University Times

One of two Ohio men accused of making cyberthreats against the University is seeking to change his not-guilty plea.

Brett Hudson, 26, of Hillsboro, Ohio, pleaded not guilty to conspiracy charges and reserved his right to a jury trial in a Sept. 6 arraignment in federal court in Pittsburgh before Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan. However, in documents filed Tuesday, a change of plea hearing was set for 4 p.m. Sept. 25 before Judge Joy Flowers Conti.

Hudson’s attorney, Warner Mariani, did not immediately return the University Times’ call seeking comment.

Hudson and Alexander Waterland, 24, of Loveland, Ohio, are accused of targeting Pitt between late April and mid-May with threats that claimed they were associated with the hacktivist group Anonymous. The threats were posted on YouTube by “AnonOperative13” and also sent via email and publicized via Twitter.

Waterland pleaded not guilty in an Aug. 28 arraignment. (See Aug. 30 University Times.) His attorney, Anthony M. Bittner, did not immediately respond to the University Times’ request for comment on whether Waterland’s plea would change as well.

In the postings, AnonOperative13 claimed to have obtained confidential information from University computer servers and threatened to release the data unless the chancellor posted an apology on the Pitt web site. (See May 3 University Times.)

According to the federal indictment, information including identifying information of students and faculty was downloaded from the University web site in late April.

Soon after, the threat appeared on YouTube and a link to the posting was emailed to the University’s webmaster. The link also was sent via Twitter to Pitt administrators.

In early May, AnonOperative13 posted a comment on YouTube that threatened to release the information if the demand for a posted apology was not met. In mid-May, Pitt police and the Pitt webmaster received an email that also threatened to release the information if the public apology was not posted.

The men each face up to five years in prison and a fine of $250,000.

Both were released on bond.

Under the terms of their release, all their computer use is being monitored.

—Kimberly K. Barlow