Revisiting 18 U.S. Code § 1001
Evidence of absence.
You should revisit 18 U.S. Code § 1001 for background.
This is me in public complaining about shipping costs to Toronto on 2 Dec 2020.
This is what you see when Canadian customs wants you to pay import duties for an HP Z420, on 9 Dec 2020. This went to the recipient rather than the sender, which is different than the last time I shipped internationally, but it has been a long time and it wasn’t Canada.
Aubrey couldn’t come up with the $259 CAD to retrieve the machine, it bounced back to me, and then on to the aforementioned grifter in Massachusetts. The lack of a customs payment in this amount combined with the shipping information to Massachusetts … well … this is what we in the business would call EVIDENCE.
But fine, I’ll fill out another IC3 report and validate these two screen shots.
I found some other funny stuff with Aubrey from that time period … this on 27 March 2021 from the dowager queen of disinformation, which he shared with me.
And then there’s a simple text file created to memorialize a “no later than” event.
2021-03-31-AubreyCottle-hosting-BarrettBrown-ends.txt
I’m at a loss for what to do with this one … 8:34 of a conf call I don’t think I’ve ever listened to past the five second mark. Does anyone know what this is?
2020-12-16-CassandraFord-AubreyCottle.mp3
Conclusion:
Ignorance can be remediated with time and effort. Stupidity is a problem one must pray to Saint Darwin to solve for future generations.
There are a number of people in the latter category who are having trouble with the difference between being aware something has happened, as opposed to being involved in the happening. Involvement in planning would be covered by Title 18 § 371. Involvement after the deed is done would be covered by Title 18 § 3.
If you read criminal complaints, say the one for Aubrey Cottle, or Paige Adele Thompson, you’ll find that a key component of the cases against them are voluminous, cocky expressions of mens rea.
In criminal law, mens rea (Latin for "guilty mind") refers to the mental state or intent required for an individual to be held criminally responsible for a particular offense. It essentially means that a crime requires not only the act itself (actus reus) but also a culpable state of mind.
So shipping a workstation that never got picked up can in no way confer criminal liability. Kilgoar’s mistake here is interpreting the customs request for payment as proof the payment was made. It is not. Nor does noticing a matter of public interest and introducing an observer of said matter to a reporter. And you can’t find a conversation involving me where I’m not being a stickler on this stuff. I’ve been interpreting leaks whilst not incurring criminal liability since 2011.
The original posting of 18 U.S. Code § 1001 triggered a number of attempts at Filing A Conjunction. A man on psychiatric disability who LARPs as a journalist chose to treat it as an admission I had violated the statute. A number of other, less clever individuals pressed all the buttons, hoping to score an admission from the recipient of the system. He’s no longer using Twitter AFAIK so that went nowhere.
Chronically overstimulated social media addicts will talk about this for perhaps a day after it’s posted, then it will sink like a stone, joining the accretion of non-events that make up the files of Internet Court. We used to show up and argue cases before @AnonymousCourt back in the day, but those were happier times, before a certain Skidnapper simultaneously qualified for early Social Security and utterly lost her mind.
I will leave you with Toxic Granny, one of Mike Reed’s Flame Warriors. This is very old, it’s Usenet culture stuff with roots in the pre-web internet.
