Re: Dmitry Bogatov arrested in Moscow

[Andrew Shadura <andrew@shadura.me>]

On 11/04/17 02:33, Michael Lustfield wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar@debian.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Apr 2017, Dmitry Shachnev wrote:
>> [...]
>> Yikes!  Assuming Dmitry didn't actually call for terrorist activities (which
>> would seem to be a pretty safe assumption) can Debian make a statement of
>> support?  Or considering the situation would it harm more than help?
> 
> Hopefully I can respond to this while appealing to nobody's emotions...
> 
> To the best of my research, I can't find anything to indicate rights
> have been or are being violated, not even by US-citizen standards.
> While very few details are being released, the important details that
> the outside world should be aware of have been made available.

Have you read this article (in Russian)?

https://meduza.io/feature/2017/04/10/kak-arestovali-matematika-dmitriya-bogatova-i-v-chem-imenno-ego-obvinyayut

It pretty much indicates the whole case is probably being fabricated
against him based on false or unsubstantiated claims.

After the defence has provided evidence of not being guilty, the judge said:

‘At the today’s hearing we’re not proving or disproving his guilt, we’re
deciding on the sentence.’

The charges are based on the evidence of someone with on-line pseudonym
of Ayrat Bashirov posting texts at some on-line forum, which the
prosecution claimed was Dmitry's false on-line identity. The defence
noted, Ayrat continues actively post messages even although now Dmitry
has now been arrested and is in the court room. The court ignored this
information.

The Meduza reported suggests the arrest may be related to a Tor exit
node Dmitry ran at home.

> At this point, what would Debian even take a stance against? Without
> evidence of any wrong-doing from either party, I don't see what stance
> can be rightfully taken because it would be based purely in
> speculation.
> 
> Of course, that doesn't mean don't watch the situation and be willing
> to take a stance. However, I believe it would provide any value now.
> Moreover, crying wolf on injustice now would hamper the effect of
> taking a stance should the situation turn sour. Additionally, should
> they be found guilty of lesser charges, having raised awareness of
> much larger accusations /could/ cause problems for them in the future.
> 
> tl;dr -- let's be patient and observe what happens before taking action
> 


-- 
Cheers,
  Andrew