Gwinnett DA Porter Recuses From GBI Probe Into Judge's Computer Hack
A motion filed by convicted child molester and DragonCon co-founder Ed Kramer said a Superior Court judge suspected DA Danny Porter of hacking her computer.
March 26, 2019 at 06:57 PM
4 minute read
Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter has asked the Georgia Bureau of Investigation to look into a possible breach of the county courthouse's computer system, purportedly after a Superior Court judge had her own chambers computer monitored to see if the DA had hacked it.
According to a Monday court filing, the analysis was ultimately performed by convicted child molester and DragonCon founder Ed Kramer.
Porter, who denied hacking the judges computer, confirmed Tuesday that he has asked GBI to investigate a possible breach of the county's computer system and said he has recused from the ongoing investigation because he might be a witness.
A motion filed Monday by Kramer's attorney, Decatur solo Stephen Reba, seeks to have Porter's office recused from handling Kramer's most recent arrest, a Feb. 26 incident in which he was accused of photographing a child visiting a doctor in Lawrenceville.
The motion tied the arrest to a series of events earlier last month, when it said Judge Kathryn Schrader contacted a private investigator in February “to discuss potential hacking of her computer by Porter.”
Investigator T.J. Ward had one of his technicians install a device called a WireShark on her computer, according to the motion. WireShark marketing materials say it “lets you see what's happening on your network at a microscopic level” to monitor activity.
Read the Motion
|The WireShark was linked to another laptop to allow it to be monitored remotely.
Ward put his computer forensic analyst in charge of monitoring and analyzing the collected data: Ed Kramer, according to the motion.
Kramer “discovered clear signs” of someone accessing Schrader's computer outside regular business hours “without her permission or consent,” the motion said.
“In the midst of more detailed analysis and the preparation of documentation for Judge Schrader to utilize in contacting federal authorities, [Kramer] was arrested by Porter,” it said.
Kramer was charged with a misdemeanor, photographing a minor without his parents' consent—a felony probation violation for him—and remains in the Gwinnett County Jail.
“At the exact time of the arrest, law enforcement officers searched [Kramer's] home and seized all his electronic equipment,” including another WireShark and multiple computers containing the data he had collected from Schrader and other investigations, according to the motion.
Kramer voluntarily gave his cellphone password to investigating officers, who found no photos or videos of any children from the doctor's office, the motion said.
Subsequently, Porter referred the matter to the GBI “for potential prosecution” of Schrader, Kramer, Ward and his technician, it said.
Porter told Reba he voluntarily recused from that investigation. Reba's motion demands that he recuse from any further prosecution of Kramer.
Reba said Kramer's most recent arrest was a “pretext for this dispute between Porter and Schrader.”
In an interview, Porter denied having anything to do with hacking Schrader's computer and did not know whether or why she might have thought he had anything to do with it.
“I'm aware that she had been having some problems with her computers, but I have no idea why she would think I was hacking her,” he said.
“Basically I deny hacking her computer. I didn't arrest Ed Kramer and I didn't order him arrested,” Porter said.
“I did request the GBI to come in once we did a preliminary investigation and developed the possibility that there had been an intrusion in the county computers,” Porter said.
Porter noted that, since his arrest on the illegal photographing charge, Kramer also has been charged with making false statements regarding his treatment in the Gwinnett County Jail.
“I'm not recused from that case,” Porter said.
Schrader did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday afternoon.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllGeorgia Appeals Court Cancels Hearing in Election Interference Case Against Trump
3 minute readJustice Department Says Fulton County Jail Conditions Violate Detainee Rights
6 minute readSupreme Court Rejects Push to Move Georgia Case Against Ex-Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows
3 minute read3 GOP States Join Paid Sick Leave Movement, Passing Ballot Measures by Wide Margins
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250