Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Courts Data Storage Government Privacy United States News Your Rights Online

Court Rules That Palin Must Save Yahoo Emails 412

quarterbuck writes "An Anchorage judge has ruled that Governor Sarah Palin must save her emails, as they were apparently used for state business. Last week a Tennessee man was arrested over hacking one of her Yahoo email accounts. The Washington Post also reports that Sarah Palin, her husband, and officials had set up email accounts known only to each other."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Court Rules That Palin Must Save Yahoo Emails

Comments Filter:
  • Oh right (Score:3, Insightful)

    by commodoresloat ( 172735 ) * on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:23PM (#25346909)

    That will put an end to hearing about her in the media I'm sure...

  • by Drakin020 ( 980931 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:29PM (#25346953)
    But do you think that if he had not gained access to her emails, this decision would have been made? Regardless if he backed out, this still resulted in her being forced to keep her yahoo emails. This could come back to bite her if she doesn't remove those emails first.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:31PM (#25346963)

    This is the last chance for America to prove it's not totally made up of braindead, religious, nutbag trailer trash. If the GOP steals this one, too..I'm moving to Canada.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:31PM (#25346967)

    I take it the neocons and confused Republicans are out in full force modding today.

    Mccain can't even check e-mail, and she used a fucking Yahoo account to do official business.

    I wouldn't even do my personal business over Yahoo.

  • by kenh ( 9056 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:33PM (#25346985) Homepage Journal

    She had private email, known only to her husband and children? OMG!

    She should absolutely use her official email for all correspondence, including campaign and private (non-government) correspondence... Except, oh yeah, the acceptable usage policies of the Alaskan government forbid the use of government computers for personal and campaign uses...

    This woman is out of control and must be stopped - she has to break the law like the rest of us do, then we can get her for that!

  • by cliffski ( 65094 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:36PM (#25347007) Homepage

    why is a government employee sending emails on govt business through a free email account?
    Why are taxpayers paying for the states computer infrastructure if she isn't using it?
    Of course something dodgy is going on.

  • by stinerman ( 812158 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:37PM (#25347011)

    Good sir Ken,

    The problem is that she used the personal email for official correspondence, which is not all that legal.

    The personal account is required for campaign and private correspondence.

    HTH

  • by stinerman ( 812158 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:43PM (#25347045)

    Second paragraph FTA, friend:

    The judge issued the orders at the request of Andree McLeod, an Anchorage activist whose pursuit of Palin's e-mails revealed that the governor did considerable state business from a Yahoo e-mail address -- an arrangement that avoided the safeguards and accountability of the state's secure e-mail system.

  • by zappepcs ( 820751 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:44PM (#25347051) Journal

    It's long been policy that government officials do not use non-government email and communications methods that circumvent the official logging of such communications. What she did was wrong, and in fact just as bad as the Whitehouse administration using non-whitehouse email services for official communications.

    Though the guy who accessed her emails might be in trouble, I'd like to see a jury refuse to convict him. He should be seen as a whistleblower and protected, not prosecuted.

    She hasn't even been elected to the Whitehouse yet and she has shown herself to be full of ineptitude and corruption. He is a hero in my book.

  • by Danse ( 1026 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:57PM (#25347133)

    They've already seen boxes of emails [adn.com] from her aides to her Yahoo account. In fact, all but one email was sent to her gov.sarah@Yahoo.com account. That's the account she used for state business. It's not the account that got hacked.

  • Heard that before. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by markdowling ( 448297 ) <mark DOT dowling AT gmail DOT com> on Sunday October 12, 2008 @03:59PM (#25347153)

    In 2000, 2004...

    www.cic.gc.ca

    Go on, I dare you.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:02PM (#25347175)

    I'll help you back your bags, bitch.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:03PM (#25347185)

    Sorry, a whistle blower must be involved somehow and not a random third party. He would have had to had PRIOR knowledge about illegal activities BEFORE breaking into her account which he clearly did not. That kid deserves punishment. He's not a hero. He's a vigilante. Guess what, we don't allow or reward that behavior in this country. This is no different than the government executing a search without a warrant except it was some college kid who had no respect for the law.

    Nobody has yet pointed to specific emails, not even stinerman above. Stinerman just quoted, condescendingly I might add, the article apparently assuming some activist we've never heard of is reputable. Until an actual email comes to light from her Yahoo! account, there is no proof and you're all just going on hearsay and conjecture. Again, that's not how we operate in this country.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:07PM (#25347215)

    The electronic voting machines are even dumber and will do as their masters tell them. If anyone at Diebold etc should happen to have the hots for Palin then maybe you should start packing now. Any discretions in the polls will simply be blamed on the Bradley Effect. [wikipedia.org] The side effects of such could prove most interesting.

  • by EtherealFlaim ( 768450 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:11PM (#25347257)

    Not only was she stupid enough to have her yahoo account password resettable by an outsider, she was stupid enough to conduct state business on this and other non-state-secured e-mail accounts.

    I'm sorry, but anyone who doesn't realize that in order to be safe it ALWAYS important to assume that your emails are immediately and fully in the hands of your worst enemies is hopelessly naive. Besides the sketchily legal issue of conducting state business over unsecure email, she also copied her husband on some of it.

    Seriously Palin? Talk about it over the dinner table. Sending the email to your hubbie sends it over unsecure servers in the internet proper where they could be read in transit by any number of unruly or dangerous individuals. And that's assuming that she was sending it from a state-secured email on state-secured servers, which she obviously didn't at least some of the time.

    The scary part now is that if she were to pull the same stuff in the whitehouse, there would be terrorists and spies trying to get ahold of national secrets, not just the inner workings of a state government. And I think we can all agree that the resources they have at their disposal are frightening.

    I'm much happier with her gambling with Alaskan politics than National Security.

  • by Majik Sheff ( 930627 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:18PM (#25347301) Journal

    No, his intentions were to cause problems for the McCain/Palin campaign in the form of an epic trolling. This kid stopped when he realized that the 4chan party van would be at his door within hours.

    He messed up, plain and simple. Now the media is going to have a feeding frenzy because they FINALLY have something to try to stick on Governor Palin. If this had been Joe Biden doing this we would have never heard about it. In fact, reporters would be calling for the head of this 4channer on a pike while simultaneously scrambling to demonstrate that the e-mails were harmless/irrelevant/nonexistent.

  • by dkleinsc ( 563838 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:19PM (#25347303) Homepage

    Shouldn't secret communications always be an option?

    No, it shouldn't be. Not when a public official is acting in their official capacity. If it's not classified enough so that Yahoo mail wouldn't be a security breach, it's not so classified that the public shouldn't know about it.

    And no, I don't buy into the theory that advisers give better advice if the know that the public won't know what they say.

  • by thetoadwarrior ( 1268702 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:42PM (#25347523) Homepage
    It may or may not be but you're a private business that can do whatever you want.

    Sarah Palin on the other hand is an employee of the the citizens of the US (some people forget this) and as such she shouldn't be hiding things from us just as it's expected that any employee shouldn't be hiding official business from their employer.

    But it's not even about hiding things. Yahoo email isn't secure enough for someone who may have to be potentially passing around state security information.

    Her supporters are more likely to be the type that live in fear of terrorists so why shouldn't they be applauded that she's doing something to make it easier for terrorists to find out potential information to aid in attacking her state which isn't that far fetched seeing how it's one of our resource rich states meaning that attacking it and destroying, for instance, the oil infrastructure could have a great effect on the whole nation.
  • by gmack ( 197796 ) <gmack@@@innerfire...net> on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:45PM (#25347563) Homepage Journal

    I don't know how this keeps getting repeated. The media has been much easier on Palin than they were on Obama or even his wife. Not so much an anti Obama thing either it was that they got lambasted for going off into the trivial.

    How long did they go on about "why doesn't he wear a flag pin?" Is your memory so short that you can't remember from two months ago?

    McCain crying that the media hates him doesn't make it so. If he didn't want a media frenzy then he shouldn't have picked a complete unknown as his VP.

  • Re:Palin (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LSD-OBS ( 183415 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:46PM (#25347571)

    Thanks, you're on the same brainless and reactionary wavelength as the crazy idiots on the other side screaming "Kill him!" and "Terrorist!" whenever Obama is mentioned.

  • by Doctor_Jest ( 688315 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:49PM (#25347599)
    Do you really think the majority of americans can see past the other side's sugar-coated lies either? Dare I say it, the lesser of two evils is NEITHER candidate. Biden's a plagiarist, a career liar, and the biggest moron from the tiniest state... Palin's a moron from Alaska... Obama's a huckster with ties to the very problem we're in now (google is your friend), and McCain is a dumbass.

    If either candidate wins, WE ALL LOSE. It's that goddamned simple... but leave it to the apologists to somehow paint Obama as actually GOOD for something. The same holds true for the other side of the aisle.

    If you believe that Obama's good for this country, you're as stupid as the people who believe McCain's good for this country.
  • by SL Baur ( 19540 ) <steve@xemacs.org> on Sunday October 12, 2008 @04:52PM (#25347615) Homepage Journal

    It's long been policy that government officials do not use non-government email and communications methods that circumvent the official logging of such communications.

    And it's long been policy that said government officials "lose" official email as in the Clinton administration or deny it altogether as in Algore's "no controlling authority" statement.

    This is truly a case of "everyone" does it. Perhaps the law is a good idea, but if you can't get your elected officials to ever obey it, what next?

    I also think this has been misstated in the media, as Mrs. Palin has NOT been officially accused of any wrong doing.

    Now, can we talk about former President Jimmy Carter's Community Reinvestment Act that precipitated the current economic meltdown?

  • by Benjamin_Wright ( 1168679 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @05:16PM (#25347823) Homepage
    A principle of the Information Age: Government is wise to organize itself and its records so it can swiftly and efficiently respond to freedom-of-information-act, open records [typepad.com] and similar requests. Resistance to such requests is wasteful and makes government look out-of-touch. Hence, a government agency is prudent to tell employees (like governors) to send all business-related messages (e-mail, text and otherwise) through the agency's central IT system so they can be archived. --Ben
  • by TheRaven64 ( 641858 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @05:18PM (#25347841) Journal

    she has a right to privacy

    Sarah Palin the private individual has a right to privacy. Sarah Palin the Governor of Alaska has a responsibility to openness and transparency. I Sarah Palin the Governor of Alaska has been pretending to be Sarah Palin the private individual in order to escape this responsibility, then there is a problem.

  • by xstonedogx ( 814876 ) <xstonedogx@gmail.com> on Sunday October 12, 2008 @05:20PM (#25347857)

    It doesn't take paranoia to conclude that someone breaking the law is going to take steps to conceal the fact.

  • by Mix+Master+Nixon ( 1018716 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @05:30PM (#25347947)

    I don't know how this keeps getting repeated. The media has been much easier on Palin than they were on Obama or even his wife. Not so much an anti Obama thing either it was that they got lambasted for going off into the trivial.

    How long did they go on about "why doesn't he wear a flag pin?" Is your memory so short that you can't remember from two months ago?

    McCain crying that the media hates him doesn't make it so. If he didn't want a media frenzy then he shouldn't have picked a complete unknown as his VP.

    If a political party's going to bash people for not wearing a stupid fucking flag pin, they better make goddamn sure their candidate wears one too. He didn't wear one at the convention, and he hasn't worn one in either debate. Why does John McCain hate America?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @05:31PM (#25347953)

    I've modded you Flamebait but not for the resons you may think I have. I typically find myself with more mod points then I know what to do with and I'm sick of the negative stereotype of Slashdot where anything Pro-Microsoft, Pro-Conservative or Pro-"Anything but hardcore liberal leftist POV" will be modded down, flamed and ignored. The mod points are distributed to people that most closely match the average /. reader. (At least as far as the servers can determine.) Therefore Slashdot moderator aren't a bunch of arrogant pricks sitting in their ivory tower rainign rewards and punishments according to some fantasy world view, their average Slashdot readers.

    AC becasue of mod points(obviously)

  • by EastCoastSurfer ( 310758 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @05:37PM (#25348011)

    This sort of thing needs to be punished wherever it's found and "everyone does it" is just not an excuse.

    I'm with you here. Lets start with a full investigation into Obama and his various real estate dealings with Resco. Next we can take a look at Clinton and the crooks he pardoned his last day in office. Bush has plenty of his own dealings we can investigate further also.

  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @05:37PM (#25348013) Journal
    I agree that malice may not have been intended. However, that doesn't really matter. For people in positions like her's, using official email systems for official business is a nonoptional aspect of documentation and accountability. Failure to do so is, at best, incompetent neglect of duty, and at worst deliberate conspiracy to deceive the public. Maliciously doing this is worse than doing so nonmaliciously; but using official email for official business is a necessary part of the job. Not doing a necessary part of your job, even if it is totally without malice, is still bad.

    I'm a sysadmin, if I failed to run backups properly, and data were lost, they wouldn't have to prove that I maliciously failed to do so in order for me to deserve to get fired. Simply not doing so is bad enough. Same for her.
  • by Jah-Wren Ryel ( 80510 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @06:00PM (#25348205)

    It doesn't change the fact that it isn't, wasn't, and probably not even intended to be a way to skate around the "system."

    If it came to light that Palin and her staff discussed avoiding archival as one of the benefits of using a non-government email system, would that change your opinion of the facts?

  • by KGIII ( 973947 ) * <uninvolved@outlook.com> on Sunday October 12, 2008 @06:16PM (#25348353) Journal

    We'd like to think so but I don't think that's true. I'm not positive but, having read the articles, this is why it is being considered in the Alaska courts and not in the Federal courts.

    Don't take this as support for Palin, I personally don't think she's fit to run a day care, never mind a country.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @06:32PM (#25348445)
    Let me guess. Still bitter about Ron Paul?
  • by DustoneGT ( 969310 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @06:35PM (#25348461)
    All the NSA/FBI/CIA/ABC SOUP need to do to access our personal data is get some punk kid to hack our accounts. They don't get in trouble themselves, but get to use all of the evidence in court.

    Illegally obtained evidence, no matter who does the obtaining, should be banned from the courts. If not, we might as well kiss our 4th Amendment goodbye.

    But, as usual, we are almost all blinded by Republican vs Democrat politics so badly that we can scarcely see the threat to our freedoms a foot in front of our faces.
  • by Kreplock ( 1088483 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @07:31PM (#25348847)
    'cuz, unless she was hatching a plot or clearly trying to hide something, I can't bring myself to care. And that's Bad, too. The nasty, nonstop personal attacks on her ever since she was announced as McCain's running mate have numbed me to it all. After the first mischaracterizations and outright lies instantly grew legs and everyone got slap-happy with her record I'm all out of patience with it. Now real stuff comes along and I'm spent unless it's truly nefarious. I'll assume she was a bit lazy about her multiple e-mail accounts like 99% of all other non-geeks until something nasty is found and sustained through public scrutiny.
  • by fbjon ( 692006 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @07:38PM (#25348899) Homepage Journal
    It's not a state-provided service, therefore she must either not use it for official business, or take care to preserve all email herself.
  • by fbjon ( 692006 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @07:54PM (#25348993) Homepage Journal
    The "hacker" invaded her privacy, but found wrongdoing. He wasn't right, and she wasn't right. It's not either-or.
  • by hrvatska ( 790627 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @07:57PM (#25349025)
    Obama has been under intense media scrutiny for the last year. All of what you're bringing up was reported at various times. Do a search of the NY Times, I think you'll find that they reported on all of this previous to Obama being nominated.

    Sarah Palin shows up out of the blue, with a little over two months until the election, and you're surprised the press is all over her, her family, and anyone that knew her since childhood? If that level of scrutiny is too much for her then she should not have agreed to be on the Republican ticket. As Gail Collins said in an opinion piece, "Palin has been pressing the line that people don't really know 'the real Barack Obama,' and who could make the argument better than a woman who we've already known for almost six weeks? Really, she's like one of the family."
  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @08:13PM (#25349125) Journal
    Indeed, users of public email services, or any other email services, do not generally have any obligation to preserve emails. The issue is that Governors(among others) have a legal duty to adhere to various standards for handling documents pertaining to official business, which generally means preservation, compliance with FOIA requests, etc.

    Among a governor's various duties is preservation of official records. If they fail to do that, there is a problem. If the behave in such a manner as would lead to their failing to do that, there is a problem. If they do so deliberately, there is a bigger problem.
  • by Miseph ( 979059 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @08:46PM (#25349385) Journal

    The big deal is that she is required by law, the very same law she has sworn to uphold as governor, to follow certain rules and regulations about how she conducts her business. Had she used her work e-mail, as it were, compliance would have been enforced server side and this would not be an issue, but she chose not to and then violated the rules. If she'd used Yahoo! and followed the rules there wouldn't be a problem (well, outside of Yahoo! mail being crap...), but she didn't follow them and now it IS a problem. She may choose whatever e-mail provider she wants, she MAY NOT choose to break the law.

    And before somebody comes along with "well it's just her personal e-mail address, she probably didn't even think to" as a defense of doing this... the account names pretty obviously indicate she created them AFTER becoming governor, so it's not like these are legacy addresses. It's also not as if somebody held a gun to her head and made her run for and accept the office of governor of Alaska, if she didn't want to comply with these laws, all she needed to do was not take on a job which required her to follow them.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @08:46PM (#25349387)
    If Liberal who has said they are moving out of country for the last two elections really had kept their word this country would be much better off.
  • by Maxmin ( 921568 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @09:07PM (#25349597)

    None of this really means there was malice intended.

    Ignorance of the law is no excuse, especially when you hold the highest office in your state, sworn to uphold *all* the laws of the land.

    At the time that Palin was using her Yahoo accounts for govt business, she was also in the public record as knowing that activists were suing for access to her email.

    Using private email accounts for public business is illegal in Alaska. Rather than deny this, surely she should be a big lady and step up to admit ... but it doesn't matter. The judge will ensure that the emails will come forth, unless Yahoo says "oops! we lost that backup tape..." like the current White House did.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 12, 2008 @09:09PM (#25349623)

    The only reason she is being forced to keep her emails and make them publicly available are that she holds office, and under FOIA she's legally required to keep her emails regardless of whether she's using a public or private email service.

    The only way you're in danger is if you get elected somehow.

  • by Walkingshark ( 711886 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @09:27PM (#25349775) Homepage

    This is exactly the point. Our system was created by the people who might be punished, so when they made it they never built in any real accountability. In a rational world, just using a private, personal account for state buisiness would be enough to get her fired. In the same way, the "I do not recall" defense has become a staple of culture, especially in politics, to the point where it is pretty clear that anyone with memory problems as bad as, say, Alberto Gonzalez, should be fired immidiately and prevented from ever working for the public again. Accountability must be restored or in the long term the negative feedback will build until we end up having to go to war with ourselves to clean out the corruption. Its fucked up, but thats how it is.

  • by Danse ( 1026 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @10:00PM (#25350051)

    This court ruling is so late they can't expect the emails to still exist!

    I know allot of people who delete email as it's read to prevent this type of privacy violation.

    It's not a privacy violation when it's part of your job. Her emails dealing with state business are part of the public record and, with certain exceptions, the public is allowed to have access to them. If she believes that those emails are exempt, then she can make that claim. A judge will make the final determination. She doesn't get to decide unilaterally what to make available.

  • by GaryPatterson ( 852699 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @10:14PM (#25350161)

    McCain ... cannot check email because he was tortured as a POW and does not have full mobility of his arms and is unable to use a computer.

    I understood that he's unable to lift his arms above his head, but has reasonable mobility below that. He can certainly write in a notebook, as we saw in the recent debate.

    Given that, it seems more likely that the reason he can't use a computer is more in line with his age and that "old dog, new tricks" thing.

    I don't think this matters at all though. Plenty of people don't care to use computers, and while that's odd to us, there's nothing wrong with it.

  • by devman ( 1163205 ) on Sunday October 12, 2008 @11:20PM (#25350651)

    "Certainly he is a reluctant hero."

    It actually just shows the mind-set of the people from the left.

    Breaking the law = okay, as long as it is against the democratic party...which is scary if that same idea is applied to more situations..

    I prefer to think of it as:

    Someone violate government officials privacy. Outrageous.

    Government violating your privacy. Patriot Act.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 13, 2008 @03:30AM (#25352225)

    Didn't the Bush 43 admin bypass the White House e-mail system by using "personal" e-mail accounts?

  • by aug24 ( 38229 ) on Monday October 13, 2008 @06:05AM (#25352899) Homepage

    I'll make the quote more obvious for you

    "...emails on **************govt************** business..."

    Got it now?

    Justin.

  • by freedom_india ( 780002 ) on Monday October 13, 2008 @06:23AM (#25353007) Homepage Journal

    She wasn't trading...

    The idiot who hacked her account should have "implanted" the evidence, and instead of publicizing his exploit, he should have 'accidentally' forwarded the same from her account to PBS or Newyorker.
    Dumb ass.
    He shd have acted the same way Rove quashed the records of Bush as Air National Guard leakage.
    Silent and deadly.

  • by Danse ( 1026 ) on Monday October 13, 2008 @08:52AM (#25353991)

    why is a government employee sending emails on govt business through a free email account?

    Because it's illegal to send campaign messages, partisan political messages, or e-mails dealing with RNC activities through a government account.

    Those things aren't government business.

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh

Working...