July 23, 2013

MIT admits Secret Role in Aaron Swartz Death

July 23, 2013. Washington. The details surrounding the death of the young genius inventor Aaron Swartz get more bizarre by the day. Days before the Obama administration was to release its secret files covering the persecution and prosecution of Swartz, the government and MIT sued to stop it. The university insists its employees will be in danger once the world finds out the role MIT played in the death of Aaron Swartz.

It’s only been six months since the tragic death of internet pioneer Aaron Swartz. The 26 year-old inventor of the RSS feed and a co-owner of the popular site Reddit killed himself in January of this year. His family, as well as millions of others across the country, accuse federal authorities of terrorizing the young man so much, they caused him to take his own life to end the constant persecution.

Aaron Swartz

What was once considered an open-and-shut case, considering Aaron Swartz was reportedly cooperating with federal prosecutors, has suddenly become a real-life who-done-it right out of a Sherlock Holmes story. It’s not so much the facts of the case that are so controversial, as much as the government’s, and now MIT’s, insistence that the facts remain sealed and secret from the American people.

Aaron Swartz wasn’t some common criminal. His crime consisted of hacking into a multi-university digital library and releasing thousands of works of literary genius. The books, journals and other publications created one of the largest and most advanced collections of human intelligence in existence. But it was only available to the world’s wealthy or those connected to the most prestigious universities. Aaron Swartz was a crusader for open and free access to knowledge and reading materials. He understood that knowledge is power.

Aaron Swartz didn’t do it for money, ego or any other selfish reason. The statement released by his family immediately after his death sheds some light on his possible motives, ‘Aaron’s insatiable curiosity, creativity, and brilliance; his reflexive empathy and capacity for selfless, boundless love; his refusal to accept injustice as inevitable—these gifts made the world, and our lives, far brighter. We’re grateful for our time with him, to those who loved him and stood with him, and to all of those who continue his work for a better world.’

On January 11, 2013, Aaron Swartz took his own life to put an end to the non-stop threats, terror and intimidation at the hands of government agents and prosecutors.

Kevin Poulsen and Wired.com

When Aaron Swartz passed away, government agents and university officials thought the story was over. But his family, friends and former co-workers wanted to know the truth. Among them was Kevin Poulsen, Editor of Wired.com. He filed a Freedom of Information Act request asking for the release of all the documents relating to the government’s investigation and prosecution of Aaron Swartz.

With an alphabet soup of government agencies persecuting Swartz, Kevin Poulsen cast a vast net and sued the Department of Homeland Security. As it turned out, it was the Secret Service that had initiated the criminal investigation of Aaron Swartz in 2011 after he illegally downloaded the contents of MIT’s JSTOR university library. A sub-agency of DHS, the Secret Service none the less refused the FOIA request and insisted the government’s investigation needed to remain secret.

Two weeks ago, a federal judge ruled against the Executive Branch and ordered the Obama administration to release the documents in the Aaron Swartz case. As detailed by Poulsen and Wired.com, US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled, “Defendant shall promptly release to Plaintiff all responsive documents that it has gathered thus far and shall continue to produce additional responsive documents that it locates on a rolling basis.”

Secret Service requests delay

Days before Judge Kollar-Kotelly’s order, the Secret Service petitioned the court for a stay in its ruling. The agency alleges that it just discovered another large collection of files relating to the Swartz case at a facility outside Washington DC. Agency attorneys insist the Secret Service needs a large extension of time in order to collect and review the just-discovered documents.

In its petition to the court three weeks ago, the Secret Service wrote, ‘Defendant has exercised diligence in processing these records. As part of that effort, it undertook an additional search for responsive records in certain agency files, including files located outside agency headquarters in the Washington, D.C. area. Based on this additional search, it learned yesterday, July 2, of files located outside the agency’s headquarters that contain several thousand additional pages that may be responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA request…The agency’s review of those files will require a substantial amount of additional time.’

The court granted the federal agency a brief delay to allow it to investigate its latest discovery. The Secret Service now has an August 5 deadline, not to release the Aaron Swartz files, but to release a timetable showing when they think they might finally be able to release them. Kevin Poulsen and others who’ve submitted FOIA requests for the same information aren’t optimistic. Government officials blew right through a May 23 deadline and the plaintiffs wouldn’t be surprised if the Obama administration simply ignored the newest deadline as well.

MIT – working for Homeland Security?

Perhaps the most curious and surprising revelation over the past few days has been MIT University’s legal filing asking to be a party to Poulsen’s lawsuit against the Dept. of Homeland Security. But rather than join the Wired.com Editor as a Plaintiff in the FOIA case against DHS, MIT voluntarily joined Homeland Security as a Defendant in the lawsuit.

After the initial surprise wore off, critics of the government’s actions began submitting their own theories. The only facts confirmed by MIT officials involved the admission by the University that it feared for the lives and safety of some of its employees and staff if the government’s files on the Swartz investigation were made public. But what could MIT staff have done in the persecution and prosecution of Aaron Swartz that was so bad that those same individuals are in fear for their lives?

According to the latest account from Wired.com, ‘MIT claims it’s afraid the release of Swartz’s file will identify the names of MIT people who helped the Secret Service and federal prosecutors pursue felony charges against Swartz for his bulk downloading of academic articles from MIT’s network in 2011. MIT argues that those people might face threats and harassment if their names become public. But it’s worth noting that names of third parties are already redacted from documents produced under FOIA.’

Showing how America’s legal system truly works, a non-party like MIT gained access to a federal judge and arranged a secret conference call with attorneys for Kevin Poulsen, attorneys for DHS and the judge herself. MIT requested an emergency stay in the court’s order to release the Aaron Swartz documents. MIT notified the judge that they intended to file a legal motion later that day, but wanted to take advantage of their privileged access and sit down and talk to the judge in an admittedly “off the record” setting.

Judge delays Aaron Swartz documents yet again

In response to what the federal judge described in her ruling as, ‘an off-the-record conference call’, she was ordering yet another stay in the court’s order for the Secret Service and the Dept. of Homeland Security to release all the documents it has regarding the Aaron Swartz tragedy. The judge wrote (from Wired.com):

‘Based upon an off-the-record conference call with the parties’ counsel and counsel for non-party Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”), the Court understands that MIT intends to file a motion to intervene later today, which will include a request for relief relating to the Government’s production of certain documents to Plaintiff. In view of the impending motion, the Court hereby STAYS the obligation of the Government to promptly release to Plaintiff all responsive documents that it has located on a rolling basis, see Min. Order (July 5, 2013), until further order of the Court. Once the Court has had the opportunity to review MIT’s motion to intervene, and has considered the positions of the Plaintiff and the Government as to the motion, it shall order a schedule for further proceedings.’

Again, showing how the US justice system works, MIT and the Secret Service were granted another delay based on a secret conference call between their attorneys and the federal judge. The judge then granted the stay well before MIT even filed its motion. As a follow-up to the incident, Wired.com published all seven of the legal motions MIT eventually submitted to the court.

The main filing from MIT states ‘The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) moves to intervene and participate fully in this action as defendant pursuant to Rule (24)a of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum of points and authorities. MIT has an interest relating to the records that are subject of the action and is so situated that disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede MIT’s ability to protect that interest, in light of the fact that MIT’s interest is not adequately protected by the existing parties.’

MIT requested that the judge force the Obama administration to allow MIT officials five days to review all documents prior to their release and give the University the authority to black-out and redact any names or details that expose the levels of involvement of MIT employees working on behalf of government agents.

Kevin Poulsen, Wired.com, the Plaintiff’s attorney, and a host of others are in shock at MIT’s requests and level of urgency. They wonder just what it is that University officials are so desperate to hide. Poulsen closes his latest report explaining, “I have never, in fifteen years of reporting, seen a non-governmental party argue for the right to interfere in a Freedom of Information Act release of government documents. My lawyer has been litigating FOIA for decades, and he’s never encountered it either. It’s saddening to see an academic institution set this precedent.”

For more information and to view the MIT emergency court filings, visit Wired.com.

Related Whiteout Press articles:

Jeremy Hammond: Government never forgiven, Swartz never forgotten

Whiteout Press hacked, Cyber-attacked, Ads suspended

A Lesson in Resistance from our Native American Brothers