[free-sklyarov] Re: Continuing the fight

[Matthew T. Russotto]

On Monday, December 17, 2001, at 02:23 AM, Ruben Safir wrote:

> No one in the US Judicial System is requrired to testify against 
> themselves in a criminal matter.  And no Laywer I've seen is gonna 
> encourage putting the defendent on the stand to testify that they 
> committed the accused acts leading to a 25 year jail sentence.

They will if doing so means that their client is freed as a result.

> How much do we want to twist this and pretend that this wasn't a high 
> stakes felony offense where Dmitry was charged with those actions, 
> actions defined as felony violations of the DMCA according the the 
> Grand Jury and the Court.  If they weren't viewed by the court as 
> criminal actions, then why wasn't the case dismissed by the judge?

Because the question of whether the actions were criminal had not yet 
come before the judge -- those hearings were set in the future.  They 
will still happen, but with Elcomsoft as the only defendant.
>
> This was no small time civil matter here where defendents run up to 
> tell their stories.  This was innocent until proven guilty, major 
> felony.

And now Sklyarov gets to be innocent even if his actions are decided to 
be criminal, and all he has to do is tell the same story (the truth) 
that he intended to tell anyway.