Date: July 28, 1991 From: "The Moderataors" Subject: File 5-- Doc Savage Sentenced (NEWSBYTES Reprint) (Moderators' Note: Readers should note well the final paragraphs of this article. It is the first case that we're aware of in which the prosecutor opposed the judges intention to imprison. Gail Thackeray's arguments against incarceration are compelling and productive. Sadly, such logic is the exception and not the rule, but perhaps her example will spread). SUNDEVIL DEFENDANT "DOC SAVAGE" SENTENCED 7/17/91 PHOENIX, ARIZONA, U.S.A., 1991 JUL 17(NB) -- The Maricopa County Arizona County Attorney's Office has announced the sentencing Baron Majette, 20 , also known as "Doc Savage", for computer-related crimes uncovered in the joint federal / state investigation known as "Sundevil". Majette was arrested on March 27th of this year and charged with a number of felony charges relating to unauthorized use of telephone facilities of Toys 'R Us to make calls worth approximately $8,000, illegal access of TRW's credit data base and use of information obtained therein to obtain in excess of $50,000 in cash, goods, and services, and stealing of credit cards from U.S. Mail boxes and use of the cards to obtain approximately $10,000 in cash, goods and services. If convicted of the charges, Majette faced a possible jail sentence of 15 years and the requirement to make restitution for the full amount of the alleged losses endured by the firms and individuals. In late May, Majette pleaded guilty to an amended charge of a single count of computer fraud, felony third degree. The reduced charge was a result of an agreement between Mark Berardoni, the public defender assigned to Majette; Janet Black, Majette's probation officer and the Maricopa County Arizona County Attorney's Office. Under the reduced charges, Majette's maximum term of incarceration was reduced from the aforementioned 15 years to 5. On July 16th, when the actual sentence was to be imposed, a further agreement between the prosecution, defense and parole service was presented to the presiding judge, Justice Gottsfield, and, after discussion, became the actual sentence. The court decision imposed the following: -- Majette will remain in jail for up to two months while he awaits placement in a "Shock Incarceration" program (Majette has been in jail since his March 27th arrest because of parole violation related to an earlier crime). Assistant County Attorney Gail Thackeray told Newsbytes that Shock Incarceration is a 120 day program which "provides both intensive counseling and military-like discipline and exercise." -- Upon his release from Shock Incarceration, Majette will enter a 5 year period of "intensive probation". Under Arizona procedures, the subject must provide the probation officer, on a weekly basis, a schedule for the next week's activities. In the event that the schedule has to be modified in any way, the probation office must be called before the new schedule is acted on. -- During the time of intensive probation, the probation officer may visit or call the subject at any time of day or night to insure compliance with the schedule. -- If, at some point after a year of intensive probation, the probation officer feels that the subject has followed the rules and shown that intensive procedure is no longer warranted, the subject and probation officer may recommend to the sentencing judge that the subject be transferred to normal probation. In normal probation, the subject advises the officer weekly of progress and problems. There is not the hovering presence felt in intensive probation, according to Thackeray. Additionally, the subject may be released from any form of probation at the petition of the probation office and subject and approval, after hearing, of the sentencing judge. -- If, on the other hand, Majette violates the terms of his probation, he is liable for incarceration in prison for the remainder of his probationary period. -- Majette was also ordered to make restitution to the parties victimized by his activities by paying a sum of $19,774.03 to those involved. The sum is to be paid on a monthly basis over the course of his sentence. Additionally, he was ordered to make payments to help defray the cost of his probationary supervision. Under the terms of his probation, Majette is subject to the following conditions said by Thackeray to be unique to his type of offense: -- He may not use any computer connected to a modem or communications network without the prior permission of his probation officer. In the event that he takes a job that brings him into contact with computer activities, he must notify someone in the employer's office of the restrictions on his computer use and must discuss the planned activities with his probation officer. -- He is not to communicate or associate with "members of the computer underground" (defined as persons such as those known to have or reasonably believed to have been involved in theft of communications services, computer fraud or related activities). In the event that any such individuals contact him, he must report the contact to his probation officer (According to Thackeray, this stipulation is intended for Majette' s protection -- "In the event that the contacting party is investigated or arrested and phone records show a call to Majette, his notification to his probation officer of the call will stand as proof that he was not involved in any conspiracy with the other individual. His notification responsibility in no way requires him to cooperate with authorities in the location or apprehension of another individual and such cooperation is neither expected nor desired."). Transcripts of the sentencing hearing reportedly show that it was the intention of Judge Gottsfield to sentence Majette to a straight five years in prison but was dissuaded by the combined recommendations of the prosecution, defense and probation office. Thackeray explained to Newsbytes the rationale of the prosecution in recommending a lighter sentence -- "Usually computer hackers who get into trouble for activities of this nature are kids or young adults who are not the type to be in trouble for any other criminal activities. The point of sentencing in these cases should be rehabilitation. If we can break the pattern of illegal behavior, society will benefit from Majette's participation. If we simply locked him up for 5 years, neither he nor society would benefit." (Barbara E. McMullen & John F. McMullen/19910717) ------------------------------