CFP'93 - In The Court of Uncommon Pleas Cyberspace Judicial District
People of the ]
State of ]
] In Re: TALIO
] Hearing on Extradition
TALIO, et. al. ]
A. Statement of Facts:
On March 17, 2002, the patient records of Quixote General Hospital, including those related to all aspects of patient care including medication, life support, and diagnosis, became unavailable owing to the computer becoming inaccessible. The most immediate response restored the system in 24 hours, but by then 30 patients had died. The ensuing media and public concern prompted a full investigation, which may be summarized briefly:
- The system collapsed because of an overload which resulted from the
intrusion of a computer contaminant AKA a worm or virus.
- The causal program entered the hospital system via a port at the
University Medical Center, in turn from Neighboring State University data
system's link to HyperNet, a federally funded network intended to link medical
providers and academic centers.
- A cooperative investigation by the FBI and the North Virginia State
Police traced its introduction to the Laputa Academy, a private school. The
perpetrator was identified as a Roberta Maurice, a graduate student who had been
afforded access to work on her thesis on the works of the English writer
- In her interview with the FBI, Ms Maurice admitted having downloaded the program from a BBS, maintained on the Laputa Academy system by a graduate student in computer sciences, John Talio. The Academy was aware of this use, but did not acknowledge or implicitly approve of it.
- In his interview with the FBI, Mr Talio stated that part of his BBS was
directed at questions of military policy, and that the program had been posted
by a contributor in the course of a discussion of the havoc programs allegedly
developed for the Gulf War. He knew the handle but not the true identity of the
- The FBI established that the fatal program was an adaptation of one
developed by the Defense Department, which invoked national security as to any
John Talio; Roberta Maurice; Rex Modem, MD, director of the Quixote General Hospital; Ralph Winsocka, President of Neighboring State Medical Center Board of Directors, Grace Unter-Prezur, director of the Laputa Academy; Margaret "Meg" Abbux, adminstrator of HyperNet; and Jane/John Does of indefinite number.
None of the defendants except Dr. Modem live in Consternation; accordingly, that State has applied for their extradition in a consolidated hearing before the Court of Uncommon Pleas. The burden of proof is, of course, on the moving party to establish a preponderance of probability that a conviction could result.
The test of culpable negligence liability is whether the standard of care observed by a particular individual was that appropriate to her or his responsibility and the risks attendant thereon, objectively considered against the standards prevailing in the field, vocation, profession of operating a computer system.
Each defendant will appear through counsel, present a brief opening statement, and engage in argument: because of the serendipitously simultaneous gathering of CFP'13, the judge has authorized the attendees to act as an advisory jury and will permit individual jurors to pose questions to the litigants.
At the conclusion of questioning, the advisory jurors will be instructed by the judge and asked to consider and return their verdicts.
For your consideration.
In The Court of Uncommon Pleas
Cyberspace Judicial District
People of the ]
State of ]
] In Re: TALIO
] Form of Verdict for Advisory
TALIO, et. al. ] Jury as to Individual Liability
Pursuant to your oath as an advisory juror in the Matter of Talio, et. al., you are requested to indicate on this form your conclusion on the single issue whether the standards society expects of persons who have accepted responsibility for data systems, their content and functioning failed to discharge those responsibilites in respect to the incident of March 17, 2002. The criteria to be applied by you is: whether the standard of care observed by each particular individual was that appropriate to their responsibility and the risks attendant thereon, objectively considered against the standards prevailing in your field. You are not being asked to determine subjective intent, much less guilt or innocence. Those issues may or may not be matters for another jury at another time, and you are not to consider the pragmatic consequences of your advisory verdict in any way. You are free to discuss the issue with the other jurors, but you are expected to base your individual verdict on your individual understanding of prevailing standards, and refrain from sympathy, speculation, collegiality, or psychological projection.
Please note your individual opinion as to each of the accused:
- Met prevailing Standard
- Failed prevailing Standard
at Laputa Academy
Rex MODEM, MD
Quixote Gen Hosp
Please place your verdict form in the designated receptacles. You are encouraged to discuss your deliberations with others,that being the purpose of this presentation.
This proceeding is wholly ficitional, bears no relationship to any real case or any legal procedure known in recorded history or anywhere in the inhabited galaxy, and should not be attempted at home.
Return to CPSR conferences page.
Return to the CPSR home page.
Send mail to webmaster.
Created before October 2004