Subject: Grady Deposition- Summary 1st Part From: dc7v@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Damon Chetson) Date: 1996/06/30 Message-Id: The following is a summary of Grady Ward's deposition taken on Thursday, June 27, 1996 in Eureka, CA. It is the first 1 1/2 hours. I may have gotten some of the names wrong or misspelled. I'm going to try to do the second part of the Deposition and post that later. I hope this is valuable to people, consider it a small substantive contribution to the newsgroup. A note on the tone. I've listened to parts of the first deposition, which was predominantly done by Hogan, but also Lieberman. Lieberman questions the whole way through the first 1 1/2 hours of this deposition and is far more aggressive and confrontational than Hogan. He pushes constantly on Grady to verify postings, which Grady won't do. He seems almost rude. But I've never been in a deposition, so this may be the way they are carried out. The tone is far more hostile this time around than the deposition in April. Also, if web site people could put this on their site, that would be nice because with the spam, it won't last long on various newsspools. Hoyos/Damon Chetson --- Begin Summary --- Opens with Grady and Lieberman arguing about whether Grady can tape all conversation in the deposition room. Grady says leave if you don't want to be taped. Lieberman says no, he won't have his private conversatiosn taped. Grady says they will call Infante, the Magistrate. (I'm not sure if they actually do). Everyone is introduced: Hogan, Ward, Lieberman, Kobrin, a court reporter, and one other person whose name I think is Allan Cartwright, but I'm not sure. Grady is sworn in. Lieberman reads into record Infante's order continuing the deposition. Ward objects, saying it's not evidence, it was written by the plaintiff. Lieberman says it was written by Infante. Lieberman begins with the New Prometheus League, a group of people investigated by the FBI for allegedly leaking Apple source code. Lieberman asks if Grady was ever a suspect. Grady says he was never told so, but he inferred it and that he was subpoenaed to give fingerprints. Grady objects to the line of questioning. They discuss Grady's interview with Stephen Cook?, an FBI agent. Lieberman says that Grady was one of five suspects. Grady objects again, but Lieberman says that, since Grady's counterclaim against RTC involves Grady's claim that false statements were made about Grady's employment with Apple, RTC has the right to explore this line. Lieberman then asks about Captain Crunch, who is John Graber?, and asks Grady if he ever met him. Grady denies it. Liberman asks about Richard Burns? and Richard Camps, the former in-house security officer for Apple Computer. Grady says ne never met these two people. Lieberman asks about Chuck Farnham, a reporter. Grady says he never met him. Farnham, Lieberman says, says Grady told him he was fired over the Prometheus League incident. Grady says that can't be true, he's never spoken with Farnham. Grady is asked about Markoff, a reporter for the NYT. Grady says he spoke to Markoff, but that he never told Markoff he was one of five suspects. They talk about Computer Underground Digest and its lengthy report on this New Prometheus League investigation. (Time 19:35) Cook of the FBI told Grady "we know you did it." Grady says that he found it shocking. to be accused when hundreds had access to the source code. He says he was never questioned by Apple about the source code leak. Grady is initially reluctant to allow RTC access to his personel file at Apple. Lieberman says, well you brought up this topic in your counterclaim. Grady gives permission for RTC to subpoena his personel file and will sign a release allowing RTC to get his file from Apple. Grady says someone working on concert with Scientology has made libelous statements about him being fired from Apple. Grady says the source code incident occured after he left so that no one from Apple forced him out. (Spring of 1990). Grady says he left in January of 1990 and the source code incident happened in the Spring. Grady says it would be libelous if anyone from Apple claims he was fired or forced out for expressing the view that the source code should be made public. Grady says he never believed that Apple source code should be free. Lieberman asks if Grady attended a hackers convention in Holland while he was employed by Apple or shortly thereafter. Grady says no. Grady says the last time he was in Holland in 1985 Lieberman asks if Grady has met Felipe Rodrigues, Alex Dejoode or Peter Moffit. Grady says no to each. Lieberman returns to his employment at Apple and the subject of a "firing" from Apple. Lieberman asks if Grady has ever heard of Kroll investigations. They were apparently hired by Apple to do an investigation. Grady denies any knowledge of who leaked the source code or who was in the New Prometheus League (Time 25:45) Lieberman turns to Grady's statement at the first deposition that he was trying to obtain archives of his postings to a.r.s. Lieberman turns to Grady's earlier testimony in he first deposition that Grady could not verify particular postings without corroborating with archives from various sites around the world. Grady says that all postings are unauthenticated and hearsay. Lieberman asks if he has received archives. Grady says yes. From whom, asks Lieberman. Grady says he has received archives from "anonymous" and also from Deanna Holmes. Grady says he did not make further soliciatiosn for fear of violating his injunction. Lieberman asks what has he received. Grady says, mostly cancels from people apparently working in concert with the Church. Grady wants to introduce them. Lieberman says no, you can tell me what they are, if I want to introduce them, I will. You can introduce yours later. Grady produces 6 postings. He says they were received anonymously. Lieberman wants to know how he asked for archives. Grady says he asked Ron Newman. Lieberman wants to know if Grady asked for or receieved SCAMIZDAT postings. Grady says not at all. Lieberman takes a break to read them. He returns them, saying "if you want to do something with them, that's up to you". He doesn't ask any questios about them. (Time 33:17) Grady says he says he asked henry, Robert Clark, for posts that would be interesting to him, that would prove his counterclaim. He says he has not received any posts of RTC copyrighted materials. He says he asked Deanna for archives, that he sent her his m-o drive on which she could copy her archives, but that he egotthemback in the mail, they no longer worked. Lieberman wants to know if Holmes downloaded stuff from ars. He wants to know if Holmes sent or has copyrighted materials. Grady says he doesn't know, but that he told her not to send any to him if she had any. He says Paper Tiger offered to send some, but never did. Lieberman grills him on the nature of her archives. Grady says he doesn't know. Lieberman wants to know who offered archives. Grady says he doesn't know, they were anonymous and he doesn't keep email, not with RTC's reputation. Lieberman wants to know what he received as archives. Grady offers "200 something" cancels. They talk about Dick Cleek who apparently has been warned recently of a website he has that has Advanced Technolog material related to lawsuits. Lieberman wants to know if Grady will ask Deanna HOlmes for another copy of her archives. He says only if we can be certain she doesn't send me copyrighted material. Grady says he threw away the m-o disks she sent him (because they didn't work). Lieberman asks if Grady tried to change his testimony at the first deposition. Grady says no, he, however, being pro se, is in ignorance of the law, he has since read the rules and says that unauthetnticated computer printouts aren't evidence. That's what he was trying to correct. He wants to make it clear that all of the pstings entered into evidence by RTC are unauthenticated and hearsay. Lieberman gets testy. Lieberman wants to know how Grady verifies his postings. Grady says he assembles large amounts of info and finds the truth value. Lieberman is trying to get Grady to authenticate the postings entered by RTC. Grady says he never authenticated them. Lieberman attempts to browbeat Grady. Lieberman keeps pushing. Grady says he can't verify every word. (Time 45:00) The topic turns to various posts that Grady in the last deposition said were familiar. Grady wants to cross-examine himself. Lieberman says he has to wait until Lieberman is through. Grady says once I get the injuncion removed, perhaps I can be free to get more archives. Lieberman says "Don't hold your breath." Lieberman stats for the record that he thinks it's unfortunate that he has to go back through the record to verify each of these postings. and he says that this is just the kind of thing that has been created by the lack of direct response [by Grady] but that "I have no choice". Grady says "for the record" he thinks that it's unfortunate that he's unrepresented by a competent attorney. Lieberman wants to know if Grady has reviewed his testimony. Grady says he hasn't because he can't afford to buy his own copy from the court reporter.(Time 1:14) Lieberman goes back through more testimony. Asks Grady about specifics of more posts, to which Grady mostly replies that he doesn't know, or can't authenticate every line of his posts. Lieberman says at one point "are you repudiating your testimony" to which Grady replies "no, I am making it more accurate."(Time 1:18) Later, Grady says he has to change his testimony to say that he can't authenticate any postings because there may be changes or deletions without his knowledge. They take a five minute break (Time 1:23) ---End of Part One Subject: Grady Deposition- Summary 2nd Part From: dc7v@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Damon Chetson) Date: 1996/06/30 Message-Id: Let me try this again. The following is a summary of the second part of Grady Ward's Depostion in Eureka Ca on Thursday, July 27, 1996. Eric Lieberman is still questioning the entire 35-minute length of the tape. Errors/questions, email me. It's pretty accurate, but, of course, I can't vouch for all words. More to follow. Damon Chetson/Hoyos --- Summary of 2nd Part of Thurday July 27, 1996 Ward Deposition Lieberman asks about Word Magic, [Something] General Semantics, Malsis? Psycho Cybernetics??, whether Grady's read them. Lieberman asks about OT-8 and Grady says he received the Lanham Act letter from Helena Kobrin. Lieberman asks about Grady calling Helena a "proven liar". Grady says that the letter Kobrin sent him was more evidence that she is a proven liar because at the end of his posting of OT-8 he specifically said he did not know if it was LRH's writings. Lieberman asks if Grady has any evidence that Helena Kobrin sent her Lanham Act letter to anyone else. Grady says, no. Lieberman says if Grady remembers writing "I laugh at Kobrin's attempt to intimidate here". Lieberman asks if the letter intimidated him. He says, well anytime you get a letter from an attorney it's intimidating. Lieberman asks if the letter changed his behavior on ars. Lieberman clearly wants to blow away at Grady's counterclaim of having his free speech infringed by RTC. Lieberman suggests Grady was still as confrontational. Grady says he was more circumspect. Lieberman talks again about another OT-8 posting. Grady allegedly tacked on two lines in which he said "Helena Kobrin is a proven liar. She claims the above is a forgery." Lieberman wants to prove, it seems, that Grady Ward was posting OT-8 and claiming it was cult scripture. Grady says he noted Kobrin's official stand when he said "she claims the above is a forgery". Lieberman says, yes but you claim she's a liar for saying that. Grady says, no, I claimed she was a liar because she said netcom warned me of making copyright violations when netcom never did such a thing. Clearly because she has been saying things that are not correct, that should be taken into account, Grady says. (Time 5:40) Next post. Post entitled "Helena speaks, again" in which Grady allegedly says "Of course, Helena Kobrin, the proven liar" then a few lines down "I laugh at Kobrin's attempt to intimidate me. Hey, ho." "You made this posting Mr.Ward?"- Lieberman. Grady, well I'm not sure, it has my character. Lieberman, sarcastically "I know, your character."(Time 13:00 approx.) Next item. Copy a letter from Rick Francis of Netcom March 20, 1995 addressed to Grady Ward. Bears a stamp from the Erlich case, in which RTC entered it. Grady Ward says he never received the letter. Lieberman says Rick FRancis testified to having sent it. Lieberman says, if he had sent it, it would mean Helena Kobrin was not a liar. Grady says he never received, he only receieved a generic letter stating the terms and conditions for Netcom. Grady says he did receive another a letter a few months[in 1996] ago that was more specific admonition not to infringe on copyrights.(Time 14:30) Next item. Letter addressed to Ward from Helena Kobrin regarding the OT-8 posting. Makes reference to Lanham Act. Ward repeats that his belief Kobrin tells the truth because of his previous experience with her. Lieberman says, well if Rick Francis sent this letter, then her credibility was "quite valid". Lieberman wants to know about Grady's counterclaim. Grady says he doesn't know, ultimately it's for free speech on the internet. He hasn't had time to do all the legal work. Is Grady claiming damages for Kobrin lying? Grady says no. Scamizdat 8 is the next item up. From nobody@replay.com. Lieberman lsays what is posted, it is scrambled out on the tape. Grady denies posting them. Lieberman asks if Grady posted about it. Grady says generally he would post warning people not to download them unless they were in a jurisdiction that permitted reading them. For instance, China was not a signatory. Lieberman wants to know where Grady was at the time. Home. Did you post it? No I did not. Do you know who posted it? No, I do not. If someone wanted to access it SCAMIZDAT 8, could they do it? Grady says, you'd go into the ARS Central Committee and the Cabal. Grady says it's a joke. Lieberman, this is no time for jokes. Grady says, it's a joke. Lieberman says, if you say it, the court will take you seriously. Back to where to get SCAMIZDAT 8, Grady says altavista. Lieberman says, do you know specifically where to get it, Grady says, no. Grady says he doesn't know where any of the SCAMIZDATs are. but explains that within an hour he could probably get all of them because they're probably kept on at least 50 archives. Part 2 over --------- Subject: Grady Deposition- Summary 3rd Part From: dc7v@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Damon Chetson) Date: 1996/06/30 Message-Id: Third Part of the Thursday, June 27, 1996 deposition of Grady Ward in Eureka, CA by RTC attorneys. Eric Lieberman is still asking the questions. A lot of the exchanges are rapid fire and it's hard to get all the words, but I get the gist of them, I hope. My point isn't a verbatim transcription, but a summary of what Lieberman is asking and how Grady is responding. In the third part, Lieberman is generally asking about specific posts. He mentions henry's request for a list of names for Helena Kobrin. He spends a lot of time on Grady's harsh language. He spends time trying to brush off the rmgroup, saying it didn't destroy ARS at all anyway. He spends time on Grady's posts in which Grady allegedly requested Cult scripture. Grady repeatedly either refuses to authenticate specific postings or says "I don't remember". In this part, which is roughly 50 minutes and ends at 12:20 Thursday when they all take a bite to eat, Lieberman seems to get annoyed at Grady's repeated refusal to admit responsibility for posts or to authenticate posts. I, again, apologize for inaccuracies. It's late, or actually early in the morning. I'm going to see if I can get through part of the next section. Enjoy. If you run a web site on Scientology, email me for the complete set with corrections. Damon Chetson/Hoyos --- Begin Third part running about 51 minutes Lieberman continues on the search engine business. Which would you use? Grady: there are literally hundreds. Lieberman: What are the first 10? Grady:http://www.search.com . Lieberman: and if that didn't work, what next? Grady: I don't want to give away my trade secrets, there are literally hundreds of ways of searching, it's chaotic. Lieberman: "I'm sure" Next topic. On the counterclaim alleging a posting of Grady's was canceled.Grady, that's correct, it was a posting pointing to a SCAMIZDAT, a postingof a URL to a SCAMIZDAT. Lieberman: when was it [the cancel/post] made? Grady: Don't know, 1995. Lieberman says: I'd like to see that. This is very important. We have a right to know what you're claiming. Grady: I know,yes of course. Lieberman: do you have an y evidence as to who did thecancel? Grady: well the group of people seemingly acting in concert with RTC. Lieberman: Do you have any evidence? Grady: I haven't had any time. Lieberman: so it's speculation. Grady: it was cancelled, the cancel is more than speculation. Lieberman: Do you have any evidence that links the cancel to RTC. Grady: of course, the pattern follows Kobrin's lead. Lieberman: it would appear you are speculating, do you have evidence. Grady: of course it is, all the cancles had identical wording, "Copyright Infringement, cancelled" On to rmgroup. Lieberman didn't it say "please remove" Grady: laugh, unfortunately saying please is like coming up with a baseball bat and saying please give me your money. It's a forceable attack. Some systems are configured to destroy the group. Lieberman: but it didn't destory ars. Grady: well on some systems, but there were newgroup commands issued. Lieberman: it was a request, wasn't it sir? Grady: well the text of the message was a request, but the command isn't for humans, it's for computers. The command automatically means destruction. Lieberman: only if people run their systems that way. Lieberman: in any event it did not destroy ars. Grady: well on some systems. Lieberman you weren't on ars at that time were. Grady: well it still affected me because of crosspostings. When ars was destroyed, it destroyed the content of my newsgroup. Lieberman: what content was destroyed? Grady: how would I know, if she removed, it, destroyed it. Lieberman: we've already established that she didn't destroy ars. Grady: no I haven't testified to that. undoubtedly she did destroy it on many spmall systems. people had to newgroup command, which is the inverse of [rmgroup]. Next topic. Lieberman: You made numerous postings soliciting copyrighted material, and insulting the church and Ms.Kobrin. Grady: well I solicited fair use. yes I made posts of that character. [There's a bit in here in which the Cult has apparently authenticated a post by Vera Wallace. I can't quite make out what Grady is arguing because of poor quality of sound] Next: A compilation of postings to the internet allegedly made by Grady Ward that are derogatory toward Helena Kobrin or taunting type of postings to which he has just testified are of the character of postings he made. Grady moves to strike as unauthenticated and hearsay. A compliation of postings allgedly form Grady Ward solicitations of RTC documents and materials. Lieberman: Grady Ward has said they are typical. Grady moves to strike as unauthenticated and hearsay. New topic. Henry's post requesting a complete list of the names of Helena Kobrin to which Grady allegedly added missing names. Grady objects: "Why are you entering these scandalous posts" Liberman: they're your scandalous posts. Lieberman implies they are entering this into evidence because Grady is alleging in his counterclaim that Helena defamed him. Lieberman presents another posting of "fairly graphic or uncomplimentary names" with a comment by Erlich "you forgot" some names. Lieberman: and followed by a comment by Grady Ward that Lieberman says: "I won't read because it's beyond the pale". (Time 13:35?) "You accused [Helena] of having oral sex in the bathrooms with Janet Kobrin, didn't you?" Grady: I don't recall that. Lieberman: What if it's not her sister. Grady: Well I don't have any idea, it could be her mom, her daughter. Lieberman: who is Janet Kobrin. Grady: she's an attorney apparently who's worked on Scientology stuff. Posting, September 1995, Grady Ward allegedy asks: I need more cult scriptures. With fax number, U.S. mail, public key block. Lieberman: did you make it? Grady: can't authetnticate it. Lieberman: that key block, is that the one you use? Grady: that key block could be any of a couple thousand .Lieberman: you could check it? Grady: well anyone could post my public key block. Lieberman: it's typical of the requests you made? Grady: it's typical, I can't say whether it is my posting or not. Lieberman: did you make posting asking to be sued, saying you'd love to be sued as SCAMIZDAT. Grady: I didn't mind being sued. I was trying to provoke a reaction to show the illegality of the cult. I did not post in order to be sued. Lieberman: Do you remember saying that you "wanted to be sued under RICO or whatever imaginary charge the criminal cult could event? It doesn't cost anything to file a cross complaint?" Grady: no I don't recall that posting. Lieberman: In March of this year, you posted a message soliciting people to send you materials. What was your best memory about what you posted. Grady: it was months ago. Lieberman: I want your best memory. Grady: I solicited material, not trade secrets. Lieberman: did you say it was shocking if SCAMIZDAT would post all of NOTs? Grady: I don't recall posting that. Lieberman: Posting soliciting "another copy" of the NOTs pack. This was in March of 1996, Mr. Ward, within two weeks of posting it, you were sued. Do you deny making this post? Grady: I deny it. It's unauthenticated. I do care about intellectual property. I do not remember this posting. Lieberman: On or about March 6, did you make a posting soliciing NOTs. Grady: I don't recall. Two weeks before you were sued, did you make a posting to ARS soliciting NOTs packs. Grady: I do not know. Lieberman: So when you found out you were being sued, "did you say what's this all about?" Grady: I thought I was being sued because Helena had personal animus toward me. Lieberman: why did you not deny it before Judge Whyte back then? Grady: I did in fact, but I didn't know the lawyer terms. Lieberman: do you deny it? Grady: I do not know. Lieberman: You don't know what you did, okay. [this is very rapid fire and I'm missing parts of it, but it's not supposed to be verbatim] Lieberman: shortly after did you receive a letter from Helena Kobrin? Grady: yes I did. Lieberman: did you refuse her certified mail? Grady: probably Lieberman: why? Grady: I don't like talking to her. Lieberman: alleged posting of Grady's "The ho of babble-on returns" Lieberman asks him about Kobrin's cease and desist letter. (30:00) Lieberman on another alleged posting of Grady's soliciting any and all legal cult literature. Lieberman wonders why, if someone was forging Grady's postings, he didn't post asking people to stop using his name. Grady: I wouldn't know if they used my name, I don't read my own posts.(36:16) Mike Reuss's quoting Grady Ward's farewell post. Grady acknowledges the post. Lieberman asks him why he acknowledges this post but not posts from days before soliciting cult material. Lieberman asks: you don't know how long you spend on the internet? Grady says no, I don't remember. Lieberman asks: you don't know how you spend your day.? Grady: no, I don't. you can check the logs. Lieberman: I'm not asking for the logs, I want your memory. [pause] Lieberman: did you make suggestions that RTC had bought justice? That Whyte/Brinkema had been paid off. Grady no, I'd never say something like that. Lieberman: So if they existed, they'd be forgeries. Grady: yes [Real time is 12:20p.m. on Thursday, they take a lunch break until 1:15p.m.] ----------- Subject: Grady Deposition- Summary 4th Part From: dc7v@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Damon Chetson) Date: 1996/06/30 Message-Id: This is the 4th part of the Thursday July 27, 1996 deposition by RTC of Grady Ward. Eric Lieberman is still asking the questions. Either the file is corrupted or my version was corrupted, but the last 20 minutes of the 1 hour recording were unintelligible. This part mostly dealt with Grady's responses to RTC's complaint and Grady's counterclaims. Lieberman tried to brush off Quiros' visit. He asked for evidence of damage to Grady from Ingram's call to Austin Code Works, Grady's publisher. The recording was corrupted just at the time when Lieberman was asking about Ingram's visit to Grady's mother during which time Grady's mom alleges Ingram stole pictures. There are two more parts, apparently that will be here later today Damon Chetson/Hoyos - Fourth Part - Lieberman: you recently filed a motion to vacate the injunction citing that the NOTs had been posted. Grady: yes. Lieberman: How did you know? Grady: I read the index, and other people's accounts. Lieberman: did you download it, repost it, post it the first time. Grady: no, no, no. Lieberman: do you know the contents. Grady: from snippits that other people have posted, I know it's to get reid of bad feelings. Lieberman: could you do it.? Grady: I have no interest in the process. Lieberman: do you know of anyone who could do them? Grady: No, I don't know anyone. Lieberman: do you know how those three postings [NOTs] came down? Grady: no, I do not know. except I believe they were canceled. Lieberman: We've seen your postings where you refer to Kobrin as the "ho of babbleon" Where did the babbleon come from? Grady: Apparently early on Hubbard had friendships with people involved cults. Hubbard engaged in sexual rituals in which he tried to conjure up the the whore of babylon and it's embarassing to the Scientologists. Lieberman: did uyou get the name from Babylon 5 (a tv show). Grady no. Lieberman: Do you know who Vorlon? was? Grady: well I've found out since that Vorlon is a character. Lieberman: ...who posted the NOTs. Lieberman: did you ever post through Univ of Maryland? Grady: no [Part scrambled out, apparently either error, or sealed discussion? or off the record] Discussion about Grady's response to RTC's complaint against Grady. They go through each of Grady's responses. Lieberman says: you agree that you posted or reproduced RTC copyrighted material but you assert you did so within fair use. Grady: yes. Back to Fair Use. Grady says he believed posting small portions with commentary is fair use. Grady: says his affirmative defenses include the fact that RTC waited a year to sue, so inaction. Also that RTC had unclean hands, rmgroup, Ingram's illegal acts, harassment of Grady's publisher. And also that Miscavige notarized the transfer of copyrights to RTC. Grady explains Moxon's testimony. [scrambled sound] Grady argues also that the stuff is more widely known. Lieberman says: do you know of anyone who can duplicate the processes outside of RTC? Grady: Dennis Erlich, perhaps thousands of others. Lieberman: I don't want your assumptions, I want to know if you know of anyone who can describe the processes in NOTs. Grady: I do not know. Counterclaims: Erlich being violated. Grady's canceled post. Jeff Quiros' trespass. Discussion about the Quiros' visit. Lieberman tries to dismiss it. Austin Code Works incident where Ingram called to discredit Grady. Discussion about Austin Code Works. Grady's income from his software products. Grady has recently placed his products in the public domain. Discussion about Ingram's theft of pictures from Grady's mom. [Either the file is corrupted or my version is corrupted because the rest of this part is unintelligible. That is, from about 38:00 to 1:01:04] ------------- Subject: Grady Deposition - Summary 5th Part From: dc7v@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Damon Chetson) Date: 1996/06/30 Message-Id: This is a summary of the 5th part of the Grady Ward Deposition by RTC lawyers on Thursday (I think it's still Thursday, June 27, 1996). In this part, Helena Kobrin is asking questions. The topics mostly have to do with how Grady manages his files, how often he backs things up, how message id's are assigned to posts and that sort of stuff. This section is 35 minutes long. Helena Kobrin is much less confrontational than Eric Lieberman and also not as good, in my opinion. But, then again, he gets paid on the order of $500/hr and she gets rice and beans? :-) Hoyos/Damon Chetson --- Part 5 of Grady Ward Deposition --- Transcript 5- Helena Kobrin questioning Kobrin asks about disks Grady turned over. She asks about how he backs up his files. He explains how he backs up on a daily basis etc. Grady says he formated and gave a powerbook to his brother, after the Magistrate's order to preserve material. Kobrin suggests that may be in violation. Grady says the order was only to preserve materials responsive to the case. Kobrin says: I'm not going to debate the order with you now, I just want to establish when you did it. They argue about when did he last use the powerbook, did he use it after the lawsuit was filed. She asks him how often he formats his drives. They go through his various computer, three of them. Kobrin: "Do you go through and do deleting from your directories?" Grady "yeah, just like anyone does." "Computers are my life, they're like pets, it's a religion to me, I do a lot of time house-cleaning." Kobrin: have you ever deleted things to make sure that they couldn't be found by another person? Grady: only as tests, to see if I could do it. Kobrin: did you ever take action on your computers [to hide or delete material] Grady: no, there was never any illicit material to hide. Next, encryption. Grady: I have files that are for tests of statistical randomness, files that are "aged"- the key expires so even I can't get into them. to ensure privacy. Kobrin: Isn't it going too far to ensure privacy from yourself? Grady: no, you have to ensure against worst case scenarios. Grady: also have thousands of viruses, intellectual enterprise. Kobrin: are there any anti-social enterprises for viruses? Grady: well of course, to inject them into enemy machines. Grady: I certainly don't dessiminate viruses to destroy people's work, that's for sure. Kobrin: what other computer "toys" do you paly with? Grady: yeah hundreds. Kobrin: do you use any hacking tools? Grady: the answer is no, I'm not a hacker. Kobrin: how would you verify a key? Grady: that's a misnomer, there's no way to verify a key. However, there are keyservers that have keys on them. Kobrin: who runs those servers? Grady: various individuals. Kobrin: how do message id's get on a posting Grady: typically the machine puts it on. Kobrin: the service provider? Grady: no it's more complicated, depends on whether I have a shell account, I'm not sure how things like Free Agent work, it divides up the task between local machine and the server. [more talk about message id's] -- End of Part 5 -- Subject: Grady Deposition - Summary 6th and Final Part From: dc7v@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Damon Chetson) Date: 1996/06/30 Message-Id: This is a summary of the 6th and apparently final part of Grady Ward's deposition by RTC lawyers in Eureka, CA on Thursday, June 27, 1996. Lieberman is questioning again. It begins with Lieberman saying he's done. Grady introduces a bunch of exhibits. Lieberman then questions him about them. I hope this was useful. I'll make a final posting later with all 6 parts. Damon Chetson/Hoyos --- Part 6 of Ward Deposition --- Eric Lieberman back, says they have no further questions, provided no new evidence pops up. He says RTC reserves the to question if new things pop up. Grady says that he wants to give as truthful answers as possible and he may have corrections and RTC may want to ask him about things he may have misstated. Lieberman: "A deposition is not a take-home exam". Grady: "I'm learning about the law from reverse". Grady redirects. He submits the cancels. He explains what cancels do. Typically you use it to correct your own posts if you've made a misstatement. But on ars people apparently acting in concert with Scientology are cancelling other people's posts. He submits 269 cancels. Lieberman: suggests a numbering system for the exhibits. Grady says he will probably subpoena Netcom to provide records on the accounts to see if there is a common credit card behind the cancel-accounts. Grady submits a post apparently from Helena Kobrin denying the rmgroup. Grady submits stuff about Vera Wallace. Apparently RTC has used Vera Wallace's posts and entered them into evidence, thus linking RTC to Vera Wallace? He submits Vera Wallace's outing of someone [I believe it is Tarla]. Grady submits stuff about Eugene Ingram. Lieberman objects to it. He says this stuff is all irrelevant. Lieberman objects and laughs "I don't even understand what these are." Grady submits stuff from Dick Cleek. Apparently Advanced Technology has been on the Internet for months. Grady says it's to show that it was not a transitory thing. Grady submits postings showing that he respected Church rights and that his purpose was to taunt them. He submits postings in which he says he doesn't download copyrighted material. Grady submits posting showing that his use of "I hear" is a mocking of Scientology posters. It's not meant to be taken as a statement of fact. Grady submits stuff which he says shows David Miscaviage calls the shots in Scientology. Lieberman: I'm going to take 5 minutes to look through this, it's quite a pile you've laid on us. [break] Lieberman: asks if any of the cancels is a cancel of Grady's posting. Grady: not sure if that one is included. Lieberman: who sent you them. Grady: someone emailed them, through an anonymous remailer. Lieberman: you have no way of knowing that these are legitimate, sir? Grady: I know from my own personal examination. Lieberman: have to go through them one by one, sitting here to day you can't corroborate anyo one of thse, can you? Grady: have to check with archives. Lieberman wants Grady to pull out the cancel cancelling his specific post. Grady: most of these [cancels] are cancels of anonymous remailers Lieberman: have you ever used anonymous remailers, hav eyou used anon.penet.fi. Grady: not in the last 2 years. Lieberman: Can you corroborate here today that any of these postings is a cancel of your posting? Grady finds one that looks as if it's a cancel of his posting. Lieberman: well it was cancelled on March 6, 1996. Why would there be a cancel if you didn't post on March 6? There is a post of yours soliciting NOTs material on March 6. Grady: I don't know if that's true. It doesn't make sense, why would they cancel a post that had no copyrighted material. Lieberman pulls out Plaintiff's exhibit of a Grady Ward post of March 6 requesting NOTs? Lieberman: do you have any idea if you posted anything else on that day? Grady: I have no idea if I posted anything else. Lieberman: so you don't know if you even had made a post to cancel. Grady: that's correct, not until I get archives. The injunction has been inhibiting me from getting archives. Discussion by an apparent cancel from an Alan Rachin, who Grady says was an FSM in Scientology. Lieberman says you have no way of knowing who that person is. Lieberman: if somebody were to anonymously postanother person's intellectual property on the internet, do you believe the person whose intellectual property it is would be justified in cancelling that post? Grady: I have to think here on basic law and philosophy.You've made some very good arguments in your briefings. There is no way for RTC to do anything about the posting of hteir material. Grady says that this is a problem. Lieberman: what if people had anonymous posted your software to the internet. Grady: I would've been very very angry and if I had the money I would be very interested in pusuig the peole who were doing that Lieberman: but if they were doing it anonymously sir, do you think you would be justified in engaging in cancelling. Grady: No, because I think it's a greater crime to do that. It still involves a forgery. Grady: it's a tough situation, I know I'm your adversary here, but it's a tough question. I don't know what I'd do if I were you. Lieberman turns to Grady's exhibit of a forged posting by Ms.Kobrin. I find it curious that you find forged postings of other people, but not under your name. If you were on ars reguarly how is that you found these postings, but not postings you say were forged of yours. Grady: well I don't look for posts under my name. He explains newsreaders and the concept of threads. Lieberman says: I find it curious that you seem to post after each posting of SCAMIZDAT, but you claim not to have seen postings forged under your name. Lieberman asks about the forged rmgroup message [not Kobrin's another] Lieberman asks if Grady or Keith posted that rmgroup. Grady says no, he didn't. Lieberman asks about reading habits of typical ars readers. Lieberman asks about another Grady exhibit of a David Elrod? posting. They finish up.