And the results are not the best. Because systems design and training takes time. And having 2 people verify sensitive information would be expensive! Judge lifts order requiring the L.A. Times to change article on ex-Glendale police spokesman.
Next you will want the .gov to spend money on computer security, or expect judges and lawyers to follow rules cooked up by programmers.
It’s an organized crime case. A Glendale police detective lied about his ties to organized crime. He took a plea agreement.
The plea agreement between prosecutors and detective John Saro Balian was supposed to have been filed under seal, but it was mistakenly made available Friday on PACER, a public online database for federal court documents.
That was done on Friday, by Saturday the LA Times had published a story. The judge wanted the story taken down, but as the defense attorney in the original case noted…
nobody can “unring that bell.”
A clerk made a data entry error. I wonder how overworked/underpaid those clerks are.
The case itself is interesting. (A cop accepting bribes, tipping off witnesses, and eventually being busted could have been an episode on any number of cop shows or even “Movie of the Week” back when they had those.)
The rush to put everything on the internet. The goal of making that easy. The lack of safeguards for sensitive information. (The judge is worried that the guy’s family will be put in danger.) But hey, we like having things on the internet, except when stuff gets hacked. Or mishandled.
Actually putting information on the internet is a good thing, but ONLY if it is not private or sensitive info (like the way to get into your online banking account) and only as long as the security is in place. Reviewing and securing data is not free.
Like this:
Like Loading...
