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

181–190 of 277 posts

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#181

Post by rprasad »

genwin wrote: post #78
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. Almost certainly zero impact for this. Easily ignored. The prosecutor in this case, however, probably could not easily ignore her friends and family dumping her.

That's about as realistic as expecting people to dump Aaron by telling them he downloaded a bunch of files without paying for them. It made him a hero.

You talk to her friends and family about her, and you'll just make her a hero in their eyes, the same way Aaron's actions made him a hero to reddit and 4chan.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#182

Post by PrudenceYuris »

objclxt wrote: post #142
erichocean wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People in power need to take responsibility for what they do. Claiming they're "just doing their job" is how the worst stuff that ever happens to humanity by other humans goes down. For more, check out The Lucifer Effect . Doing evil in the name of your "job" is a bug in the human psyche. We need to do everything we can to mitigate its effects, and that starts by not staying stupid shit like "Hate the game, not the p…

Laws are meant to be beneficial to society as a whole. In the US, laws must be passed by a democratically elected body. The judicial system is one of the few areas where "just doing your job", no matter how 'evil' it may seem, is morally right. Even the most heinous and obviously guilty defendant deserves the best defence available. And similarly, is a prosecutor enforcing a law that society chose to enact inherently…

Congress is bought and elections are a choice among the bought.

We are dealing with prideful arrogant people. They need a vivid example in order to get their attention. Destroying this case's prosecutors' careers is only a good start.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#183

Post by rprasad »

lancefisher wrote: post #146
btilly wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My suggestion, start a whitehouse petition. If that gets to 25k people, the whitehouse will respond. If Reddit gets involved, 25k people is quite doable. The wording of the petition should be as strong as possible. I'm off with my children now, but if I get back tonight and I see a decent petition on this, I will definitely sign it. Edit: D'oh, the petition has already been written. I just had to sign it.

Here's a link: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-stat... And a second petition to pardon Aaron: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/posthumously-pardo...

The second petition will never be granted. I can say this with certainty because it is legally impossible to grant a pardon when someone has not been convicted (or plead guilty to) a crime to finality (i.e., the exhaustion of appeals).

As with the Enron fellow who died during his appeals, Aaron will never legally be guilty of whatever it was he was specifically charged with because his case was never adjudicated to finality.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#184

Post by rprasad »

alexqgb wrote: post #178
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 exhaustin…

That's not how politics works. It's never been how politics works. This is why most people simply ignore Silicon Valley and the Internet when it comes to political issues.

If the likes of 4chan or reddit attack a federal prosecutor personally, all they will do is spur political action against reddit and 4chan. The underlying cause of their action will be ignored and forgotten.

(Note: SOPA is not an exception; major Silicon Valley companies spent serious amounts on lobbying to get that bill dropped. The internet opposition had exactly zero impact on its political fate.)

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#185

Post by ceol »

jlgreco wrote: post #131
ceol wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't personally familiar with Aaron, but from what I've read of him, I really don't think he was the type of person who would want everyone to go on a witch hunt the day it's announced he's committed suicide. So how about you save your emotionally charged call for an internet brigade until everything has settled down, yes?

That may be true, that may not be true. I don't know. What I do know is that the issue is larger than Aaron himself.

If it's larger than Aaron, then people shouldn't be using his death as the core reason for their crusade.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#186

Post by fatbird »

genwin wrote: post #76
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…

> Naming and shaming Carmen M. Ortiz for destroying the life of a young man is exactly what is necessary Agreed. She should lose her friends and family too, if they are good people. They should drop her out of their lives.

Maybe we can hammer her hard enough to drive her to suicide. Wouldn't that be a win?

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#187

Post by rprasad »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #171
davidp wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "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…

All prosecution is political and white collar crimes doubly so.

No, all laws are political. Enforcement of the law, especiallly at the federal level, is apolitical. White collar crimes are not special; indeed, white collar crimes are by far the worst types of crimes because they strike directly at the foundation of the system itself (i.e., trust).

There's no politically neutral AI calling the shots.

Exactly. Letting prosecutors pick and choose which statutes they enforce would make prosecution political. This is what happened in the South for 100 years when blacks were prosecuted aggressively and white defendants were not (especially in cases with black victims). It's also the reason why prosecutors at the federal level generally do not have discretionary authority to decide what crimes they will enforce absent a presidential directive or a directive from the head of their agency.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#188

Post by fatbird »

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.

The most prominent and continuous use of jury nullification occurred in the American South in the 20th century to nullify murder charges against those who had lynched black people or killed them by burning down their homes and churches.

Didn't change the law in the direction they wanted, and didn't achieve justice either.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#189

Post by temphn »

rprasad wrote: post #183
lancefisher wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a link: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-stat... And a second petition to pardon Aaron: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/posthumously-pardo...

The second petition will never be granted. I can say this with certainty because it is legally impossible to grant a pardon when someone has not been convicted (or plead guilty to) a crime to finality (i.e., the exhaustion of appeals). As with the Enron fellow who died during his appeals, Aaron will never legally be guilty of whatever it was he was specifically charged with because his case was never adjudicated to f…

All Obama has to say is that Massachusetts law enforcement acted stupidly. It'd have the same effect, as they've done so before, and he's said so before.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-07-22/us/harvard.gates.intervie...

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#190

Post by rprasad »

anon3456 wrote: post #112
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So 97% is "absurd" but 90-91% is well within reason? Moreover, in many cases the cause of a dismissal is that the prosecutor requested it, e.g. because the entire charge was a farce meant to intimidate the defendant and it by that point had either failed or (more likely) succeeded to do so and no longer needed to be maintained.

What would you prefer it be, 50/50? Would you prefer the US charge more innocent people with crimes to bring down the conviction rate? If someone is formally charged with a federal felony, that means they have been indicted by a federal Grand Jury; i.e., a majority of the 23 Grand Jurors felt that there is probable cause for charging the defendant(s) with the alleged offense(s). People indicted by Grand Juries should…

The sole purpose of a grand jury is to determine if there is sufficient evidence that a crime may have been commited to justify an expensive investigation, filing charges, or proceeding to trial (depends on the jurisdiction).

The grand jury hearings have no bearing on the determination of guilt, much less on the adequacy of the prosecution's case.

Post reply on HN