The Tulsa Forum by TulsaNow

Not At My Table - Political Discussions => National & International Politics => Topic started by: RecycleMichael on July 30, 2007, 10:22:05 PM

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: RecycleMichael on July 30, 2007, 10:22:05 PM
What a strange story...

http://www.kjrh.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=086c09b1-dbe5-4d7e-bc88-b695fd9cb434

City Council e-mail investigation
Posted By: Phil Berman

City Councilor Rick Westcott is accusing his predecessor of shady dealings involving confidential City Council e-mails. Chris Medlock admits he continued to get City Council e-mails forwarded to his personal e-mail address after leaving the council.

Medlock says it was mistake on the part of the city and he shut them down a month after leaving. A City Council administrator admits a member of the city's staff should have caught it sooner. He says that person no longer works there.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: guido911 on July 31, 2007, 09:24:41 AM
Anyone know if he commented on this issue on the radio?
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tulsacyclist on July 31, 2007, 10:47:38 AM
He did. He basically said that there was an Outlook or probably Exchange rule in place that would forward all emails to dist2@tulsacouncil.org over to Medlock's home email address. This way he could work from home sometimes with ease.

Anyhow, once he was out and his position was filled he said he continued to receive forwarded emails but they all had to do with him and giving him thanks for his service, etc. He eventually said those stopped but he was still getting forwards from that address that dealt with other issues and he simply ignored those.

Not sure what else he said, I wasn't paying too much attention to it, honestly.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: guido911 on July 31, 2007, 01:19:41 PM
thanks tc
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on July 31, 2007, 02:32:21 PM
Is there a way to tell if he opened any of the emails?
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on July 31, 2007, 03:05:21 PM
Deplorable...shameful.....typical....unethical.
[;)]
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: AngieB on July 31, 2007, 03:25:34 PM
Much ado about nothing.

I have a similar rule on my work email because I can't directly access it from home. If I found myself no longer employed here, I doubt deleting the mail rule would be at the top of my mind.

If the city was on the ball, his email account would have been deactivated as soon as he was no longer city councilor. After leaving his position as councilor, Medlock couldn't have done anything about the mail rule anyway -- it operated from within the email client/program.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on July 31, 2007, 03:56:07 PM
Certainly, the city will not allow this type of intrusion to happen in the future.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tulsacyclist on July 31, 2007, 04:13:39 PM
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa

Certainly, the city will not allow this type of intrusion to happen in the future.


I don't think intrusion is the word you are looking for, what happened here appears to be quite the opposite. The City continued to forward dist2@tulsacouncil.org emails to Medlock with no 'intrusion' necessary. I'd consider it spam actually.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on July 31, 2007, 04:14:02 PM
Intrusion...I think when you hand someone something it's not reallt "intrusion" is it?
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on July 31, 2007, 04:25:36 PM
So, the mailman delivers me a letter intended for someone else. I open it. Read it. Use the contents to further my own interests.

OK. Intrusion maybe not.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on July 31, 2007, 04:29:58 PM
I think the emails were actually addressed to him as well...
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on July 31, 2007, 04:35:04 PM
So the emails were going where?  To a personal account?
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on July 31, 2007, 04:37:11 PM
Simple forwarding.  Work email accounts are frequently forwarded to people so that they can work from home.  Especially when a company doesn't have a proper email exchange server that people can log onto at home or a replicating program.  I'm guessing the city isn't very technologically advanced...
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: deinstein on July 31, 2007, 05:13:02 PM
Do you guys really think this is that big of a deal? Seriously? I see tim huntzinger is foaming at the mouth on this one as well.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on July 31, 2007, 05:19:54 PM
"I'm guessing the city isn't very technologically advanced..."

Good guess. I am guessing Medlock is meddlesome.

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on July 31, 2007, 06:35:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein

I see tim huntzinger is foaming at the mouth on this one as well.



Not yet. If the emails were going to a little-used address that is one thing.  If they went to a main address and went unopened that is another.  If he opened them and they are tagged confidential then I will go rabid.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on July 31, 2007, 06:44:55 PM
In reality, though, IMO it is not a big deal.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: sgrizzle on July 31, 2007, 07:53:30 PM
quote:
Originally posted by deinstein

Do you guys really think this is that big of a deal? Seriously? I see tim huntzinger is foaming at the mouth on this one as well.



Many companies would fire the employee on the spot if they found out about forwarding to a personal account. All emails to an organization's address are their property. It's like taking your desk chair home and not returning it after you left.

I personally don't think it's a big deal, but it COULD be a big deal if Medlock acted on any of those communications.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Wilbur on July 31, 2007, 08:12:46 PM
Sorry to say, but the city is more advanced then that.  All employees have the ability to access their work email from home, without having to forward the emails from the city system to an outside system.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: sgrizzle on July 31, 2007, 09:25:52 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Wilbur

Sorry to say, but the city is more advanced then that.  All employees have the ability to access their work email from home, without having to forward the emails from the city system to an outside system.



If this is true of City Councilor mail, then it nullifies Medlock's explanation.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on July 31, 2007, 09:27:36 PM
^Bet on it....
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: RecycleMichael on July 31, 2007, 09:42:35 PM
The timing of this month o' e-mails is also interesting. That was when the Mayor was putting her staff together and preparing the city budget.

It was also a time when constituents were contacting the five new councilors, including the one who won this particular seat.  

I can only assume there were some very interesting e-mails not intended for Medlock.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Wrinkle on July 31, 2007, 10:43:38 PM
So, some City IT person let us down. It's not the fault of anyone else. Too bad we don't hold those standards for all City employees.

Personally, this is really pretty funny.

BTW, I'm pretty sure all email correspondance remains under Open Records regulations here.

Besides, how many times have we told you, don't put anything in your email you wouldn't say to your grandmother?

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Wrinkle on July 31, 2007, 10:47:43 PM
I should modify that slightly. Just assume all your email were forwarded directly to the Mayor, becaue on a City system, it's not only legal, it probably happens.

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on July 31, 2007, 11:02:54 PM
BUH BYE ETHICS!!!
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Markk on August 01, 2007, 06:24:41 AM
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael

What a strange story...

http://www.kjrh.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=086c09b1-dbe5-4d7e-bc88-b695fd9cb434

City Council e-mail investigation
Posted By: Phil Berman

City Councilor Rick Westcott is accusing his predecessor of shady dealings involving confidential City Council e-mails. Chris Medlock admits he continued to get City Council e-mails forwarded to his personal e-mail address after leaving the council.

Medlock says it was mistake on the part of the city and he shut them down a month after leaving. A City Council administrator admits a member of the city's staff should have caught it sooner. He says that person no longer works there.



Complete lack of integrity, at best.  If he "forgot" about the autoforward rule before he left office, he would have been reminded of it when he got the first forwarded piece of mail after he left office.  The right thing to do at that point would be to call Westcott or someone in IT and have them disable the rule.  He apparently didn't; I assume because he thought the "inside" info could make him relevant.  He's just a hack.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on August 01, 2007, 06:51:21 AM
He mentioned on-air that any emails from a certain period can be requested via Freedom of Info Act.  In his sick mind, then, he wrote his own approval.  Sort of like the warrantless eavesdropping pogrom of his icon Karl Rove.  Rules do not apply to one if one is working for a greater good.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: RecycleMichael on August 01, 2007, 07:16:11 AM
According to the Tulsa World, it lasted for ten months.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070801_1_A15_KWorl74441

Ethics is subject about receipt of District 2 e-mails
ETHICAL QUESTIONS
Chris Medlock Former city councilor Medlock has been receiving e-mails intended for his successor, Westcott.

By P.J. LASSEK World Staff Writer
8/1/2007


Ethical questions are swirling around former city councilor Chris Medlock and his nearly yearlong receipt of council e-mails that were intended for his successor, Rick Westcott. "What bothers me is that Chris continued to receive my e-mails for 10 months after he left office and never called to inform me that he was still getting them," Westcott said.

"In my opinion he has violated the privacy of all the constituents and officials that sent me an e-mail because he continued to get them and not tell anybody about it," Westcott said. Don Burdick, a former campaign manager for Medlock when he ran for City Council, said he has some "serious concerns as to what happened."

"I agree with Rick that Chris' actions at the least was discourteous, at the most was criminal, and more than likely it certainly seems unethical," Burdick said. Although Medlock gave an interview to a local television station, he refused to speak to the Tulsa World and requested that all questions be submitted in writing, to which he also has not responded.

Westcott said e-mail content was showing up in Medlock's personal Internet blog and during his political commentary as a guest on a morning talkshow on radio station KFAQ-1170 AM. Medlock is now one of the hosts of the show. "His sources he claimed to have apparently came from my e-mails," Westcott said. He also said that "sources are people you talk to. Intercepting e-mail messages from a City Council computer is not a source; that's an ethical violation." Medlock told KRJH Channel 2 that it wasn't up to him to disable a feature that sent a blind copy of council e-mails to his personal e-mail address, it was up to the council staff to do it. Council Administrator Don Cannon said a former employee should have audited Westcott's desktop computer and disabled the feature.

Because of the incident, increased security was installed on the council's computer system, which is a different system than the rest of city, Cannon said. Burdick and Westcott both supported Medlock during a failed attempt to oust him from his council office in 2005. Medlock supported Westcott as his successor when he ran unsuccessfully for mayor.

"I would hope if somebody is getting e-mails addressed to someone else, regardless of who they are or the situation, that they would have the personal integrity to say something," Burdick said. The e-mails were intercepted from April 2006 when Medlock left office until last February when the situation was detected, Westcott said.

The e-mail situation was detected after a council aide sent an e-mail with an attachment to Westcott's District 2 council e-mail address and then received a notice that the file was too big and could not be delivered to Medlock's personal e-mail address. That triggered council staff to look into how Medlock got that e-mail.

Tulsa County District Attorney Tim Harris said he told Westcott that with the absence of a formal investigation it would be difficult to determine criminal intent. Council Attorney Drew Rees agreed, adding that many of the e-mails would have been subject to an Open Records request, which Medlock could have sought through the proper channels.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: sgrizzle on August 01, 2007, 07:26:53 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

So, some City IT person let us down. It's not the fault of anyone else. Too bad we don't hold those standards for all City employees.



I doubt an IT person set it up in the first place.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: AngieB on August 01, 2007, 07:55:08 AM
The plot thickens...

I said earlier "Much ado about nothing", but now I have to rethink that statement. Yes, IT should have found and disabled the auto-forward, but it's obvious that Medlock just sat back and waited to receive something juicy.

The ethical, moral, and just plain considerate thing to do would have been to reply to the very first forwarded email and say hey, Rick, I forgot to turn off the forwarding rule...

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Wrinkle on August 01, 2007, 08:05:44 AM
For that matter, maybe Westcott's a mole.
He was exposed and now has to cover.

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on August 01, 2007, 08:10:13 AM
quote:
He mentioned on-air that any emails from a certain period can be requested via Freedom of Info Act. In his sick mind, then, he wrote his own approval.
Let me get you a towel to wipe up the drool...Medlock was reitterating what Rees had already mentioned in an earlier interview.  It's a case of CYA at this point.  Until Rees mentioned it, I don't think Medlock ever used it as an excuse...in fact, I don't think Medlock was forward looking enough to even devise an excuse like that.

I get that you hate this guy, and that's okay, but please keep the tinfoil hat type comments to minimum.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Wrinkle on August 01, 2007, 08:12:47 AM
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

So, some City IT person let us down. It's not the fault of anyone else. Too bad we don't hold those standards for all City employees.



I doubt an IT person set it up in the first place.



Who set it up is not relevant. When personel changes, IT is responsible for clearing out the old and setting up the new. IT dropped the ball.

Chris could have called Rick and mentioned it, but he, like me, probably thought it funny, figured it'd get handled eventually.

Whatever else, email isn't private, especially these.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on August 01, 2007, 08:53:50 AM
^It is this thought process that has put a wrinkle in our country's ethics!
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on August 01, 2007, 08:58:53 AM
Ba dum dum ching!  He'll be here all week folks.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on August 01, 2007, 08:58:55 AM
[WIPING DROOL FROM THE EDGES OF AN OPEN MOUTH]

Permission to revise and extend . . .

There I go again, trusting Medlock.  This does sound like a bigger deal.

Are there any laws that have been broken?

[SLURP SLURP]

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on August 01, 2007, 09:00:08 AM
quote:
Are there any laws that have been broken?
Oh boy Timmy!! Golly geez we can sure hope so!
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Friendly Bear on August 01, 2007, 11:02:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:
Originally posted by Wrinkle

So, some City IT person let us down. It's not the fault of anyone else. Too bad we don't hold those standards for all City employees.



I doubt an IT person set it up in the first place.




Who set it up is not relevant. When personel changes, IT is responsible for clearing out the old and setting up the new. IT dropped the ball.

Chris could have called Rick and mentioned it, but he, like me, probably thought it funny, figured it'd get handled eventually.

Whatever else, email isn't private, especially these.




As is the case of any "terminated" employee in private industry, there is some type of formal clearance process to revoke access, collect keys, badges, company credit cards, calculate final payroll check, explain COBRA benefits, etc.

The employee has only the responsibility to comply with returning the company property.

If the company does not turn off an Email forwarding feature of his former CITY COUNCIL email account, then it is NOT the former employee or city councilor's responsibility to do ANYTHING.

The councilor has not ever, as slanted in the Half-Truth version of events reported in the Lorton's World ever "INTERCEPTED" an email message.

The information services unit at the city just dropped the ball.  Indicative of the quality fo their management, not indicative of the quality of Mr. Medlock's character.

And, yet Westcott waits another 5 MONTHS to out Medlock, after the email forwarding is rescinded?

Puleeeeze!

These former pals have been feuding since Westcott took office, and then proceeded to quickly transform into a Charter Member of the Good Old Boys/Go-Along-to-Get-Along team of Councilors.

Medlock challenged him about his sniveling conduct, and Westcott in turn revoked his endorsement of Medlock in the State Representative race.

They are apparently no longer such good pals.

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: AngieB on August 01, 2007, 12:00:16 PM
What IS relevant is, to quote a phrase, "Doing what's right." Chris didn't do what was right and alert Rick to the situation.

Who cares who's "responsibility" it was to discover and disable the auto-forward. It was wrong of Chris to just sit back and let it continue.

I've been a fan of Chris'. I was at the mayoral primary watch party and shed a tear or two when he conceded. So yeah, I'm really disappointed in him.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Friendly Bear on August 01, 2007, 12:23:44 PM
quote:
Originally posted by TulsaMINI

What IS relevant is, to quote a phrase, "Doing what's right." Chris didn't do what was right and alert Rick to the situation.

Who cares who's "responsibility" it was to discover and disable the auto-forward. It was wrong of Chris to just sit back and let it continue.

I've been a fan of Chris'. I was at the mayoral primary watch party and shed a tear or two when he conceded. So yeah, I'm really disappointed in him.



I think, within reasonable parameters, if my former employer email account continued to be forwarded to my personal email account, after a short period of time I would contact my former employer with this information.

However, the former employee is not REQUIRED to contact the former employer.

If there were a Financial aspect to this transaction, where former Councilor Medlock for instance continued to receive his salary or parking allowance in error, then I believe he would have a responsiblity to contact his employer.

A COPY of a e-mail?

No.  There's no crime.  Despite the Lorton's World's histrionics, there was no INTERCEPTION of the message.

The original INTENDEE of the email did  in fact continue to receive all Emails:

dist2@tulsacouncil.org

Apparently, this event also says a little more about current Councilor Westcott's lack of computer savey.  

Or, maybe Mr. Westcott simply did not want to be bothered with copies of the emails forwarded to his personal or business Email address.......

Just maybe Mr. Westcott didn't want to WORK as hard at his lowly paid city councilor job as his predecessor.......

When you kick of a self-created scandal, Councilor Westcott, even you cannot determine where it will eventually run its course........
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on August 01, 2007, 12:41:21 PM
Still looks bad.  As an elected official of the GOP - is he not on the Republicant Statewide Committee or whatever they call it - to receive confidential emails and just let it slide is stupid.

Why give your enemies ammunition?

[SLOBBER, SLOBBER, DROOOOOOL]
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on August 01, 2007, 12:42:34 PM
Integrity is something you have or don't have....there is no in between. Sorry Chris Meddlesome, you have no integrity.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: bokworker on August 01, 2007, 12:55:42 PM
FB, interesting what you will come to the defense of and what you will rail against...

I'm just sayin'...
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on August 01, 2007, 01:01:59 PM
I'm really not clear on the law regarding misdirected emails, but I don't think he's under any obligation to notify unless there was a disclaimer attached to the email warning the recipient of the confidential nature of the communication.  The only reason you jokers are saying it's "unethical" is because you don't like his politics.  I really don't care one way or the other about the guy, but what constitutes "ethical behavior" is in the eye of the beholder unless you can prove he violated a law.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: sgrizzle on August 01, 2007, 01:10:33 PM
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw

I'm really not clear on the law regarding misdirected emails, but I don't think he's under any obligation to notify unless there was a disclaimer attached to the email warning the recipient of the confidential nature of the communication.  The only reason you jokers are saying it's "unethical" is because you don't like his politics.  I really don't care one way or the other about the guy, but what constitutes "ethical behavior" is in the eye of the beholder unless you can prove he violated a law.



The contents of those emails were the intellectual property (sound familiar) of the city. Likely there is a city computer access policy that also reiterates that. We can only hope medlock didn't use hotmail as that opens a whole other can of worms.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Aa5drvr on August 01, 2007, 01:11:14 PM
dist2@tulsacouncil.org

Testing, Testing.

Chris did you get this?
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on August 01, 2007, 01:21:57 PM
I don't have problems with Chris' politics even though I disagree with them at times. But, I do have a problem with accepting someone with no integrity who holds himself out there as credible.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: iplaw on August 01, 2007, 01:27:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle

quote:
Originally posted by iplaw

I'm really not clear on the law regarding misdirected emails, but I don't think he's under any obligation to notify unless there was a disclaimer attached to the email warning the recipient of the confidential nature of the communication.  The only reason you jokers are saying it's "unethical" is because you don't like his politics.  I really don't care one way or the other about the guy, but what constitutes "ethical behavior" is in the eye of the beholder unless you can prove he violated a law.



The contents of those emails were the intellectual property (sound familiar) of the city. Likely there is a city computer access policy that also reiterates that. We can only hope medlock didn't use hotmail as that opens a whole other can of worms.

What IP right was violated?  The only right that might apply is copyright, but he hasn't violated that right either.

This really deals more with confidentiality and ownership of documents.  There may be policies that deal with what the city considers to be confidential info, but a quick review of the law in this area reinforces my initial thoughts, that unless there was a disclaimer they have no claim.  It's certianly attaches no criminal penalty.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Friendly Bear on August 01, 2007, 01:47:28 PM
quote:
Originally posted by bokworker

FB, interesting what you will come to the defense of and what you will rail against...

I'm just sayin'...



Wasn't one black eye today enough?  Coming back for the other eye now, are you?

Okay.  Here goes.

I think, within reasonable parameters, if my former employer email account continued to be forwarded to my personal email account, after a short period of time, I would contact my former employer with this information.  

That's what I would do.

However, the former employee is not REQUIRED to contact the former employer.

If there were a Financial aspect to this transaction, where former Councilor Medlock for instance continued to receive his salary or parking allowance in error, then I believe he would have a responsiblity to contact his employer.

A COPY of an e-mail?

No. There's no crime.

Despite the Lorton's World's histrionics, there was no INTERCEPTION of the message.

The original INTENDEE of the email did in fact continue to receive all Emails:

dist2@tulsacouncil.org

If your bank computer department configured your Outlook or Lotus Notes e-mail account to provide a automatic carbon copy to another email address, the problem would probably be solved when that user's individual account got revoked upon termination.

The generic email addresses used by the city meant they needed to be more on their toes.

And, being the City Goobermint, they weren't on their toes.

Medlock probably found the information humerous to continue to receive his old e-mail.

He however, could have put a stop to it, after a REASONABLE error period.

He was not, however, under any requirement, since he did not DO anything.  HE did not intercept anything.

And he simply didn'have to.

I think I would have.  But, that's just because I'm an old softie.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: guido911 on August 01, 2007, 02:07:17 PM
From now on, when I read/hear "sources say" from this guy (who is part of the news reporting media) I will wonder how and where he obtained the information.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: tim huntzinger on August 01, 2007, 02:28:12 PM
Now I understand what that recall thing was all about.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Friendly Bear on August 01, 2007, 02:33:45 PM
quote:
Originally posted by guido911

From now on, when I read/hear "sources say" from this guy (who is part of the news reporting media) I will wonder how and where he obtained the information.



The arch-evil nemesis of former City Councilor John Benjamin (now Bixby resident) are the local nattering, nay-sayers of negatism.

a.k.a. the Dissenters.  

There are more than a few to keep Medlock & Company fed with juicy insider news tidbits.

Emails from former constituents (and now neighbors) complaining about potholes would definitely not be big news.

I'm sure Mr. Medlock & Company will have plenty to talk about.

He's got some powerful enemies.

He also may have a few friends hereabouts.

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: aoxamaxoa on August 01, 2007, 03:27:07 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Friendly Bear

quote:
Originally posted by bokworker

FB, interesting what you will come to the defense of and what you will rail against...

I'm just sayin'...



Wasn't one black eye today enough?  Coming back for the other eye now, are you?

Okay.  Here goes.

I think, within reasonable parameters, if my former employer email account continued to be forwarded to my personal email account, after a short period of time, I would contact my former employer with this information.  

That's what I would do.

However, the former employee is not REQUIRED to contact the former employer.

If there were a Financial aspect to this transaction, where former Councilor Medlock for instance continued to receive his salary or parking allowance in error, then I believe he would have a responsiblity to contact his employer.

A COPY of an e-mail?

No. There's no crime.

Despite the Lorton's World's histrionics, there was no INTERCEPTION of the message.

The original INTENDEE of the email did in fact continue to receive all Emails:

dist2@tulsacouncil.org

If your bank computer department configured your Outlook or Lotus Notes e-mail account to provide a automatic carbon copy to another email address, the problem would probably be solved when that user's individual account got revoked upon termination.

The generic email addresses used by the city meant they needed to be more on their toes.

And, being the City Goobermint, they weren't on their toes.

Medlock probably found the information humerous to continue to receive his old e-mail.

He however, could have put a stop to it, after a REASONABLE error period.

He was not, however, under any requirement, since he did not DO anything.  HE did not intercept anything.

And he simply didn'have to.

I think I would have.  But, that's just because I'm an old softie.




Lacking integrity is not criminal. It's a character flaw. Unfortunately, it's becoming more and more commonplace.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Wrinkle on August 01, 2007, 03:34:10 PM
Actually, the concept of Westcott being a mole solves all the incongruencies.

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Wilbur on August 01, 2007, 04:27:01 PM
I agree the moral thing to do was call the council office and tell them to stop the emails from being forwarded.

But remember, he is receiving copies of emails that are open to the public.  Unfortunately, those of us in government have no privacy.  Thus, all our emails, instant messages, cell phone records, telephone records ........  are public record and available to anyone.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: RecycleMichael on August 01, 2007, 04:36:49 PM
I agree with Wilbur.

The right thing to do was to notify someone at the city that you were getting e-mails that were not intended for you.

He didn't do that.

Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Double A on August 01, 2007, 07:04:17 PM
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw

Simple forwarding.  Work email accounts are frequently forwarded to people so that they can work from home.  Especially when a company doesn't have a proper email exchange server that people can log onto at home or a replicating program.  I'm guessing the city isn't very technologically advanced...


                                               That is a scary thought considering what the head of IT makes annually.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: RecycleMichael on August 01, 2007, 07:24:37 PM
More class envy, doubleA?

The city information technology person was not hired when this problem occured, but don't let facts get in your way of attacking innocent people.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: shadows on August 15, 2007, 12:03:38 PM
I can't see what all the screaming is about.   There are disclaimers on the internet all the time that others can assess the e-mails.  A court of appeals sent a case back to the district court overruling a lower court on the  FOIA.  Since the address of the e-mail involve the city council which involves taxpayers funds, all information is subject to the FOIA, except the few exceptions exempted by law which the city is obligated to itemize.  

Thinking back when a city commissioner used the city copy machine to make some personal copies that cause quite an  upset; I relate this to what kind of personal messages are received and sent with city owned property? (computers)  The information, sent or received, would be relevant to the production of government, not to be hidden from the people.    

Having used the FOIA to obtain city information, it can be done but they will throw everything they can think of in the way before they release it.  I have had some good experience with that.

I would believe that he was under no obligation to cancel the forwarding as all information should have been limited to the public interest.  He may have needed to call and tell someone that the e-mails were cluttering up his hard drive and he was tired of deleting it.  

PS The ruling is published in today TW and should be of interest to all parties on this form.    
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Gold on August 21, 2007, 02:31:10 PM
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw

quote:
He mentioned on-air that any emails from a certain period can be requested via Freedom of Info Act. In his sick mind, then, he wrote his own approval.
Let me get you a towel to wipe up the drool...Medlock was reitterating what Rees had already mentioned in an earlier interview.  It's a case of CYA at this point.  Until Rees mentioned it, I don't think Medlock ever used it as an excuse...in fact, I don't think Medlock was forward looking enough to even devise an excuse like that.

I get that you hate this guy, and that's okay, but please keep the tinfoil hat type comments to minimum.



I'm pretty sure Medlock's supporters (Michael Delgiorno, for the love) have the monopoly on tinfoil hats in this town.  I'm glad there were enough people left in town to see through Medlock and stop before he did any additional damage.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: Gold on August 21, 2007, 02:56:10 PM
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw

quote:
He mentioned on-air that any emails from a certain period can be requested via Freedom of Info Act. In his sick mind, then, he wrote his own approval.
Let me get you a towel to wipe up the drool...Medlock was reitterating what Rees had already mentioned in an earlier interview.  It's a case of CYA at this point.  Until Rees mentioned it, I don't think Medlock ever used it as an excuse...in fact, I don't think Medlock was forward looking enough to even devise an excuse like that.

I get that you hate this guy, and that's okay, but please keep the tinfoil hat type comments to minimum.



Pretty sure that Medlock's supporters cornered the tinfoil hat market a long time ago.  I'm just glad Tulsa's voters figured out how ridiculous he was and stopped him.
Title: Medlock and someone else's e-mails
Post by: shadows on August 24, 2007, 08:19:34 PM
In the best interest to the citizens of Tulsa, all councilors e-mails, sent over the public furnished resources, should be open for the public viewing as restricting them could be construed as a violation the same as the telephone conference phase of the of the open meetings act.

If such distribution is sent to the required number, as defined in the act, then this should be looked into whereas such e-mailing among council members possibly would include discussions on decisions that is to be brought before the council.