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

171–180 of 277 posts

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#171

Post by drzaiusapelord »

davidp wrote: post #152
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but this should have no bearing on whether to prosecute or not. "We were just following orders" and "We were just doing our jobs" and "We were doing what the law told us to do" aren't the indefensible moral positions you seem to think they are. Laws are written by men and enforced by men. Just the idea that all prosecutors are slaves to these laws is so incredibly naive I almost don't know what to say to you, but I'…

> "We were just following orders" and "We were just doing our jobs" and "We were doing what the law told us to do" aren't the indefensible moral positions you seem to think they are. Careful; that's a double-edged sword. Would you prefer that individual prosecutors have the authority to ignore the law? That didn't work too well in the pre-civil-rights South, when lynchings went unprosecuted. It's far better to have a…

>It's far better to have a government of laws and not a government of men

Who do you think decided to tell JSTOR to shove it and prosecute him anyway under a federal computer crimes act? All prosecution is political and white collar crimes doubly so. Men decide to be vindictive, men decide which laws, and the men who prosecute knowing it takes millions of dollars to successful defend from a false accusation from the federal government.

We don't live under laws. We live under men. There's no politically neutral AI calling the shots. Its people trying to get promotions and making names for themselves and who knows what other motivations. The selfless prosecutor exists only in movies and TV.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#172

Post by pavel_lishin »

rprasad wrote: post #70
temphn wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Or, you know, you could just call your local Congressperson and complain. This is far more likely to have a direct impact on her job (performance of, or continued employment) than some random internet "naming and shaming." It is also far more likely to bring about the structural changes necessary to prevent this from happening again. ...as they have disabled the voice of the people by routing around jury trials. Aaro…

> Or, you know, you could just call your local Congressperson and complain.

Isn't that part-and-parcel of naming-and-shaming?

Most of the commenters seem to think that name-and-shame means "write about it on your blog" or "retweet something", I guess. A tweet doesn't get someone fired; calling your local congressperson is definitely the thing to do.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#173

Post by [deleted] »

jrs235 wrote: post #140
downandout wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

What do you think about jury nullification? If more people knew about it, do you think "we the people" could reign in out of touch congress critters that write these laws (don't repeal or change them) and the over zealous executive branch (prosecutors and police) that attempt to rack up and level up charges.

[deleted]

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#174

Post by nekojima »

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…

This is almost as good as Japan's very controversial 99%+ conviction rate, which is widely seen as abusive, with a high rate of innocent people forced to confess, for varied reasons.

This is a decades old paper, but still quite relevant for the reasons why the conviction rate is so high in Japan.

http://www.rasmusen.org/published/Rasmusen-01.JLS.jpncon.pdf

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#175

Post by pmorici »

bugsbunnyak wrote: post #166
dmix wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

How much would it cost to run a full-page ad near the front of The New York Times and Boston Globe, and some local tv ads in Boston? A targeted media campaign and the resulting echoes could easily put a stop to any political aspirations (I'm thinking 60 Minutes, Anderson Cooper, and the like).

This is the number two story on Google New's "Top Stories" for me right now so it seems like this has a far chance of getting a lot of coverage is people are loud enough for long enough.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#176

Post by cgag »

andrewtbham wrote: post #99
temphn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's obviously very important to stay on the bright white side of legal here, as we are dealing with a prosecutorial bully. Emailing her directly is unlikely to produce results and likely to get your name on some kind of terrorist watch list. But going to her superiors and the Boston media to call for her resignation in disgrace over an overzealous prosecution is the right tactic. 0) Start with background: http://www…

I do like these tactics and... I am in favor of naming and shaming. I think she should be made the poster child for overzealous prosecution of a outdated law. However, it is a story that could serve a larger purpose than just ruining this woman's career. I would like to this effort put into something more constructive like the decriminalization of copyright infringement. It could be relegated to a civil issue, especi…

Overzealous prosecutors hurt people accused of every kind of crime, making them accountable is a pretty far reaching cause.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#177

Post by sliverstorm »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #172
rprasad wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, you know, you could just call your local Congressperson and complain. This is far more likely to have a direct impact on her job (performance of, or continued employment) than some random internet "naming and shaming." It is also far more likely to bring about the structural changes necessary to prevent this from happening again. ...as they have disabled the voice of the people by routing around jury trials. Aaro…

> Or, you know, you could just call your local Congressperson and complain. Isn't that part-and-parcel of naming-and-shaming? Most of the commenters seem to think that name-and-shame means "write about it on your blog" or "retweet something", I guess. A tweet doesn't get someone fired; calling your local congressperson is definitely the thing to do.

Good 'ol internet myopia.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#178

Post by alexqgb »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #94
andrewtbham wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we need to start lobbying for a bill that decriminalizes copyright infringement and makes it purely a civil matter.

I don't think that would really do it here. The problem is not (just, or even primarily) the laws against criminal copyright infringement. The problem is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Wire Act, RICO and the complete set of federal laws passed during the heyday of organized crime that are so broad and with such disproportionately insane penalties that they can be used to put just about any arbitrary subject of…

Changing the law is the aim, no doubt, but as with anything, progress is much easier when you're seen as having strength and being on the side of the angels. Having legally and properly dispensed with a conspicuously abusive US Attorney does a tremendous amount to discredit the opposition. And it puts other attorneys on notice that their preferred tactic—hitting people with a raft of charges the freezing or exhausting their assets before a trial—is on the public radar as a deeply illigitimate and almost certainly unconstitutional approach to handling what are, increasingly, political crimes.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#179

Post by alexqgb »

pekk wrote: post #159
rokhayakebe wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a feeling Anonymous will get on this case. Sadly enough this is not one of those cases where a few messages is going to "send the message."

If her career ends in a clean and legal way, that will send the important message. So if individuals are in the position to send messages which will contribute to that, it would be a good thing.

Unless Anon pursues the course of action outlined above, I strongly suspect they will do more harm than good. Even a hint of illegitimacy on the part of Ortiz's opponents will be exploited ruthlessly. Keeping one's own hands clean is a vitally important part of bringing attention to the dirt that others have on theirs.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#180

Post by temphn »

rprasad wrote: post #70
temphn wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Or, you know, you could just call your local Congressperson and complain. This is far more likely to have a direct impact on her job (performance of, or continued employment) than some random internet "naming and shaming." It is also far more likely to bring about the structural changes necessary to prevent this from happening again. ...as they have disabled the voice of the people by routing around jury trials. Aaro…

The goal must be to get her fired for abuse of power. Getting the press involved is the only way to accomplish this. Calling a Congressman by itself will only help if done in a huge and coordinated way. That kind of suggestion on its own is a safety valve, the sort of futile thing that people who don't want see justice served would suggest. As for the justification of putting prosecutors beyond elections because of "the South": Reconstruction and Jim Crow have somehow become the excuse for birthing a class of invulnerable prosecutors that threaten a young Jewish kid in Boston with 35 years in jail for downloading some history PDFs! We really licked Jim Crow now, good job! I am sure that burning the democracy to save it makes some sense in some universe, but not this one.

No matter. The fact that this woman cannot be disciplined by electoral measures is what necessitates the use of the Internet and the press:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5048632

Post reply on HN