Oliver was a private contractor who helped companies become more efficient by creating electronic files to back up all physical documents. This practice was becoming particularly popular in that companies with electronic files of documents are able to more easily communicate those files with employees or other contractors. However, during a job with a law firm, Oliver implanted a virus into the law firms computers that allowed him to receive the social security numbers as well as financial information for all employees. This included credit card numbers. Oliver then sold this information online to whoever requested it, for a price. When one of the employees found out that this was going on, a police investigation was requested. Eventually, this investigation led to Olivers arrest, and he was found guilty for computer crimes under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, or CFAA, for purposefully gaining unauthorized use of a computer to collect financial or credit information protected under federal privacy law. Oliver was ordered to repay over $10 million in damages.

But what if the facts of the case were different? Select each set of facts below that could change the result of the courts decision and punishment:

Oliver knowingly chose to become intoxicated during his side-job involving appropriation of financial information of those with whom he contracted.

The idea to hack into the law firms computers had originated with an officer who induced Oliver to commit the crime.

The officer that arrested Oliver did not read Oliver his full Miranda Rights, but the court found that Olivers testimony to the officer prior to his getting read his full Miranda Rights was necessary to protect the public who had been affected by Olivers actions.

The court determined that Oliver had committed computer crimes knowingly instead of purposefully.