Since November 1, 1993, I've been entangled in a legal case with which
most of you are familiar. It began with a search of my house and
interrogation and having my five-year relationship with Intel
terminated. My computers were kept for 40 days, and I didn't find new
work until three months later. A month after that, I was charged with
three felonies, and paid out nearly $180,000 defending myself in court
through numerous pre-trial hearings and the trial itself in the
ensuing months and years. All the while being out on bail with travel
restrictions and reduced civil rights.

In July 1995, I was convicted on all three counts, and have been
serving my ongoing five-year supervised probation period. I've paid
$67,000 in restitution fines (into an escrow account), and completed
my 480 hours of community service (later commuted to 240 hours plus a
fine).

For the mistakes I made in 1993, I've paid dearly. I've lost
contracts, and opportunities innumerable. My civil rights are heavily
restricted, and will remain so even after the probation is over. It's
clear to me that I was naive in my handling of matters at Intel, and
in fact been perhaps inappropriately rewarded for the initiative I had
shown on earlier projects, leading me to believe I was nearly
untouchable. That turned out to not be the case. Given the
environment of Intel, mixed with the constitutionally bad laws we now
fight, I had walked into a powder keg and mistakenly lit a match.

I've shared my story with hundreds of people in person, and countless
thousands on-line. The press has been mostly favorable to me, and
many experts have stood by my side. They support my claim that while
I made mistakes, it seems ludicrous that when no harm was intended,
and no harm demonstrated, that I remain a triple felon in the eyes of
the law.

With this in mind, my legal team, led by Marc Sussman, has been in
ongoing pursuit of an appeal, including the most interesting element
of ripping the bad law (ORS 164.377) off the books, based on claims of
constitutional vagueness and overbreadth. (To this day, in reading
the law, I still cannot determine if it applies to me or not.)

I'm pleased to announce that the case comes up before the Oregon State
Appeals court on 27 July 1999. From what I understand, Marc will be
making an appearance before the court on that day, and in the four to
six weeks following, the court will review the materials to determine
my fate. This could be called perhaps "the beginning of the end".

If the court can calmly see that this law is unlike most other laws
passed in my home state, I'll be free once again to live my life as an
ordinary human being. Not a felon. But a fellow human that has been
much enlightened in the ways of our legal system, and of how language
(even improper language) can matter so much, deciding the fate and
outcome of an entire lifetime.

Other possible outcomes include a review of the trial itself,
potentially resulting in a retrial with some of the evidence
discarded. Or perhaps just the resitution hearing would be redone.
Or maybe nothing.

But I'm going to ask you, each of you, for a favor to help me get my
life back. If you wish to stand with me, to heal what is unwhole, and
return freedom to my life, please pray with me -- pray for a healing.
(If you don't like the term prayer, then at least think happy
thoughts.) Please focus on restoring my freedom, and on making me
whole again, so that I can move on to contributing my life's work and
passion freely. And focus on the court justices being awake to the to
the damage that an ill-written law can wreak on the populus, such that
everyone that uses a company PBX for a private phone call could very
well be committing a felony under this law.

I ask this of you. I ask not because I deserve it, but merely that
it's what I need -- what I want with all my heart. I've been praying
daily to have this happen, and meditating daily on what the case has
meant to me and to others, and will continue to do so until I get word
from the court.

I am committed to the possibility that the courts will be awake enough
to see that the law is bad, and remove the law, preventing others from
being placed in harm's way as I have been, and removing a dangerous
precedent of a law that demands selective enforcement, making it
unconstitutional.

Please pass along this letter to any place you see fit. For more
information about my case, see http://www.lightlink.com/fors/ or email
fund@.... Discussions about my stand may occur on the
mailing lists mentioned in the reply email from the latter address.

Thank you.

--
Name: Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
Keywords: Perl training, UNIX[tm] consulting, video production, skiing, flying
Email: <merlyn@...> Snail: (Call) PGP-Key: (finger
merlyn@...)
Web: <A HREF="http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/">My Home Page!</A>
Quote: "I'm telling you, if I could have five lines in my .sig, I would!" -- me

---
You are currently subscribed to fors-discuss as:
ListSaver-of-fors-discuss@...
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-fors-discuss-23114F@...