main

Windows 2000 SP3 setup error message patch

configure   on 24 January 2002 - 09:17 · no comments & 323 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Thanks bob.kahlon for the heads up :D

When applying Windows 2000 Service Pack 3 (SP3) on a debug version of Windows 2000 that has been upgraded to Windows 2000 Service Pack 2 (SP2), you may receive an error message. This problem occurs because a registry key that is set during the installation of Windows 2000 SP2 conflicts with the Update.exe install program. Microsoft has released a script that you can run before you apply Windows 2000 SP3 that removes the registry key. Download now to prevent this error from occuring.

Download: Windows 2000 SP3 Patch (Setup error message)
News source: Warp2Search - Windows 2000 Patch: SP3 Setup Error Message!



After asking a battery of questions necessary for such a motion, Judge Trumbull said she had no choice but to allow him to waive his right to an attorney, but she didn't soften her opinion of his chances on his own.

"I don't think you have the foggiest idea what you are doing," Trumbull told Heckenkamp, after repeatedly advising him that "it's not in your best interest to do this."

Granick, the clinical director of Stanford University's Center for Internet and Society, told Trumbull that she had advised her client not to represent himself. She would not comment on the matter to the media, citing attorney-client privilege. The judge held a 10-minute closed-door session to confer with both Granick and Heckenkamp.

Unable to dissuade him after a 75-minute proceeding, Judge Trumbull let Heckenkamp waive his right to an attorney.

"You are a bright young man," Trumbull said. "You have a lot of education, and you have no idea what to do in a courtroom."

Heckenkamp has been charged with seven counts of accessing computers without authorization and eight counts of intercepting computer communications. The charges stem from intrusions into the networks at eBay, Exodus, Juniper, Lycos, E*Trade and Cygnus throughout 1999, according to an indictment filed in December 2000.

In addition to the 15 charges, the U.S. district attorney's office charged Heckenkamp with tampering with a witness. Heckenkamp is also being tried in San Diego County on 10 additional charges of computer intrusion.

Standing still, his head slightly bowed, Heckenkamp answered questions regarding his health, whether he had been coerced into dismissing his attorney, and whether he understood criminal procedures and federal rules of evidence.

"A little," he answered to the last two questions. When the judge pressed him as to what that meant, he haltingly admitted his lack of knowledge and then answered, "Not really."

More than a dozen times, the judge advised him against representing himself and added that she was more than willing to give Heckenkamp more time to consider his decision or to seek additional legal opinions on the matter.

Heckenkamp refused to be swayed, however. "I don't think a court-appointed lawyer would help me," he said.

In the only hint so far as to why he has sought to dismiss his lawyer, the 22-year-old former security professional, dressed in the orange and gray prison uniform of Santa Clara County Jail, told Judge Trumbull, "My counsel may be more suited to a plea bargain and not to a trial."

Heckenkamp will return to court late Wednesday afternoon to attempt to free himself from custody, so that he can prepare his own case. He also will have to file a similar motion in San Diego court to dismiss Granick from representing him in that case.

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are no additional comments

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)