Q. Who is the real Kuji?

My name is Mathew Bevan

I am 25 years old and was once accused of breaching some sensitive computers in 1994 belonging to ths USAF and a commercial missile manufacturer.

Evidence was heard in the US Senate regarding the incidents, 'Kuji' was judged to have been a spy because of his technical perfection.

Investigation by AFOSI and Scotland Yard led to my arrest in June 1996 and after lengthy pre-trial hearings the prosecution eventually offered 'No Evidence' leading to full acquittal and not guilty verdicts being recorded in 1997.

I have been using my computer skills to good use in the form of Penetration testing, and also for education in the form of seminars and workshops.

I regularily provide soundbites and interviews to various sectors.

 


Q. What was the timeframe of the case?


This is how it went, start to finish. I think I have it all down.

  • 12 May 1994
    Richard Pryce arrested and interviewed. Bailed to 21 July 1994.
  • 21 July 1994
    Richard Pryce interviewed again. Bailed to 23 November 1994.
  • 14 October 1994
    Papers received by Crown Prosecution Service from police.
  • 11 November 1994
    Crown Prosecution Service have conference with police. Decide to bail Pryce for a further 3 months to obtain further evidence.
  • 17 May 1995
    Police send further report to Crown Prosecution Service for advice.
  • 7 June 1995
    Richard Pryce charged with 12 offences contrary to Section 1 of the Computer Misuse Act.
  • 19 June 1996
    Pryce charged with Conspiracy.
  • Arrested 21 June 1996 10:00am
    I'm arrested (at work), taken for interrogation and search of home.
  • Charged 22 June 1996 19:47pm
    Charged with two counts of conspiracy:

    a. On or before 14th May 1994 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court you did conspire with Richard Pryce (also known as Datastream Cowboy) or others to cause a computer to perform a function with intent to secure access to any program or data held on computer systems belonging to the United States AirForce, Lockheed Space and Missile Company, or others, knowing that such access would be unauthorised.
    Contrary to Section 1(1) Criminal Law Act 1977.

    b. On or before 14th May 1994 within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court you did conspire with Richard Pryce (also known as Datastream Cowboy) or others to cause the modification of any program or data held on computer systems belonging to the United States AirForce, Lockheed Space and Missile Company, or others, knowing that such modification would be unauthorised.
    Contrary to Section 1(1) Criminal Law Act 1977.

    Remanded to appear at Bow Street at 10:00 am on Thursday 11th July 1996.
  • Bow Street 14 March 1997 10:00am
    Appearance adjourned. Crown indicated a wish to proceed with 12 section(1) offences and 3 section(3) offences for myself and Pryce.
    Remanded to appear at Bow Street at 10:30 am on the 21.03.97.
  • Bow Street 21 March 1997 10:30am
    Pryce changed plea to guilty, accepting 12 section(1) offences with 3 section(3) taken into consideration. Fined £100 per charge, had computer equipment confiscated and ordered to pay £250 costs.
    Charges changed for myself to 3 Section(3) offences:

    a. Between 1st March and 12th March 1994 did an act which caused an unauthorised modification of the contents of a computer, namely placing a program known as a sniffer into the operating or file system of a computer with the address homer.flex.rl.af.mil at Rome Laboratory, Griffiss AirForce base, Rome, New York, United States of America. With intent to impair the operation of that computer.
    Contrary to Section(3) of the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

    b. Between 1st March and 12th March 1994 did an act which caused an unauthorised modification of the contents of a computer, namely placing a program known as a sniffer into the operating or file system of a computer with the address jose.flex.rl.af.mil at Rome Laboratory, Griffiss AirForce base, Rome, New York, United States of America. With intent to impair the operation of that computer.
    Contrary to Section(3) of the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

    c. Between 1st March and 12th March 1994 did an act which caused an unauthorised modification of the contents of a computer, namely placing a program known as a sniffer into the operating or file system of a computer with the address yosemite.space.lockheed.com at the Lockheed Missile and Space Company Palo Alto, California, United States of America. With intent to impair the operation of that computer.
    Contrary to Section(3) of the Computer Misuse Act 1990.

  • Bow Street 22 April 1997 11:00am
    Application made for disclosure of three computer programs; namely: Pathfinder, Stethoscope and Network Security Monitor.
    Stipendiary Magistrate reserved decision and adjourned until 30th May 1997.
  • Bow Street 30 May 1997 11:00am
    Stipendiary Magistrate gave his judgment against disclosure..
  • Cardiff 12 August 1997
    Position reconsidered by Solicitor and Bevan upon advice of Counsel then instructed. In the light of Counsel's advice, Defence decide to seek reconsideration of mode of trial and seek trial at Crown Court and a transfer to Cardiff. CPS informed and agree to re-opening of mode of trial.
  • Bow Street 13 August 1997 11:00am
    Application made to return to Mode of Trial. Magistrate accepted this and declared No Jurisdiction for Magistrates Court.
  • Southwark Crown Court 13 August 1997
    Mode of trial re-opened on application by Defence with agreement of Crown. Stipendiary Magistrate agrees to commit to Crown Court following representations by both parties as to complexity of case and practical difficulties in presentation of the evidence at Bow St. Court. Committed for trial at Crown Court at Southwark. Subsequent application to be made for transfer to Crown Court at Cardiff.
    Bailed unconditionally to appear at Southwark Crown Court at 11:00 am on the 11.09.97.
  • Southwark Crown Court 11 September 1997
    PDH at Crown Court at Southwark, HH Judge Rivlin QC. Ordered, inter alia, that Defence put application for transfer to Crown Court at Cardiff in writing.
    Prosecution indicate that pleas of guilty to Section 1 offences acceptable.
  • Old Bailey 29 September 97
    Application before Wright J. at Old Bailey for transfer to Crown Court at Cardiff refused.
  • Woolwich Crown Court 03 November 1997
    Further Plea & Directions hearing at Crown Court at Woolwich, HH Judge Rivlin QC.
    Adjourned to 21 November for Crown to consider its position in the light of the learned judge's comments concerning the conduct of the case.
    If the Crown proposes to proceed there to be submissions from both sides as to 'abuse of process' on 21 November 1997, skeleton arguments in advance.
  • Woolwich Crown Court Friday 21 November 1997

    Crown Offer no evidence
    Not guilty verdicts recorded = Acquittal