrants obtained
from a court of law that were, uh, were executed. And as a result of
that, evidence was found uh, linking uh, this juvenile defendant with
the with possession of child pornography on his computer. He
was ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) What was the evidence that linked him to it?

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, initially, the National Center for Missing and 
Exploited Children uh, came into contact with the Phoenix police 
department. They, as a result of that tip, and evidence uh, linking that 
computer to a Yahoo web site were able to work with our office, obtain 
search warrants. And uh, they went in and uh, conducted that uh, uh that 
investigation.

ANDREW THOMAS: They then spoke to the uh, the juvenile who made uh, 
certain admissions. Uh, while he denied accessing adult uh, pornography, 
he did admit to being a part of uh, accessing uh, adult pornography and 
(OFF-MIKE)

ANDREW THOMAS: The juvenile admitted that uh, while he or he said, the 
juvenile said that uh, while he did not access child pornography, he did 
uh, access adult pornography as part of uh, a group, a web site that 
he uh, went onto on the Internet. So you have all of that evidence plus 
some incriminating statements. And as a result of that, the case was 
brought. But as is ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) I just want to get  ...

ANDREW THOMAS: Yeah.

JIM AVILA: ... specific on that.

ANDREW THOMAS: Sure.

JIM AVILA: Because you say all of that evidence. When you listen
carefully to what you said, the evidence was that again, there were
some pictures on his computer that were child pornography.

ANDREW THOMAS: Yes.

JIM AVILA: You didn't have any admissions by him that he had anything
to do with child pornography.

ANDREW THOMAS: Correct.

JIM AVILA: Okay. There was no evidence that you found that directly
linked him to it, because it was a computer in the family's home.

ANDREW THOMAS: No, he admitted uh -- not to -- he did admit to the fact 
that it was his computer. He admitted to the fact that he had used that 
computer to access uh, the web sites where he frequented adult 
pornography. And he, admitted that that was the computer that he used 
for going onto the Internet. So -- and it was the computer that he 
used and it was ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) Who else used that computer in the family?

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, there may have been other people in the 
family who used it, but here's the thing. Uh, then I began at some 
point, I started to talk about the individual, the need for 
individualized justice.

JIM AVILA: So there was a huge amount of evidence that in fact, this kid 
was not involved in a sex crime. And yet, your office and you yourself 
continue to believe and put him through two years of hell, because you 
continue to believe despite lie detector tests, court psychiatrist 
reports, a report from the computer expert who said it could have come 
from anywhere you continue to say ...

ANDREW THOMAS: (Overlap) Well ...

JIM AVILA:  ... that he did it.

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, I -- again, I'm not sure that that's totally right. 
But you gotta ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) Halfway right?

ANDREW THOMAS:  ... you gotta (Inaudible) ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) (Inaudible) ... right here.

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, our experts certainly didn't think ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) ... Your experts ...

ANDREW THOMAS: (Inaudible) ... could have gotten it from anywhere.

(Overlapping Comments)

JIM AVILA: Your -- your experts ...

ANDREW THOMAS: I mean (Laughter)...

JIM AVILA: ... your expert was not an expert who did any analysis 
whatsoever.

ANDREW THOMAS: Well ...

JIM AVILA: as to where it came from. All your expert did was say it's here.

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, right. But let's back up. When you're looking at
a case again, not to belabor the point. You've gotta look at all the
evidence. Here, we had evidence that from the National Center for
Missing and Exploited Children that came to the Phoenix police
department showing that this computer user in this household had
access a Yahoo account where there was child pornography.

JIM AVILA: Well, that's not exactly ...

ANDREW THOMAS: (Overlap) We didn't obtain ...

JIM AVILA: ... what it said, is it?


ANDREW THOMAS: Well, no that ...

(Overlapping Comments)

JIM AVILA: It said that a computer in this addr -- house at this address 
has some compu -- has some child pornography on it.

ANDREW THOMAS: No, they ...

JIM AVILA: It didn't say this computer user

ANDREW THOMAS: No.

JIM AVILA: It didn't identify a computer user.

ANDREW THOMAS: It it identified a computer.

JIM AVILA: Right.

ANDREW THOMAS: And the computer had accessed a Yahoo account where there 
was child pornography. That was the,  uh, basis for the search 
warrants issued by a court.

JIM AVILA: Right.

ANDREW THOMAS Other evidence was assembled in the course of executing
the search warrants. The computer was found and seized. Child
pornography was found on there. The juvenile was interviewed. He
admitted at least partially, the substance of the crime, which was
yes, he used the computer to go on the Internet to access pornographic
sites.

It turned out he says it was only adult sites. Quite frankly, criminal 
defendants are not famous for being forthcoming with the facts. So 
you've got to weigh that ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) Except for this one passed two lie detector tests.

JIM AVILA: It sounds a bit like you're trying to have it both ways. 
Because you're saying you didn't charge him with any ... you and at the 
end of the day, you let him go. But you ... the final the end of the 
day, he wasn't charged with any child pornography. None. He was ...

ANDREW THOMAS: Right.

JIM AVILA: He ...

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, but he was charged with solicitation to furnish 
uh, to furnish ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) He bought a Playboy magazine

ANDREW THOMAS: sexual exploitation ...

JIM AVILA: ... and took it to school and showed it to other 16 year olds.

ANDREW THOMAS: That's what he pled to, but that's a little uh, that 
requires a little bit of explanation. It is very typical in plea 
agreements what you have to do is, if you decided okay, 
we want to try to resolve this case because the criminal charges were 
originally brought we want to try to resolve it and specifically, you 
bring the charges down.

And what you have to find is an appropriate uh, offense at that level of 
felony so that you can enter into the plea agreement. That's 
typically how the decision making process is done. So um, although I 
wasn't privy to that decision making process, it was a line prosecutor 
who handled tip I've done that. And typically, what you do is you would 
find in this case, a classics on designated felony where there's a 
factual basis so that I mean, you can't just pick any uh, any classic 
felony.

It has to be something that relates to the crime as alleged so that the 
defendant can go forward and admit guilt in court. And I should 
note, not to put too fine a point on this, but this defendant did plead 
guilty in a court of law.

JIM AVILA: To?

ANDREW THOMAS: To the solicitation charge, which is a class six 
(Inaudible) undesignated felony.


JIM AVILA: Which was ...

ANDREW THOMAS: And ...

JIM AVILA: ... showing a Playboy magazine to another 16 year old at school.

ANDREW THOMAS: Well and ...

JIM AVILA: (Overlap) Is that child pornography?

ANDREW THOMAS: (Inaudible) well, no, but that's the whole point of 
this. That when you're trying to resolve a case, you want to reach 
the right outcome so that there is justice. We started up this 
conversation by talking about these tremendous hammers and people can be 
sent for too many years in prison.

Now we have, I guess, the accusation is well, maybe there wasn't enough. 
That's the whole point of prosecutorial discretion in the judicial 
system. It's finding a just outcome in an individual case. That was the 
balance we tried to strike in this case. I think that the line attorney 
who handled it, handled the case properly and uh, quite frankly, the 
defense attorney would have been ethically bound not to allow his client 
to uh, plead guilty to a crime he hadn't committed.

And the judge would not have been allowed by law to accept the uh, 
guilty plea in open court if he did not think there was a factual basis 
uh, to accept that plea.

JIM AVILA: Let me in fact, read you what the Judge said about that plea 
agreement. He said as you were negotiating the plea agreement here the 
reason why this agreement took place is because you couldn't prove the 
things you just alleged now, or else we wouldn't be here.

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, I wasn't there to hear that.

JIM AVILA: Oh, it's right here at the transcript (sic).

ANDREW THOMAS: Well, that's fine. But here's the thing: This Judge there 
is no way a court a judge in a court of competent jurisdiction in 
this state can accept a guilty plea unless they believe the uh, 
defendant is guilty.

JIM AVILA: I mean, he ...

(Overlapping Comments)

ANDREW THOMAS: They're just not allowed to do that. I mean, that's 
(Inaudible) ...

JIM AVILA: He did accept the plea.

ANDREW THOMAS: Right.

JIM AVILA: Of showing a Playboy magazine to another 16 year old. What he 
didn't accept was exactly what you're doing now…trying to stain the boy 
with child pornography ...

ANDREW THOMAS: No.

JIM AVILA: ... charges ...

ANDREW THOMAS: I disagree.

JIM AVILA: .. that you could not prove. That's what he says right here.

ANDREW THOMAS: I disagree. Well, with all due respect to the judge it's 
his job not to accept a guilty plea if he really thinks that the person 
is innocent.

JIM AVILA: And you know what he did?

ANDREW THOMAS: That's his job.

JIM AVILA: You know what he did?

(No response heard.)

JIM AVILA: He invited the defense attorney to appeal. And he did appeal.

ANDREW THOMAS: (Laughter)

JIM AVILA: And within days, the judge overturned it and said ...

ANDREW THOMAS: (Laughter)

JIM AVILA:  ... that the plea agreement was not right. Because he
said, that I've read the pre-sentence report, and my memory of the 
comments that went back and forth about the underlying discussions for a 
factual basis of this pleading are perhaps a little bit different 
than what the state articulated.

ANDREW THOMAS: (Laughter) So the judge admitted a mistake.


JIM AVILA: What he said was, you guys have been have agreed to this
plea agreement. The state won't do anything else but this. But
Mr. Defense Attorney, come back to me and I'll take out the sex crime
part. And that's what he did.

ANDREW THOMAS: Uh huh.

JIM AVILA: What does that say about what you guys were trying to do?

ANDREW THOMAS: Tells me the judge admitted he made a mistake. That's all 
it tells me.

JIM AVILA: It doesn't tell you that you tried to hold onto a case 
you couldn't prove? I guess here's my skepticism about that: here you 
are, a hard line guy. You campaign, uh, against this crime. You kept 
some kid you believe actually downloaded child pornography, this heinous 
crime. You believe you can convict it in court, and you don't do it.

ANDREW THOMAS:  Well, we think there's a reasonable likelihood of 
conviction. Uh, and that's how we felt when we filed the charges. Now, 
you got to understand, in the criminal case, there is give and 
take. I mean, the defense attorney is going to come to the prosecutor 
and say, "Well, I know you've charged him with X, Y and Z, but are you 
aware of this, are you aware of that?" That give and take process 
occurred. And he had a uh, had an outstanding attorney who, uh, worked 
with our office. Uh,  talked to our prosecutor, our staff about various, 
uh, issues.

And at the end of the day, we felt that for this particular case, that
was the right outcome. Now, this uh, in fairness, this is very
different from the guy I was talkin' about, uh, and I can give you
more specifics about him as an example of somebody I'd want to throw
the book at. Somebody who's basically trafficking in child pornography,
those guys should go to prison for a long time. I got no sympathy for
them at all.

This young man was different. Now, is it appropriate for us to bring
these original charges? Yes, I think it was. Was the ultimate outcome
appropriate? I think it was, based on all the factors of the case. Can
reasonable people disagree about that because they, you know, they
take a look at it and they think it was maybe too harsh or too light?
I suppose.

But that's what prosecutors are paid to do. We have to try to do
justice in individual cases, that's what courts are paid to do.

ANDREW THOMAS: But the ultimate outcome was what it was. And the
defendant accepts that, the state accepts that, and I'm content that
the appropriate sanction was imposed to hold him accountable, teach
him a lesson, teach him that this isn't fun and games. If you're goin'
to start playing around on pornographic sites, and you come across
child pornography then, you know, you better accept the consequences
of that.

And whatever happened in his case, uh, presumably we'll never know
because, uh, we haven't been able to fully get to the bottom of
that. But, uh, an important lesson was taught here. But justice was
served in that the appropriate outcome wasn't to send this guy to
prison for 50 years. Was to teach him a good, hard lesson so he
doesn't do it again. And that's what happened.

JIM AVILA: The defense attorney didn't agree to a plea that said this 
boy committed child pornography ...

ANDREW THOMAS: Uh-huh.

JIM AVILA:  ... in any way.

ANDREW THOMAS: Right.

JIM AVILA: Okay? He didn't do anything unethical. He did agree to a 
plea of a boy who took a Playboy magazine to school.

ANDREW THOMAS: Uh-huh.

JIM AVILA: Showed it to 16-year-olds.

ANDREW THOMAS: Right.

JIM AVILA: A charge which we've not been able to find has ever been 
leveled against anybody in this county ...

ANDREW THOMAS: Uh-huh.

JIM AVILA:  ... before.

ANDREW THOMAS: Yeah, I don't know. It may have, it may have been a while. 
It's certainly not one that we bring commonly. But again, to 
explain, uh, how you reach that plea agreement, if you've decided that 
somebody is going to plead to, instead of a Class Two felony, it's a 
Class Five felony, or a Class Six undesignated felony, then to reach the 
plea agreement that can then be entered into court, I mean, not to be 
too technical about it, but you've got to find a Class Six felony that 
fits the factual description of what happened so that you can go into 
court and you can say, "On this date, this is what I did" and the judge 
can examine the facts and accept a guilty plea.

So, while this would have been an unorthodox thing to a person to plead 
to, uh, that it's because of the common desire of prosecution and 
defense to reach a just outcome in looking for a Class Six undesignated 
felony that fit this fact pattern. And that's, uh, that's how 
we reach this point. And, uh, but for the record, you know, these kids 
really shouldn't be takin' (Chuckles) Playboys to school.

Uh, not that, uh, we have some big crackdown here on that but, uh but 
the law is on the books, and maybe it's on the books if only to 
allow us, in cases like this, to properly dispose of the case.

Copyright 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures

For a video link of ABC News on this case, please go to:
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=2796316


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First, for anyone still reading this, I
do suggest you look at the above video for more details. And it would 
seem to me the _only_ reason police insisted on the watered down
charge of 'distributing pornography' was so they did not have to go
away empty-handed. As any police officer would tell you, it is quite
essential to neutralize anyone who might otherwise try to sue you for
false arrest charges. Myself, I would have pleaded not guilty and
stood on that position until hell froze over (which it almost has here
today in Independence, sheets of ice on everything after the weekend
ice storms), but in any event I would have given them nothing, nada,
no matter how long it took or how much it cost. And one favorite trick
of pedophile hackers, as we learn in the video, is to keep their _own_
computers clean at all times, storing their stuff on _someone else's_
computer instead, as apparently happened in this case. And, IMO, shame 
on Yahoo for sticking their nose into the mess.  PAT]

------------------------------

Subject: CommunicationsDirect News Daily Update - January 15, 2007
From: communicationsdirect_daily <communicationsdirect@communicationdirect.com>
Reply-To: communicationsdirect_daily-owner@communicationsdirectnews.com
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 12:18:27 -0500 (EST)


********************************
PricewaterhouseCoopers Presents
The CommunicationsDirect Daily Update
For January 15, 2007
********************************

Starting today we invite you to participate in our weekly reader polls
on the home page of our site. Results are posted each Friday. This
week's question: Would you pay extra for expanded customer service
from any of your communications service providers? Tell us what you
think by voting on our home page.

Deutsche Telekom Changes Its VDSL Roll-Out Strategy
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/22081?11228

     Europe's largest telecoms group, Deutsche Telekom, has shelved its
     3.3 billion euro (US$4.3 billion) VDSL roll-out strategy and will not
     carry out its initial plan to connect 50 cities in Germany to its
     ultra-high-speed VDSL network, which is capable of delivering speeds
     of up to 50 Mbps and supports live streaming of high-definition...

Boomerang Effect
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/150/22074?11228

     The wall separating telecom services from broadcast and cable TV
     services has never been thinner. The ability of wireless
     customers to watch their home TV programming remotely via their
     wireless devices over a wireless network is raising flags - not
     only for regulators trying to monitor both content and
     telecommunications services, but ...

Three Companies on the Move
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/150/22068?11228

     A variety of startups introduced innovative and potentially
     revolutionary technologies last year, making it an exciting time for
     telecom innovation. As 2007 kicks into gear, several new telecom
     products and services are gaining momentum. Three companies in
     particular -- Firethorn, GrandCentral Communications and Innopath
     -- are offering ...

Italy's Fastweb Fixed-line Operator Posts 26 Percent Rise in Q4 Revenue
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/22066?11228


     MILAN, Italy -- Fastweb, Italy's second-largest telecommunications 
     fixed-line operator, announced a 26 percent increase in fourth
     quarter revenue on Monday as it signed up a record number of
     customers.  Revenue in the fourth quarter rose to E362 million
     (US$467 million) from E287.5 million a year, helped by a record
     105,000 ...

AT&T Puts Cingular Out to Pasture
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/22064?11228

     The AT&T Inc. phase-out of 6-year-old Cingular Wireless' brand
     begins next week. AT&T says it will transition the Cingular brand
     to its own in a massive advertising and customer communications
     campaign targeting Cingular's Websites, retail stores, company
     buildings and vehicles. Just last week, AT&T gained full ...

Nortel, Siemens Win PBT Deals at BT
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/120/22062?11228

     BT Group plc has firmly committed to the controversial new
     Ethernet technology PBT (Provider Backbone Transport) by
     announcing multi-year supply deals with Nortel Networks
     Ltd.&nbsp;and Siemens Communications Group . Light Reading
     believes BT plans to invest several tens of millions of dollars
     in the Ethernet technology. ...

Sonae Gets Green Light To Launch PT Takeover Bid
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/130/22060?11228

     Portuguese stock-market regulator Comissao do Mercado de Valores
     Mobiliarios (CMVM) has given Sonae the go-ahead to move forward
     on its hostile takeover bid for Portugal Telecom (PT), just hours
     after PT this morning issued a statement that it thinks the bid
     is billions of dollars too low. The agency essentially accused
     Sonae and ...

Alvarion Heads Downmarket
http://www.communicationsdirectnews.com/do.php/140/22057?11228

     The news that Alvarion Ltd. has formed a joint venture with a
     Taiwanese partner to build end-user devices brings the development of
     WiMax networks to a new phase, according to executives on both sides
     of the deal. Tel Aviv-based Alvarion says it will partner
     with Accton Technology Corp. of Taipei to build high ...

Your feedback on our e-letter is always welcome. Send email to:
CommunicationsDirect Editor <telecom_direct_editor@us.pwc.com>

Copyright (C) 2007 PricewaterhouseCoopers.

------------------------------

From: Keith Thelen <kthelen@kanabec.net>
Subject: Newbridge 3624 Console Port - Pinout?
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 21:48:57 -0600
Organization: Kanabec Systems


Hello all!

The subject pretty much says it all -- I have a Newbridge "MainStreet"
3624 channel bank which I need to reconfigure, but I have not been
able to obtain the proper console cable for it, nor have I found the
info needed to make one in my searching. Does anyone have the pinouts?

TIA,

Keith Thelen
Kanabec Systems
http://www.kanabecsystems.com/
Mac + PC consulting for East Central Minnesota

------------------------------

From: Mark Crispin <mrc@cac.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: NY Times Plans Major Job Cutback
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 17:47:47 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> 3) Far more people live in the suburbs and just don't care about the
> big city issues anymore, the stuff that was the bread 'n butter of a
> city newspaper.  Suburbanites without any city connection -- as many are
> today -- don't care about City Hall or inner city issues.

True, but ...

> Unfortunately, it's a lot harder for a newspaper to cover every tiny
> town meeting of the suburbs, where many towns can be just a few square
> miles.

There's a big difference between covering every tiny town meeting, and
no coverage or condescending coverage ("where all the girls are either
pregnant or look like they will soon become pregnant") of the suburbs
where most of their readership lives.

A newspaper that purports to be a regional paper should cover at least
the local 5-digit population bedroom communities, and not treat them
as if they were a 2-digit population farming community 100 miles away.
And, under no circumstances, should the paper make the kind of remark
that I quoted above about any place.

> 4) The cost of covering a much larger developed area and distributing
> the newspaper to said area is considerably more.

Yet the big city papers seem to be determined to grab wide-area
markets.  If they want to play, they ought to pay.

> 5) If you compare a newspaper today to one say of 1974, you'll find
> the 1974 edition much smaller.  Over the years they've added many
> features to the newspaper that weren't there in the past.  This is a
> cost.

Most of the bulk is advertising.  Once you get past page 1 and 2, the
majority of each page in the A section of the Seattle papers are large
ads for downtown Seattle business.  It goes downhill from there.

Then there are the advertising inserts.  In the Sunday paper, more
than 50% of the paper by weight is advertising inserts.

I once measured column inches between one of the Seattle papers and a
much thinner smaller-city newspaper.  The latter actually had more
news text.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do either of you -- Mark or Lisa --
> remember when the Sunday New York Times first weighed in at five
> pounds? Five pounds of newspaper every Sunday. There was an article
> about it in the NY Times the next day ... Does _anyone_ actually read
> all of the Sunday paper? Not just the Times, but any Sunday paper?  PAT]

I go through the entire Sunday paper (minus the advertising).  Of
course, I just skim through the sections that I am uninterested in,
but at least I see them.

It's been a long time since I last looked through the Sunday NY Times, but 
as I recall much of its bulk was advertising.

 -- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

------------------------------

From: Wesrock@aol.com
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 20:46:56 EST
Subject: Re: NY Times Plans Major Job Cutback


In a message dated 13 Jan 2007 12:52:30 -0800,hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
writes:

> I don't know all the reasons, but I would submit some reasons are:

> 1) People drive to work instead of transit and they aren't reading the
> paper on the train/bus as they used to.

       But the loss also occurs in smaller places with no public
transport.  However, there is no doubt that in most cities public
transport is not much used.  (I believe the highest percentage is in
New York, 17 per cent.  So the NY Times should be least affected by
this reason.

> 2) Both parents work these days (assuming there even is two parents)
> and there is little time left over to relax and read the paper at
> night.  Mother isn't home during the day to pause and read it and in
> the evening Father has his chores to do and can't read it.

       Afternoon/evening newspapers have disappeared in most places.
The number of cities with both morning and afternoon papers in the USA
can be counted on one hand.

> 3) Far more people live in the suburbs and just don't care about the
> big city issues anymore, the stuff that was the bread 'n butter of a
> city newspaper.  Suburbanites without any city connection -- as many are
> today -- don't care about City Hall or inner city issues.
> Unfortunately, it's a lot harder for a newspaper to cover every tiny
> town meeting of the suburbs, where many towns can be just a few square
> miles.

       But many are trying to do so, recognizing this as a significant 
factor.

> 4) The cost of covering a much larger developed area and distributing
> the newspaper to said area is considerably more.

> 5) If you compare a newspaper today to one say of 1974, you'll find
> the 1974 edition much smaller.  Over the years they've added many
> features to the newspaper that weren't there in the past.  This is a
> cost.

     Additional sections and features are normally added as sources of
revenue, to attract more advertisers for the specialized interests
represented by those sections and features.  The basic support of
newspapers is advertising revenue, and they seek to maintain or
increase their subscription base to attract more advertising revenue.

> 6) TV always was the enemy of print.  With cable, there's so much more
> on TV now (though mostly garbage*) and people watch instead of read.

      Probably some truth in this, but newspapers tried to allow for
that by starting TV stations, usually the first station to be
established in the market.  The FCC and the Congress put a stop to
that in that name of providing "more voices."  The result has been in
most places that the newspaper-owned station was the quality station
in the market and prided itself on that quality.  With newspapers
required to divest their TV stations, those stations descended to the
level of the other stations in the market.


Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com

------------------------------

From: ellis@no.spam ()
Subject: Re: Article: T1 Connections Provide Unparalleled Data Transfer
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 03:18:44 -0000
Organization: S.P.C.A.A.


In article <telecom26.12.5@telecom-digest.org>, Sam Spade
<Sam@coldmail.com> wrote:

> Now, let's talk t-3 at reasonable rates.  (not about to happen, is it)

I had a client in a building that had Cogent presence. He was able to
get 100 Mbit for about $1000/mo.

http://yosemitephotos.net/

------------------------------

From: DevilsPGD <spam_narf_spam@crazyhat.net>
Subject: Re: Making Voice Mail More Like Email
Organization: Disorganized
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 05:25:37 GMT


In message <telecom26.13.8@telecom-digest.org> Monty Solomon
<monty@roscom.com> wrote:

> Despite spam and other problems, email is highly useful and
> effective. You can quickly send and receive messages, delete or
> forward them, and save them for reading at a later time.

Voicemail can do all of those, including the spam.

> A glance at your inbox can tell you a lot about each message,
> including its subject, sender and the time it was received.

It's hard to "glance" at a voice system.  However, you can get that
same info out of a voicemail system too, if you desire.

You can't usually start in the middle, but you can still get the list
in chronological order without listening to any of the message
content, if you so desire.

> But voice mail lags behind in key ways. A voice mail still doesn't
> tell you the caller's name or reason for calling unless you listen to
> at least part of it. 

Then your voice mail system is stuck in the stone age.  Even my cell
phone's voice mail system tells me the number, if I ask for it.

> You usually can't reply to a voice mail with a
> message of your own, as with email; instead, you must call the person
> back. 

My cell phone's voicemail can both reply to voicemail (if the caller
uses the same system), or automatically connect me to the caller's
phone number.

> And you can't easily jump from the most recent voice mail to the
> 10th without listening to every message in between.

This is tougher, mainly because it would be very difficult to interact
with a voice mail system due to the lack of interface.

> Still, voice mail has its place. A phone call is much more personal
> than an email, and lets you use vocal inflection to express your
> point, whereas email expressions can sometimes be misinterpreted. And
> it's often easier and faster to speak your message than to type it
> out.  

It might be faster for the sender speak it, but it's a hell of a lot
faster for a recipient to read text then listen to you stumble through
a message, repeating parts, fading out because you're in a noisy or
windy location on your $5 cell phone or because *I* happen to be in a
noisy place.

Voicemail is for the convenience of the sender, email is for the
convenience of the recipient.

     ===================
If crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight
fire, what do freedom fighters fight? 

------------------------------

From: T <nospam.kd1s@cox.nospam.net>
Subject: Re: Should Consumers Tape "Customer Service" Calls?
Organization: The Ace Tomato and Cement Company
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 02:59:44 -0500


In article <telecom25.153.7@telecom-digest.org>, 
koos+newsposting@kzdoos.xs4all.nl says...

> T <nospam.kd1s@cox.nospam.net> wrote in
> <telecom25.147.11@telecom-digest.org>:

> [ story about dell support woes ]

>> There ought to be some sort of vetting process for I.T. folks to get
>> past those damned support scripts.

> With Dell there is an option (at least in the Netherlands). A company
> can send one (or more) of their support people on a special Dell
> course (and pay for the privilege), after which those support people
> will have access to second-line support at Dell. Regular freshen-up
> courses are needed for new models of hardware and other changes.

> A company needs to have an awful lot of Dell hardware for this to be
> interesting.

40 Dell servers, 70 Dell desktops and laptops. I love the part about
"pay for the privelege". Yeah, right. I could probably do Dell support
without even looking at the script. I've had it used on me so many
times in the past that I could repeat it verbatim.

------------------------------

From: Fred Atkinson <fatkinson@mishmash.com>
Subject: Re: Easy411
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 08:35:13 -0500
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $19.95
Reply-To: fatkinson@mishmash.com


Pat, 

	I tried it again a few minutes ago.  

	Both times I've called Smoothstone, they've opened a ticket.
The second time I called them they told me they'd call me back.  I
told them that that is what they promised me last time but I never got
a call back.  The CSR said he'd see that I did.  It didn't happen.  

	They certainly can't stay in business with Easy411 like this. 
Regards, 


Fred Atkinson 

On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 19:12:26 -0500, Fred Atkinson
<fatkinson@mishmash.com> wrote:

> Pat,

>    I called Smootstone a week ago and complained.  They said they'd look
> into it and get back to me.  They never did.

>    I called them again a few minutes ago.  The fellow that was on duty
> duplicated my problem on another phone while I was talking to him.  I heard
> it fail when he did it.

>    I told him they'd not called me back last time.  He said he'd try to see
> that that doesn't happen again.

>    We'll see.

>    Regards,

>    Fred

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The service does not work for me,
>> either. I have been able to track them down to this limited extent on
>> New Year's Eve: Try http://www.smoothstone.com/contact.php for some
>> information. That company, Smoothstone, deals in IP telephony, and is
>> located in Louisville, KY. I do not know the dispostion of Easy 411
>> however. I doubt we will get anywhere on this at least until Tuesday
>> but if some of you want to work on it, please go ahead and try. PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 14:57:40 -0500
From: Rick Merrill <rick0.merrill@NOSPAM.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! The Sickest Phish Yet!


and it starts with "Good day" :-(

------------------------------

From: mc <look@www.ai.uga.edu.for.address>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! The Sickest Phish Yet!
Organization: BellSouth Internet Group
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 00:41:43 -0500


I have seen news reports of a variant of this that purports to come
from the FBI.  Of course, in real life the FBI would not tell people
to pay extortion money, but some people will believe anything.

------------------------------


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecomm-
unications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as
Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums.  It is
also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.

TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Patrick Townson. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then.  Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!

URL information:        http://telecom-digest.org

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://feeds.feedburner.com/telecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2007 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

   In addition, gifts from Mike Sandman, Chicago's Telecom Expert
   have enabled me to replace some obsolete computer equipment and
   enter the 21st century sort of on schedule. His mail order 
   telephone parts/supplies service based in the Chicago area has
   been widely recognized by Digest readers as a reliable and very
   inexpensive source of telecom-related equipment. Please request
   a free catalog today at http://www.sandman.com 
   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list. 

All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.

End of TELECOM Digest V26 #15
*****************************