investigator

All an investigator needs to do is order a hit and then arrest the dude that shows up to execute it. That's the end of that business.

It tells us exactly what steps they took, and why they felt the investigator was appropriate. \n2.

I suspect the findings have already been reached before the first investigator got to work. Now the question is how India responds.

When I called the police and the investigator came, I could tell I was instantly suspect #1. He began grilling me lengthily about my whereabouts the night before and who I lived with.

If a great hacker, a great salesman and a great fraud investigator started a company they would be able to start a company like stripe. And they'd all be doing stuff they were passionate about.

You point is : if you're a talented con artist who was able to con $50B out, then you would mislead/charm/fend off a SEC or any other investigator better than a lawyer. I'm completely agree with you here.

Can you imagine his search records being rifled through by a government investigator? Or his Facebook profile being examined by an employer?

It's far beyond special investigator time. Obama should be impeached.

The information you put down isn't really a whole lot more interesting than what you might put down on a home loan application, but you sign some consent forms that the investigator can do some credit checks, that sort of thing. You also put down some references they can contact.

Rather than addressing the accusation and presenting evidence to the contrary, they seek to attack and silence the investigator by throwing out accusations of libel. It's a tactic of snakes.

In Rehberg, the accusation was the chief investigator for the DA's office simply presented made up testimony in front of the grand jury, knowing it was false, and the prosecutor knew it was false as well when questioning him/presenting it. They did this 3 times, leading to indictments against folks that were, thankfully, later dismissed by judges.

However, while there may have been no legal wrongdoing, the investigator did find evidence of mistakes and errors of judgment. Using the word "exonerated" outright ignores the conclusion of the report. The github hired investigator reported no evidence of legal wrong-doing.

As a network forensic investigator, if I were to upload packet captures to a third-party, I'd almost certainly lose my job - and rightfully so. Now, the appliance looks interesting for collaboration, as long as it stays in my protected environment, but I'm not sure that's necessarily the best way to go about this general task.

A good investigator is a pretty damn good lie detector all by him or herself. Also, can we finally agree that wire-fraud, mail-fraud, and obstruction of justice are ridiculously overly broad statutes that basically make federal criminal jurisdiction universal?

You collect enough information over a long enough period of time so that an investigator can trivially search a dumped archive of email to verify your claims. But we are supposed to believe someone who offers effectively no evidence from the duration of their claimed tenure, and who pushes it off as "I stayed because I had a family to support, and secondly I wanted to see how far they would go."