I don't think the simple division of people you describe is accurate.
The original post didn't discuss the issues you raise above. Rather, it raised the issue of potential _mistakes_ in accusation and arrest as a result of new technologies, their use, and their misuse.
For example: Someone arranges for a meeting via the Internet. At some point (before, during, or after the meeting) one person is assaulted by the other person. The police trace the Internet logs back to someone else who was not at all involved, but his identity was stolen. If the victim doesn't have a clear description or the person looks similar, that outside person is in big trouble.
[public replies, please] [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is at least one third type of division which Henry did not mention: There are those folks who not only deny that it happens but 'go into denial' about it when there is some instance (for example, in the newspapers) they cannot avoid. One example I recall from the newspapers was that lady, Joyce (what was her last name?) in Oklahoma who was employed for however many years as a 'forensic technician' for the police in Oklahoma. Her job, was to 'investigate crime' and sort out the 'criminals' from the 'good guys' and accordingly, advise police on matters such as DNA, blood types, fingerprints, etc. Things which could easily _make or break_ anyone where police were concerened on a high profile crime. As Danny Burstein explained it here one day, a 'high profile' crime is any crime in which a white person is the victim, and usually a well-to-do white person at that. So this Joyce lady, _head forensic technologist_ for the state of Oklahoma was just going along with whatever police told her to say/do. Police would say 'thus and so is the perp' and Joyce would jerry-rig the 'evidence' to make things turn out as the plice told her they should.When the shit finally hit the fan -- as you knew would happen -- the police did not hesitate to sacrifice Joyce; they claimed it was all her fault; she said police had 'twisted her arm' many times to get the desired results. She was unable to document or prove otherwise, and as for the police, well, they did not have to prove anything; they are the police, after all. Despite Joyce's several loud protests, she was sent packing; how many death sentences did (Oklahoma) Governor Brad Henry have to write off ? ... it was almost as much of a stench as in Illinois where the former governor cleaned out death row _entirely_ in one fell swoop (over a hundred inmates) because (as he [former Illinois governor] put it) "there are just too many unanswered questions in all these cases." The people who are in denial about these things like to pretend that we have a very good 'system' in the United States and 'only occassionally' are there errors and we sure hope "there are no hard feelings in the 'rare instance' when a mistake is made." What utter nonesense! PAT]