moishe - 8:21 pm on Mar 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

The article from the local paper clearly starts out by equating using a WiFi connection with cable theft. That having been said, it would be real nice to know what really happened here. If he hacked the WiFi, then he is a criminal. If he accessed the non-profit's PC as the article seems to say, then he is a criminal.

If he accessed an open WiFi network to gain access to the internet and then pled guilty, he is a moron. I would have fought that one to the Supreme Court. IF this is the case, it sets a VERY BAD pressitant.