Press Release Notes from the United States Attorney’s Office
Hello. This press release announces the sentencing in the Deric Lostutter case. He is the person (from Winchester, KY)who admitted to hacking into a website in relation to the much publicized 2012 rape case in Steubenville, Ohio.
I have noticed that several reports of the case in the press have offered stories that do not match the facts of the case. In fact, in the sentence today, Judge Danny Reeves made mention of a false narrative about the defendant’s motives intentions [noting that this was not a noble or heroic effort for justice].
Below I’ve provided a few points to help give more insight into the truth about the case. I’ve already provided a detailed account in the press release, but added these points below to assist you as you shape your story. Please be mindful that the wording in your story is not phrased in a way that alters the facts.
He was facing a range between 18 and 24 months in prison and received the top end of the sentencing range. He will be on supervised release for 3 years following his sentence and was issued a $5,000 fine.
I have also attached the plea agreement and a victim impact letter written by the local prosecutor from Steubenville, Ohio, who was originally assigned to prosecute the defendants in the rape case. Her letter describes the impact of the defendant’s actions on the community of Steubenville.
As always, if you have questions, feel free to call me.
Please remember that what I’v [sic] mentioned above and below is NOT for direct quote but for information for your story and to provide context to the case. There is a quote in the press release from the Acting U.S. Attorney.
A Few Notes
- The defendant was sentenced for two charges: illegally accessing a computer and lying to the FBI about his conduct during the investigation, (more in the press release on that).
- Defendant has admitted that the purpose of his hack was not just to draw attention to the 2012 rape case, but to gain publicity for his online identity and to harass and intimidate people.
- There is a victim in this case – the operator of the website that the defendant and his co-conspirator (more in press release on how he was victimized).
- There were two parts to the hack. The defendant admitted that he and his co-conspirator also hacked into the administrator’s private email account and made his private emails available for download by anyone who visited the site.
- The wording in the court documents is that he [in part] hacked to “bring attention” to the rape case. However, it’s important to not confuse this with assisting in bringing about justice or revealing or exposing anything new. In fact, when his hack occurred there was already considerable press coverage on the case (including a NY Times story) and the suspects in the rape were already being prosecuted and were in custody at the time of the hack. (see page 2, paragraph 5 of attached victim impact letter for more about this).
Public Affairs Officer
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Eastern District of Kentucky