Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Prosecutor as bully

lessig.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 277 posts

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#51

Post by downandout »

agwa wrote: post #18

From the article: For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April — his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. Remember, this was on HN just a week ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?…

Approximately 97% of indicted federal defendants plead guilty before trial because of three aspects of our system:

1) US Attorneys routinely routinely overcharge defendants to an almost absurd degree;

2) The most commonly used federal statutes, such as the Wire Fraud statute, are so broadly written that people with no criminal intent could reasonably be found guilty; and

3) The maximum sentences for convictions under these broad statutes are so absurdly high that no one in their right mind would dare risk a trial.

These factors, combined with often merciless prosecutors, add up to a recipe for a potential disaster such as the one we have seen here. The system is very much geared to send to prison anyone that is charged with a crime, based on the system's trust in the concept of prosecutorial discretion. Unfortunately, many prosecutors abuse their discretion, and there is no way to inject uniform sanity into our system as it currently exists. Sadly, the prosecutor in this case likely won't even offer as much as an apology to Aaron's family, as most of them seem to feel justified in their behavior.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#52

Post by catshirt »

Benferhat wrote: post #36
pbateman wrote: post #2

From the link in the article: Depending on how many of the counts Swartz is found guilty of, the sentence could conceivably total 50+ years and fine in the area of $4 million. What an absurd and unreasonable level of punishment. Carmen Ortiz, the prosecutor who was behind this[1] needs to be publicly shamed. [1] (source: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/reddit-co-founder-c... )

The prosecutor's job is to charge you with the violation of every statute that the evidence indicates you violated, and use that breadth of charges as leverage in a plea negotiation. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

"don't hate the player" is a satirical half assed defense used to justify irresonsible actions. even if the entirety of our hate should be directed at the game, that doesn't mean the player holds no responsibility.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#53

Post by Niten »

PrudenceYuris wrote: post #21

Then do something about it. This prosecutor is quite the collector and displayer of awards: http://www.necc.mass.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Carmen-O... She is a PR asset to this university: http://www.pr.com/press-release/366324 Evidently some people want her to run for higher office: http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2013/01/... Governor Ortiz? Make sure it isn't: http://www.bostonglobe.com/met…

OK but before we all get on the public shaming bandwagon, I ask whether you know for sure that Ortiz is the primary target of Lessig's (rightful) criticism here? I know Ortiz was involved, but Lessig doesn't explicitly name Ortiz in this article and he refers to the prosecutor as a "he".

And please pardon my skepticism if it is in fact Carmen Ortiz, but I'm not familiar with the case and I think a healthy dose of skepticism is a good idea whenever "internet justice" is called upon.

Anyway, rest in peace Aaron.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#54

Post by dmix »

temphn wrote: post #46
agwa wrote: post #18

From the article: For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April — his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. Remember, this was on HN just a week ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?…

Naming and shaming Carmen M. Ortiz for destroying the life of a young man is exactly what is necessary. She brought 13 felony counts against him for downloading articles that should be freely available, after JSTOR itself had dropped the charges. Destroying her career and seeing her fired in disgrace will send a message to all other overzealous prosecutors, in the same way that she surely thought her prosecution of S…

How do we go about getting this message across to her and other key people (legally)? I'm interested in helping.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#55

Post by danso »

andrewtbham wrote: post #49
jdminhbg wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with your edit. There's definitely a systemic problem, but it's a systemic problem with elected officials. Naming, shaming, and voting them out is the solution.

I agree naming and shaming is a good idea. It puts a name and a face to the story... not just some nebulous "the system is broken." People need a narrative to humanize the situation and it can serve as a warning to other prosecutors.

Yes...as much as hacker-minded people want to think that it's about the data (which I won't argue that it isn't), things happen because of individual stories.

Rosa Parks was not the first person to be denied a seat on a bus. The mishandling of rape cases has been a problem in India for a long time and it took the tragic case of the (so far, anonymous) woman who was brutally gang-raped to spur international furor. And think of the numerous laws named after victims...Megan, and so forth

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#56

Post by larrys »

temphn wrote: post #46
agwa wrote: post #18

From the article: For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April — his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. Remember, this was on HN just a week ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?…

Naming and shaming Carmen M. Ortiz for destroying the life of a young man is exactly what is necessary. She brought 13 felony counts against him for downloading articles that should be freely available, after JSTOR itself had dropped the charges. Destroying her career and seeing her fired in disgrace will send a message to all other overzealous prosecutors, in the same way that she surely thought her prosecution of S…

"after JSTOR itself had dropped the charges"

From a practical matter a prosecutor might decline to prosecute if they can't get the cooperation of someone (needed to testify or provide evidence) but this should have no bearing on whether to prosecute or not.

You could have a crime committed and the crime is worthy of prosection. The fact that someone believes (as an extreme example) that a person who committed assault against them shouldn't be prosecuted doesn't and shouldn't really matter (keeping in mind of course the practical nature of prosecuting without cooperation). Unless of course they say "no assault occured" which is different then "assault occurred but I don't want anything done".

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#57

Post by Homunculiheaded »

brianobush wrote: post #22
miles wrote: post #3

if what the government alleged was true — and I say “if” because I am not revealing what Aaron said to me then — then what he did was wrong. And if not legally wrong, then at least morally wrong. Morally wrong to download taxpayer-funded research? I'm sorry Larry, you lost me. More on the academic publishing "industry": http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/22/academic-pu...

Taxpayers fund my research, so can they just break in and steal "information" (code, plots, draft of papers, etc)? They paid for it, right? The academic publishing industry is not one of my favorites, but they do provide a service to the communities they represent. Circumventing them will eventually destroy the community unless another "open" organization is willing to step in. Many fields (mine included) are so arca…

"Stealing" in the sense of depriving you access to the documents should be prohibited, but I see no problem if someone requested you immediately copy all of your research.

In fact this is exactly the case with anyone working directly for the federal government, doing research or otherwise. You're told in no uncertain terms that at any moment information on your work laptop can be FOIA'd in which case you will have to immediately hand over the contents of your hard drive (if it has been determined there is a reasonable likelihood that it contains the FOIA'd information). Obviously if you're working on classified state secrets the process is different (also personal information is redacted from the documents). There's no reason research can't be accomplished successfully given the condition that the public has a right to that information at any given moment.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#58

Post by dmix »

downandout wrote: post #51
agwa wrote: post #18

From the article: For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April — his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. Remember, this was on HN just a week ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?…

Approximately 97% of indicted federal defendants plead guilty before trial because of three aspects of our system: 1) US Attorneys routinely routinely overcharge defendants to an almost absurd degree; 2) The most commonly used federal statutes, such as the Wire Fraud statute, are so broadly written that people with no criminal intent could reasonably be found guilty; and 3) The maximum sentences for convictions under…

Wow, do you have a source for the 94%?

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#59

Post by ejdyksen »

miles wrote: post #3

if what the government alleged was true — and I say “if” because I am not revealing what Aaron said to me then — then what he did was wrong. And if not legally wrong, then at least morally wrong. Morally wrong to download taxpayer-funded research? I'm sorry Larry, you lost me. More on the academic publishing "industry": http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/22/academic-pu...

I was wondering if this sentence was a typo. I thought he almost certainly meant the reverse:

And if not morally wrong, then at least legally wrong.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#60

Post by agwa »

downandout wrote: post #51
agwa wrote: post #18

From the article: For in the 18 months of negotiations, that was what he was not willing to accept, and so that was the reason he was facing a million dollar trial in April — his wealth bled dry, yet unable to appeal openly to us for the financial help he needed to fund his defense, at least without risking the ire of a district court judge. Remember, this was on HN just a week ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?…

Approximately 97% of indicted federal defendants plead guilty before trial because of three aspects of our system: 1) US Attorneys routinely routinely overcharge defendants to an almost absurd degree; 2) The most commonly used federal statutes, such as the Wire Fraud statute, are so broadly written that people with no criminal intent could reasonably be found guilty; and 3) The maximum sentences for convictions under…

It's actually 97%, at least as of 2010:

http://www.ussc.gov/Data_and_Statistics/Annual_Reports_and_S...

Unfortunately that's down at the moment but you can use the Google Cache:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:WCmq1ybmBqAJ:...

Post reply on HN