I’ve emailed Postmedia for clarification, were there 2 or 3 emails?
The account was registered to someone using the email address email@example.com.
The order required PayPal to turn over account details, transaction history and the IP address used by firstname.lastname@example.org, whenever he or she connected to the payment company’s servers. Another email address, email@example.com, is also cited in the documents.
What does the 1630 mean? My guess is it’s the random number generated for “Pierre” by gmail, because otherwise his email address was too common.
By the way, Google should also be served with a production order, to list the IP(s) of the computer(s) that created those email accounts.
And here’s a letter to the editor that my dad’s submitted to the Gravelbourg Tribune (and possibly elsewhere):
Why should we be concerned about the robo call scandal? Is it even a scandal, after all how many votes were affected? Maybe it is just stupid politics and not worthy of attention. The
answer to these questions provide us with the reasons why we should care. Prior to this scandal the ad scam which involved a few millions of dollars being mis-directed into the pockets of a
few individuals was the biggest scandal. Voters were mostly affected by the political games around the wrong doings, and the biggest impact was to set the notion that all politicians are criminal. A perception more than a reality. I can disagree with my MP, but I don’t label him as a criminal. The newest scandal is much more serious because it involves peoples basic rights.
This newest scandal was an act meant to interfere with the evaluation of the people that we pick to make the decisions that will affect our lives. Electoral fraud is an attempt to prevent that process. Electoral misdeeds are an attempt to sway peoples choice by the use of misinformation. This fraud is not a misdeed.
Remember that the Conservative majority was obtained when slightly more than six thousand votes changed in no more than 14 ridings. The Conservatives argue that a few calls cannot subvert democracy and that more than six million calls were made during the election. That is a strange argument when the fact that the vote change giving them their majority accounts for less than one tenth of one percent of the calls they argued were made. I don’t believe anyone would have spent the kind of money needed to make those calls if only one tenth of one percent was going to be affected.
We now know a few basic facts about these calls that were intended to discourage a vote. That is an illegal act. We know the calls included false representations also an illegal act. We know the false representations were to falsely represent Elections Canada or an other political parties, both of which are illegal. We also now know that these calls came to people that had previously indicated their lack of support for the Conservative Party. We know that this occurred in at least 31 different ridings. We know that the Conservative support across Canada is less than 25 percent of eligible voters and that their majority is eleven seats.
The question that needs to be asked is how legitimate is their mandate when the evidence indicates it was the Conservative database that was used to call non Conservative supporters to misinform voters in many more than eleven seats. Finally, it was a shift of less than one tenth of one percent of election calls that rovided them with their mandate. Seems to me that illegitimate is the most appropriate word that applies to this government.
Is this a scandal? You bet it is. Is it bigger than ad scam? Again no comparison, and that is emphasised by the fact that the Conservatives have spent in the range of one billion dollars of our tax dollars to promote themselves making even a one hundred million dollar misappropriation of funds to promote Canada in Quebec a fairly small error.
Wood Mountain, SK
I was right about the EC female voice being computer generated, without even opening it up into an audio editor, I could hear that a repeated part of the message was repeated identically to the first pronouncement.
[Al] Mathews says, “The voice sounded to me as though computer generated rather than a script read by a person.”
The fake Elections Canada message was also likely recorded using voice synthesis software, according to Prof. Alan Black, a computer speech expert at Carnegie Mellon University’s Language Technologies Institute in Pennsylvania.
He analysed the message on behalf the Citizen and Postmedia News.
“The initial English voice is almost certainly synthetic; it has a particular duration pattern at the end of sentences that is characteristic of speech synthesis voices, and not on pre-recorded voice,” Black said in an email.
Mathews’s December statement shows he also obtained records from RackNine that show the Burke campaign used the company to send out 10 robocall campaigns, including one called “Counter Fake EC.” Meier told Mathews this call told Guelph voters to ignore the fake Elections Canada calls.
But the Burke campaign never listed RackNine as an expense in the return it filed with Elections Canada, as required by the election law. The campaign’s official agent told the Citizen and Postmedia that he never received any invoices for RackNine from campaign manager Ken Morgan.
Morgan has not return repeated calls and emails requesting comment over the past month.
The Globe&Mail lists some numbers.
Records provided by RackNine show that the unknown robo-caller paid using the name Pierre Jones and listed his address as 54 Lajoie Nord in Joliette, Que.
RackNine also told Elections Canada that the operative had identified himself as a University of Ottawa student studying by correspondence and located in Joliette.
The University of Ottawa informed investigators it has no record of a student named Pierre Jones and Mr. Mathews said in court filings that he could find nobody living at the Joliette address named Pierre Jones.
“It appears the name Pierre Jones, like Pierre Poutine, is false,” he said.
Robo-calls by the numbers
$162.10:How much it cost “Pierre Poutine” AKA “Pierre Jones” to launch the fraudulent robo-calls aimed at Guelph voters. The Alberta firm RackNine that was used to make the automated calls can make 200,000 calls an hour at 1.9 cents a call, court filings say.
6,738: The total number of phone numbers targeted on May 2, 2011 by the “Poutine” robo-calls. This includes a call to the unknown operative’s own cellphone. Most carried the 519 area code that is used by many numbers in Guelph.
7,676: The total number of attempted robo-calls (include repeated calls to the same number) made on May 2, 2011 by “Pierre Poutine.” This includes calls that did not go through.
10: The number of robo-call dialling campaigns from RackNine to electors in Guelph on behalf of the “Marty Burke Campaign.” Mr. Burke was the Conservative candidate for Guelph, and RackNine’s contact for these phone campaigns was deputy campaign manager Andrew Prescott. The 10 sets of calls were made between March 31 and May 2, 2011. The Burke campaign did not list these calls as expenses.