Anonymous May Have Completely Destroyed Military Law Firm

Anonymous' gutting of Puckett & Faraj, the firm that defended the Marines behind the Haditha Killing, might have been more than a major embarrassment. The hack attack might have killed the group entirely.

In an email released by Anonymous in the wake of the attack — suggesting they still had their hands inside the attorneys' bowels after the news broke — we see the firm scrambling to understand and react to the strike. They don't do so well. Their web host is clueless, conceding "Anonymous is a little out of my league" and suggesting a call to the FBI. "Why the f**k does [our host] not know about this before we have to tell them," despairs partner Haytham Faraj. "Not sure how this will affect the business of the firm going forward," says namesake attorney Neal Puckett, "but for now, we're not able to do any business."

"This may completely destroy the Law Firm," laments Marcy Atwood, the Pucket & Faraj's business manager.

And this is no pissant firm, according to its self-billing:

Puckett & Faraj, PC, is a partnership between Neal A. Puckett, Esq. and Haytham Faraj, Esq. The partners have represented military members facing serious charges in a variety of cases including several high profile war crimes trials. Mr. Puckett has experience as a Federal Public Defender in the Northern District of Florida. The Firm maintains offices in Alexandria, Virginia and San Diego, California. This bi-coastal operation for military defence attorney services provides easy access to the majority of military installations in the United States and reduces the travel expenses to clients. The firm will handle all matters under any military provision or regulations governing members of the armed forces or those facing trial in federal court. We have experience as military defence lawyers in Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, Navy and Coast Guard court rooms. Our clients seek our representation, the best military lawyers, because we win.

But now, the site remains blank — a desperate interim measure implemented by P&F's web host when it realised what'd happened, and a woman answering the phones at the firm's Virginia office wouldn't comment as to whether business was still being conducted.

If Anonymous wanted to damage a business they believe let a murderer go free, it looks like their online attack has already had serious IRL consequences.


Comments

    The truth? You can't handle the truth!

      So does that make me a prophet?

      http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2012/02/anonymous-leaks-us-marine-corps-massacre-case/

    What an utter disgrace on the part of Anonymous. Was there any suggestion that the law firm had done anything wrong in their defence of their clients, or did Anonymous just decide that they didn't agree with the outcome?

      Agreed, the justice system relies on good argument. That these guys argued better than the prosecution is not their fault!
      The system has flaws but it does so to prevent (or at least reduce) the risk of finding innocent parties guilty.

      Meh. With all the injustices casued by governments and corporations in the world, I'm not one to worry to much about a Military Law firm defending people who've killed people (defence being "it's war so it's allowed") being taken down (only financially.... tough titties, as per TSH's comment, do some backups and spend more time and money understanding the web ya losers) by Anonymous. I won't cheer loudly, but I will quielty fist pump.

      The world needs Anonymous...
      They would have more information on these companies than what you know about Anonymous. Who are you to judge what they are doing as wrong??

        It could be argued that Anonymous has it's place, but a law firm only argues the law as it stands on behalf of the client, it does not make the law and nor does it make a judgement. I'm sure there are many people who have in fact been innocent despite initial evidence and they and their families would have suffered enormously and incorrectly had a lawyer not defended them. I'm not saying for one moment the defendant in this case was innocent or guilty, I don't know the facts but the lawyer was required by the law to defend their client to the best of their ability. If the defendant got off and was guilty, then perhaps the law was deficient.

    Isn't the real moral of this story "backups are worth their weight in gold"?

    With a little effort there's no reason they couldn't get up and running again.

      I think the biggest problem for them is that all their Privileged client information is not secure so who would trust them with it. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth of their clients when things said in confidence are (at risk of) being plastered all over the internet.

      Not necessarily their backups or system being down.

      You missed the point of the article.
      Anonymous possibly have damming evidence, no data has been lost as such just compromised.

      A lot of the documents and information that were breached are classified. If the documents gets released, it would not only harm the company and stakeholders, but also past clients who dealt with them. This is top tier military breach of privacy and the military will now have to join the hunt for Anonymous.

    Another day that Anon makes me happy, and restores a bit of faith in humanity.

    Keep it up!

    I like Anonymous. It's one giant uncontrollable and unprosecutable force on the internet and it's the people's only way of saying "f**k you" to corporations who don't listen.

    Whatever they do, for better or worse, is fine for this little pleb of society.

      How did this "corporation" not listen and deserve to potentially be run out of business?

        by protecting scum.....

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings

          +1

            You know what, these killings were an absolute disgrace and disgusting, but to all of you above unless you were there I don't think we comment on what really happened: Under the extreme pressure of war coupled with a good dose of PTSD and seeing many of your good mates being blown away by people that look like civilians, who are protected and hidden by civilians (the same civilians you are also trying to protect from each other incidentally), yeah, I'm sure none of you would ever crack and go nuts in that situation.

          Here here..... thanks for the link. Yup, no sympathy for a company that defends people like this to be taken down financially (not to mention a government that helped protect people like this). Nice one Anonyomous.

          Hence why US won't sign anything the United Nations puts up that might put their soldiers in front of the Hague.

          And if anonymous next decide that a law firm has defended someone else they consider "scum" but you (and the Courts) consider innocent men? Still okay with their actions?

          Personally im sure that they were guilty BUT you cant put someone in jail without proper evidence its WRONG and it turns into salem trials. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials you cant have a trial based on he said she said. EVIDENCE or acquittal is the only option.

    go anonymous! These guys crack me up.

    Can they please start f*cking with some Australian websites, it would be fun to watch...

    Good on them. These are targets well worth attacking!

    It is immoral for punishment to be applied without any kind of trial. These basement dwellers need to grow up and get a job.

      If I shoot your family at close range do you think I should be given 0.0000001% chance to walk free? That is immoral..

        Maybe we should just do away with the legal system. Everyone could just be incarcerated immediately because someone else says so.

    Whilst I agree that some stuff that happens is BA, and attorneys like these aren't my favourite people, someone has to defend them. It's a defendants right, if they can't afford a lawyer, then the state pays for one. So is the poor one lawyer firm going to be taken down next when they are forcefully appointed to a defendant?
    My only issue with Anon is that it's actions are just like a vigilanty type of law. Unfortunately the Deth Note rules aren't applied here.

    If these attorneys aren't lying to protect alleged murderers, than all the memos and confidential correspondence won't make a difference when released to the public.....right?

    I think this a real shame. I like Anonymous's accumen and how they stand up for what is right, but I cannot agree with their actions this time. The ONLY way to a fair trial, which everyone deserves, regardless of their actions or whether they are guilty, is to have a lawyer on each side, putting forward their best argument, with the jury or judge deciding the outcome based upon the evidence provided during the trial. The other thing, at least in Australia, is that a lawyer is not allowed to refuse a case based upon personal beliefs, even if their belief is that their client is guilty and should burn in hell.
    I say, to Anonymous, please keep defending our rights, but only attack those who have caused AVOIDABLE harm to others. The lawyer(s) in this example didn's do anything wrong unless they lied in court or manipulated the system unfairly. I do not know much about the case details, but I am of the understanding that the lawyers followed typical protocol.

    Right to fair trial blah, blah, blah- like the onr the yanks gave Bin Laden? What is good for the goose.........

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now