[HN Gopher] A man who accidentally started an assassin hiring we...
___________________________________________________________________
A man who accidentally started an assassin hiring website
Author : 4ndrewl
Score : 218 points
Date : 2021-12-24 22:41 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
| thysultan wrote:
| Accidentally started an honeypot for amateur assassins and
| assassin connoisseurs.
| ipsin wrote:
| "So far, nearly 150 lives have been saved as a direct result of
| the site and my actions."
|
| I get that those 150 lives were all at risk, because a not-too-
| bright someone wanted them killed, but... I'm also curious how
| many of those would manage to kill their targets if they weren't
| intercepted?
|
| This isn't an argument against intervention, since they
| demonstrated an intent to kill. But I'm legitimately wondering
| how often people with grudges connect with actual contract
| killers.
| MomoXenosaga wrote:
| My country is turning into a European Mexico because the middle
| class needs their cocaine to get through life. Twenty year olds
| are getting payed just 20k to kill someone.
|
| The funny thing is that all these drive bye gang bangers are
| all invariably caught by the police and then spend the rest of
| their life in jail. Don't underestimate the stupidity of man.
| cosmodisk wrote:
| I once had a chat with my colleague about how the country he
| was born in has changed over the last 20 years. He expressed
| concerns about safety, gang crimes,etc. Yet he was the one
| consuming white powder that is responsible for majority of
| those crimes he's concerned about...
| johnisgood wrote:
| The War on Drugs has failed a long time ago though, and I
| thought it was obvious. Such crimes exist because of the
| War on Drugs. That said, legalization is not enough. If the
| taxes are too high (as it happened to be the case in
| California for weed), then you will still have a black
| market for this white powder.
|
| There is black market here for meat, too.
| rosndo wrote:
| The powder cannot be responsible for those crimes, if it
| was, the government could solve the problem overnight by
| simply allowing a legal supply of white powder. And if
| that's the case, how is the government not to blame?
| pessimizer wrote:
| Are you sure it's the fault of the people who drove the
| value of inexpensive to produce substances used in tiny
| amounts up by multiple orders of magnitude?
| FartyMcFarter wrote:
| Which country is this?
| rosndo wrote:
| None, MomoXenosaga has no idea how bad things are in Mexico
| and is just regurgitating alarmist talking points of right-
| wing populists.
| not_really wrote:
| Spoken like a true left-wing populist...
| rosndo wrote:
| Spoken like a realist. I've frequently interacted with
| the worst parts of Europe, my Telegram is constantly
| spammed with ads for guns in Benelux (FGC-9 really
| booming lately). I've stayed in the "ghetto" in Sweden
| where shootings happen on a weekly basis, spent a month
| in Transnistria, sat down for lunch with separatist
| fighters in Ukraine.
|
| Nowhere in Europe does the situation come anywhere close
| to being as fucked up as in Mexico, not even in the
| literal warzones.
| pessimizer wrote:
| That's the same problem as with all of the FBI terrorist
| entrapment. What if people have an honest desire to kill, but
| lack the intelligence, means, and/or motivation?
|
| Do you give them ideas, pretend to give them the means, and
| encourage (or even nag/pressure) them? I mean, we do, but is
| that a good thing? Especially seeing as while we're doing it
| we're giving them ideas, we may accidentally give them the
| means (or at least an idea of how to find the means
| themselves), and in a time crunch to show results the pressure
| that we put on them to carry out the act may actually become
| threatening?
|
| More applicable to this specific case, which is obviously why
| the guy is sensitive about it, is that people sending
| unsolicited requests to murder people to a site called
| rentahitman.com are very stupid. They're the _least likely to
| be able to carry it out,_ although I acknowledge that 's
| probably somewhat offset because they may also be too stupid to
| understand the probability or consequences of failing to get
| away with it.
|
| The writer sees the same thing, which is why they gloss over
| the fact that he has put in effort to dress the site as a
| website where you order hitmen online, with splashes of satire
| to signal to people of normal intelligence and ability to
| detect sarcasm that it is a joke. It is never mentioned
| explicitly that he's dressing the site that way now until it's
| implicated by the discussion of the "jokes and clues to show it
| wasn't the real deal" halfway through the article.
|
| Before I got to that, I thought he was a guy who had an
| innocent site marketing himself as a network contractor who
| would get sucked into the nefarious plans of stupid strangers
| because of his domain name. Afterwards, I decided that he's a
| guy who got sucked into one nefarious plan of one stupid
| stranger, got her busted, and loved being the center of
| attention and having his ego stroked by law enforcement. To get
| that feeling back, again and again, he turned his site into an
| phishing expedition for people stupid enough to think click-to-
| murder could be real. This is the same as Nigerian prince scams
| that intentionally use bad grammar and spelling to limit the
| replies to suckers. It's a confidence scam filtering the crowd
| down to the marks.
|
| The moral hazard I see is that if you sold the site
| convincingly, in a way that could trick people of closer to
| normal intelligence, that might result in danger for you.
| Somebody normal tricked into prison by this might send a real
| hit man after you (or maybe a lawyer.) So instead, he focuses
| on people like the moron he started with, who don't scare him
| at all. If they don't scare him, are they really scary?
| syshum wrote:
| >>Do you give them ideas, pretend to give them the means, and
| encourage (or even nag/pressure) them? I mean, we do, but is
| that a good thing?
|
| All of that should be considered entrapment, and law
| enforcement should not be doing it
|
| for FBI, and other law enforcement I have a pretty simple
| standard, that many people do not agree with. law enforcement
| should not be allowed to break the law to enforce the law. We
| however allow them to do so all time.
|
| In relation to this story, it is simple. If you just put up a
| site like this, people then contact you, and as law
| enforcement you setup a meeting let them incriminate
| themselves no problems, you did not break the law, it was
| unsolicited by you, etc.
|
| Flip this though and say you embed an agent at a support
| group of some kind, this agent then prompts a person with "I
| know someone that could take care of that for you" after
| establishing a relationship with the person, then over the
| course of months they entice the person into committing a
| crime. That is where the line is cross IMO. That is where law
| enforcement is today
| pessimizer wrote:
| > All of that should be considered entrapment, and law
| enforcement should not be doing it
|
| Not in courts in the USA. Entrapment is when you convince
| someone to do something they wouldn't do if not for your
| encouragement. This is painted as making it easy for
| someone to do what they want to do. It's why they target
| schizophrenics and idiots.
|
| > law enforcement should not be allowed to break the law to
| enforce the law. We however allow them to do so all time.
|
| That's not a simple standard. If we allow law enforcement
| to break some laws legally, they aren't breaking the law.
| It's against the law for you to break my laptop to pieces,
| but it's not against to law for me to break my laptop to
| pieces.
| syshum wrote:
| >>Not in courts in the USA.
|
| hmmm I wonder if that is why I stated "SHOULD BE" not
| that is was. Clearly the indication was that I believe
| the current position by the court system is wrong, and
| that we have allowed law enforcement to much latitude in
| this area. That we as a society to seek to more tightly
| control what law enforcement is allowed to do in the name
| of "law and order", then maybe we would not have the
| clear abuse of power we see on the streets every day.
|
| >>If we allow law enforcement to break some laws legally,
| they aren't breaking the law.
|
| Again words matter, clearly I should SHOULD NOT, again
| indicating my bleif that there should not be exemptions
| in the law for law enforcement like they have today. We
| as a society would suffer far less abuse from law
| enforcement if we did not create a separate class of
| individual called "law enforcement" that we exempt from
| the laws that everyone else has to obey. Again to be
| clear this is a position I believe society SHOULD adopt,
| not that I believe it has, thus commenting "well under
| the law today...." is pointless as that is not the
| conversation. I am fully aware that today we do exempt
| law enforcement from the very laws they are to enforce
| upon others. I find that to be unethical and untenable
|
| >>It's against the law for you to break my laptop to
| pieces, but it's not against to law for me to break my
| laptop to pieces.
|
| That is a ridiculous analogy, that that then some how
| conclude that we are all property of the government, and
| by extension law enforcement? That some how property
| rights apply to abuses by government agent? Really?
| BrianHenryIE wrote:
| Clearly we need a double-blind study.
| CaptainJustin wrote:
| I feel sorry for the control group
| littlestymaar wrote:
| Being part of the control group often sucks: what if you're
| bing given a placebo instead of a revolutionary cancer
| drug.
| avalys wrote:
| In almost all such circumstances, the control group is
| still given a "real" cancer drug that has already been
| proven, and the study looks for the new drug to
| demonstrate an improvement versus the current state-of-
| the-art.
| niekmaas wrote:
| There is no way for us to know if the drug is a
| "revulotionary cancer drug" if we don't test it in a
| double blinded randomized controlled trial (RCT). Indeed
| it would be disappointing the later find out you were
| treated with the placebo, but so many drugs or other
| interventions have to potential to be revolutionary but
| fail to really change the clinical decision making later
| on.
| amcoastal wrote:
| I guess I never understood placebo trials in a lot of
| medical situations. Like what we are discussing here, a
| "revolutionary cancer drug", why even bother letting
| people die giving them placebos? Its cancer. Its not like
| you can placebo effect the cancer away. You don't need a
| double blind trial to see if the drug stops the cancer,
| you just give people the drug and observe the cancer! I
| feel like our medical system is pretty wack. Or maybe I'm
| entirely wrong and you can placebo cancer away.
| setr wrote:
| A common medical joke:
|
| A cold takes 7 days to resolve on its own. With modern
| medicine, it will take merely a week !
|
| The placebo is not to eliminate the cancer, it's to
| guarantee that we know the "normal" path without the
| drug, and gives a comparison point between the control
| and the target. The fundamental problem is that cancer
| can just resolve/improve on its own, or rather without
| intervention... so just poking and watching isn't
| sufficient proof of the drug's efficacy
| ithkuil wrote:
| Yes.
|
| Yet it's so hard to have a good intuition about that.
| We're wired to think in terms of action and agency and be
| morally judged on its basis. This is deeply rooted in
| human psychology and acts as a foundation for many of our
| behaviours, from religion to vaccine hesitancy.
|
| Ask anybody I'd they think it's more likely that a
| disease just went away on its own or if there was some
| reason, "something".
|
| Most people will tell it's more likely something
| happened, a miracle of some kind for some reasons. Deep
| down there is always a reason for things to happen, but
| "your cells in your body did a good job" just doesn't
| sound right.
|
| Even when people accept the idea that the body can fix
| itself pretty well, they tend to swing the pendulum too
| much and assume the body can do just anything ....
| provided you do (agency) the right motions (potions,
| talismans, right diet, right prayers...)
| daedalus_f wrote:
| That is not how randomised controlled trials in
| conditions like cancer work. They are almost always a
| riff on new drug + current best treatment regime vs
| current best regime. Sometimes a drug within a regime is
| swapped with the new agent and the two compared in terms
| of survival and toxicity.
|
| Progress in cancer treatment is almost always achieved by
| incremental tweaking of how we treat it. There are a few
| revolutionary agents based on specific disease mechanisms
| in certain cancers (e.g. imatinib [1]) but these are in
| the minority - cancer is protean.
|
| [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imatinib
| mellavora wrote:
| or what if the revolution is lead by Robespierre?
| hawk_ wrote:
| It's ok the study will be conducted with mice.
| ufmace wrote:
| That's what I was thinking. Yeah anybody who tries to actually
| hire a hit man through that site ought to be checked out.
| Claiming that lives were saved seems a bit over the top though
| - if you're trying to use a random website nobody has heard of
| to hire a hit man, the odds seem mighty slim that you'll ever
| find somebody prepared to actually kill someone.
| [deleted]
| dragonwriter wrote:
| > if you're trying to use a random website nobody has heard
| of to hire a hit man
|
| To be fair, that's probably less crazy than using a popular
| website everyone has heard of for the same purpose.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| Obviously the popularity of the site can be both a benefit
| and a detriment, a very popular site increases the chance
| that it has hitmen among its users, but it also increases
| the chance of narcs. We can see therefore that is what is
| needed is a popular site with the ability to deliver
| targeted messages to the people most likely to be hitmen.
| Finally this story shows the kind of problems you can
| encounter trying to hire hitmen through sites with a
| conscientious and moral leadership, that should be avoided.
|
| Use Facebook.
| lmilcin wrote:
| You can argue that actually more lives have been saved because
| after a public stunt like that a lot of potential murderers
| will be deterred from searching for a killer for hire on the
| Internet.
|
| It will also make more people aware than just searching for
| killer makes them liable if somebody thinks they were serious
| about this.
| ummonk wrote:
| "It will also make more people aware than just searching for
| killer makes them liable if somebody thinks they were serious
| about this."
|
| Not sure that's true - if you click through to the CNN
| article (https://edition.cnn.com/2021/12/12/us/hireahitman-
| website-cr...), the police will set up a meet and check
| whether the people actually want to go through with hiring a
| hitman.
| lmilcin wrote:
| This is one of proving somebody is serious. It is not
| required, though.
|
| In general, Police will set up a meet because it is much
| stronger and difficult to refute proof. And they also don't
| have anything to loose - their case cannot be weakened by
| the suspect refusing to come to a meet.
| rlt wrote:
| Yeah, I'd like to see the stats on how many mentally ill or
| cognitively disabled people he unnecessarily had sent to
| prison.
| ghusbands wrote:
| If someone is trying to get people killed, it may be that
| they need help, but other people certainly need protection
| from them, which is meant to be part of the point of the
| prison system.
|
| Also, equating a desire to assassinate with being mentally
| ill or cognitively disabled is doing a disservice to the
| majority of mentally ill or cognitively disabled people who
| do know it's wrong to kill people. I doubt there's a clear
| correlation between desire to kill people and being mentally
| ill or cognitively disabled.
| pessimizer wrote:
| That's not the equation. If you try to fulfill your desire
| to assassinate by clicking a payment option on
| rentahitman.com, you are failing to understand the
| likelihood this plan will be successful. This is absolutely
| a sign of being mentally ill or cognitively disabled.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| A mentally ill or cognitively disabled person is still
| able to operate a knife, blunt weapon, and if they can
| get one, a gun.
| bigiain wrote:
| He hasn't sent anybody to prison.
|
| He's referred some requests to law enforcement, who've than
| taken whatever action they deem necessary. (Admittedly in
| some jurisdictions for some demographics, there might not be
| much distinction there.)
|
| If your angry 13 year old brother or cognitively impaired
| cousin that you didn't get a PS5 for xmas emailed this guy,
| it's spectacularly unlikely the cops would send him to
| prison.
| watwut wrote:
| It is actually more likely the cognitively impaired would
| end up in prison. They people sux even more then usual at
| navigating criminal system. Same for kids.
|
| That being said, the " 13 year old brother or cognitively
| impaired cousin that you didn't get a PS5 for" are an
| actual threat and those around them do need intervention.
| Not reporting them amounts to enabling.
| enkid wrote:
| Right, the problem isn't the guy reporting the people,
| it's some of the stuff leading up to it and after it.
| gumby wrote:
| While I agree I give him a pass: he could simply abandon the
| site but instead continues to run it. If that thought motivates
| him, why not?
|
| Likely some of the people would ultimately try to do the deed
| on their own. Probably a small number, but a bunch of tragedies
| were likely forestalled, even if the seeker is not arrested but
| receives help. Which is probably what happens for people
| outside the US.
| sonicggg wrote:
| That dude just seems like he has too much time on his hands.
| rolleiflex wrote:
| Sure, but many good deeds and about all of science pre 20th
| century was made by people who had too much time on their
| hands.
| spoonjim wrote:
| Everyone gets 24 hours a day. He's doing something
| presumably useful. Are you?
| vntok wrote:
| Why do you think his use of time is presumably useful?
| account-5 wrote:
| They're using the same argument the copyright industry use
| against pirates.
|
| Instead of this person saying they saved 150 lives, the
| copyright industry say the artists lost X amount making the
| assumption each pirate, given no other option, would pay for
| the copy the pirated.
|
| I often am curious how many of those pirates would have
| actually paid.
| teh_infallible wrote:
| If you think about it for even a little bit, it becomes obvious
| that no one would open a legit assassin-for-hire service online.
| Think of logistics of this:
|
| Your assassin has to travel to some random city somewhere and
| take all the risks involved with killing someone, OR..
|
| They rip you off. What recourse would you have against a real
| paid killer? And what help would you get from law enforcement?
| jeroenhd wrote:
| Meal delivery services seem to do quite fine online. What you
| need for a hitman-for-hire scheme is a broad network of
| assassins, preferably paid as little as they will possibly work
| for, and certain availability areas. You enter an address and
| it comes up with a list of hitmen and their preferred murdering
| solution, sort by price, or show a page that your service is
| not available at the specified location yet.
|
| It can be done, though for obvious reasons law enforcement
| would end your operation in days if not hours.
| notimetorelax wrote:
| Well... you'd be ripping off somebody who was ready to kill
| someone. Might not end well in the long run.
| Hjfrf wrote:
| All you need is a security deposit from the assassins before
| they start taking jobs.
|
| Plumbers already have a bond system like that, for example.
|
| If there are enough hitmen, they can just pick up jobs near
| them.
|
| It's not impossible logistically.
| yob28 wrote:
| Lol " he had just saved the lives of three people" typical crap
| from the guardian. No doubt almost none of these people would
| have come to harm from these keyboard warriors. It's amazing that
| anyone reads this rag for anything other than a joke
| lmilcin wrote:
| After so many referrals, it is not hard to believe that at
| least some of these people would actually go through with a
| murder one way or another.
|
| So, yes, I believe this person saved some lives.
| yob28 wrote:
| Hence "almost none", it's almost like you can't read
| avaika wrote:
| What if I submit a request on behalf of someone else? Will this
| someone else get jailed?
| varajelle wrote:
| This reminds me of another story about fake hitmen
| https://www.wired.co.uk/article/kill-list-dark-web-hitmen
| rootusrootus wrote:
| If he's never going to use it for anything legitimate, perhaps
| just give it over to the FBI and they could take away the satire
| from the page and make it look convincing. Forward the
| information directly to the local field office automatically,
| without having to rely on a private citizen to make the
| connection.
| rocqua wrote:
| If the FBI is running it, the defense 'it was entrapment'
| becomes quite a bit easier.
| wdevanny wrote:
| IANAL, but I don't believe that would qualify as entrapment.
|
| https://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633
| trompetenaccoun wrote:
| But it's all about saving lives (and catching mentally
| challenged/ill people while filtering out serious would be
| murderers, apparently).
| jliptzin wrote:
| If anyone is wondering why criminals always seem so dumb it's
| because the smart ones are getting away with it.
| watwut wrote:
| Smart criminals are sitting in boardrooms and generally
| doing economical crime.
| yeetaccount4 wrote:
| Last I heard, about half of homicide cases in the US go
| unsolved. It's probably not the smart half getting caught,
| usually.
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| Even that is the wrong statistic to look at.
|
| The number of homicides that go _undetected_ in the first
| place is at least as important, if not more. In Germany,
| police claim that they solve 94% of homicides, but there
| are estimates that around half don 't get discovered...
| LeonB wrote:
| Good site, but something of a so-called "taxation on stupidity".
| new_guy wrote:
| Openly doxxing himself to people actively trying to hire killers
| doesn't seem too smart.
| Stratoscope wrote:
| I recently submitted a request on this site for a small service.
|
| Reformatted for readability here, and a few details redacted to
| preserve my illusion of privacy: Rent-A-Hitman
| Service Request (HIPPA Compliant) Your Name: Michael
| Geary I certify I'm an: Adult - Over 18 Years Old
| Your eMail Address: mg@ok.mg Your Phone Number: [redacted]
| Your Address (For Field Operative Use Only): [redacted]
| Field Operative Contact Preference: Email Enter Your
| Desired CODE/SAFE Word or Phrase (Optional): Tony Relation
| to Intended Target: Fan Target's Name: James Gandolfini
| Address Where Service Requested: Holsten's Brookdale
| Confectionery 1063 Broad Street Bloomfield, New
| Jersey 07003 What is the reason for contacting us? James
| Gandolfini is dead. Describe what services you would like
| performed: James died tragically at the age of 51. I want
| you to bring him back to life. I last saw him at the
| address listed above. I sent a modest donation to your
| PayPal account to help you consider my request. Guido, if
| you can perform this small service, there is a hundred boxes of
| ziti in it for you. How did you hear about Rent-A-Hitman
| (Paste Link - For Marketing Purposes Only):
| https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/12/us/hireahitman-website-cracks-
| crimes-cec/index.html
|
| References for anyone unfamiliar with two coded messages in my
| request...
|
| "a hundred boxes of ziti": In _The Sopranos_ , a "box of ziti" is
| a code word for $1000. "Tony tells Christopher to get "five boxes
| of ziti" for David Scatino. In the morning, Christopher tells
| Tony that David is down "forty-five boxes of ziti"." -- _The
| Sopranos Wiki_
|
| "a small service": "Don Vito Corleone was a man to whom everybody
| came for help, and never were they disappointed. He made no empty
| promises, nor the craven excuse that his hands were tied by more
| powerful forces in the world than himself. It was not necessary
| that he be your friend, it was not even important that you had no
| means with which to repay him. Only one thing was required. That
| you, you yourself, proclaim your friendship. And then, no matter
| how poor or powerless the supplicant, Don Corleone would take
| that man's troubles to his heart. And he would let nothing stand
| in the way to a solution of that man's woe. His reward?
| Friendship, the respectful title of "Don," and sometimes the more
| affectionate salutation of "Godfather." And perhaps, to show
| respect only, never for profit, some humble gift--a gallon of
| homemade wine or a basket of peppered taralles specially baked to
| grace his Christmas table. It was understood, it was mere good
| manners, to proclaim that you were in his debt and that he had
| the right to call upon you at any time to redeem your debt by
| some small service." --Mario Puzo, _The Godfather_
| czhu12 wrote:
| Doesn't the publication of this article kinda mess up this
| scheme?
| sundvor wrote:
| I somehow get the feeling the cross section of Guardian/HN
| readers and the kind of people likely to jump into a site like
| this isn't exceedingly large.
| mdavis6890 wrote:
| I feel that there are nearly 150 frustrated law enforcement
| officers who attempted to bust a hit man by pretending to hire
| one.
| gregw134 wrote:
| The problem with making it sarcastic is I can imagine someone
| them just to run with the joke.
| ant6n wrote:
| I guess then it's up to the judiciary to judge the joke?
| [deleted]
| abricot wrote:
| He should add a "career" section, then he would help catch a new
| group of people.
| JulianMorrison wrote:
| It's there!
| throaway46546 wrote:
| https://archive.ph/XcX7e
| framecowbird wrote:
| Is this entrapment? He isn't coercing people to commit a crime,
| but he is encouraging it
| nl wrote:
| No.
|
| A) he's not law enforcement.
|
| B) entrapment laws vary by jurisdiction, but I'm unaware of any
| where a private citizen sending in information about someone
| contacting them to commit a crime is problematic.
| pessimizer wrote:
| What if you have a longstanding relationship with law
| enforcement, and you run a site called "Contact Me, I Will
| Commit A Crime For You"?
| tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
| My understanding is that even if police were running that
| site it would still be fine, unless the site is actively
| reaching out to people encouraging them.
|
| Standing on the corner selling drugs to people who ask: ok
|
| Standing on the corner, asking people "hey, wanna buy some
| weed": borderline but probably still not entrapment
|
| Standing on the corner, asking people "hey, wanna buy some
| weed", then pestering those who say "no thanks":
| Entrapment.
|
| An undercover agent becoming a friend with someone, then
| pressuring them to buy weed for him even though that person
| really doesn't want to: very clearly entrapment.
| mlcrypto wrote:
| Why is he not locked up like Ross Ulbricht then?
| [deleted]
| KindOne wrote:
| The owner of the website does not provide actual services.
|
| Better article:
|
| https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/rent-a...
| gumby wrote:
| So you're saying he's committing fraud?
| CaptainJustin wrote:
| It's a grey area
| sterlind wrote:
| It's only fraud if it leads to money changing hands. Also,
| contracts for illegal goods and services aren't enforceable
| at least in civil court - you can't take your dealer to
| small claims for selling you baby powder, for example. The
| best you can do is shatter their kneecaps.
| olliej wrote:
| because he wasn't trying to run&profit from hitmen? because he
| wasn't laundering money? Etc
|
| Also this guy just forwards details to police.
| duxup wrote:
| > Now, Bob Innes hands people over to the police for trying to
| have their enemies killed
| dijonman2 wrote:
| He is an expert navigator of the legal system
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-12-25 23:02 UTC)