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

191–200 of 277 posts

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#191

Post by rprasad »

lazyGeneral wrote: post #101
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?…

I can imagine and believe that defending yourself against the US government is costly, what I don't understand is what the breakdown of all expenses would look like. What services do you need to purchase/hire that you wouldn't get in a normal court case? Is it because you spend a lot more time in court or in preparation? Do you need to choose among lawyers with special certification? What type of paperwork do you nee…

Federal courts vs normal courts are like the difference between the NBA and high school basketball, or the NFL and college football.

Most of the rules are the same, but the game is played at a much higher level and the stakes are higher.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#192

Post by rprasad »

PrudenceYuris wrote: post #134
rprasad wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me get this straight: you want to contact a group of judges and prosecutors and "let them know you don't approve of her actions." What exactly do you hope to accomplish by this? Federal judges and prosecutors already get this every day from people who do this for a living. And you know what? It doesn't work. Who cares if you don't approve of what they're doing? They don't measure themselves based on your approval…

Her entire career, professional circle, and reputational supports have made an error in backing her, and they need to hear that directly. She hounded someone to suicide, and the repercussions for that are light if they are limited to ending her career.

I don't know how much more clearly I can state this:

Most criminal defendants do not kill themselves. It was Aaron's choice to take his life, not hers. Her professional and personal contacts will never agree with you that she hounded someone to suicide. Telling them "she did wrong" when it is not clear that she did anything out of the ordinary in this case will have zero effect on getting her "shamed" and will have no effect on ending her career.

The internet does not determine whether these people get jobs. People in the legal industry and in the federal government determine that. And right now as a member of the legal industry, I can tell you that despite my extreme distaste for prosecutors, based on all publicly available facts about this case she did not do anything wrong. She did her job, pursuant to the laws as they are written. You don't like that? Change the laws.

Going after her without changing the laws will not work.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#193

Post by rprasad »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #125
rayiner wrote: post #121

Man, if we could get this kind of outrage built up against over zealous prosecution when the defendant isn't a white techie, we might actually get some criminal justice reform in the U.S.

If we're lucky we can get this kind of outrage built up when it is, and then fix it for everyone. These laws get passed when the innocent victim is a sympathetic white girl, why can't they get repealed when the innocent accused is a sympathetic white boy?

Whether Aaron is a "sympathetic" defendant depends strongly on your point of view. All the laws named after little white girls are named after dead little white girls who were the victims of brutal crimes.

Aaron is the alleged perpetrator of a potentially serious felony. Moreover, he is the perpetrator of a crime that most people cannot distinguish from hacking (because unlike the HN crowd, most people are not technology literate beyond knowing how to download apps). Aaron would not be a sympathetic defendant to most of America; he would be just another one of the same hackers who try to steal money from their bank accounts.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#194

Post by erikpukinskis »

Homunculiheaded wrote: post #57
brianobush wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> I see no problem if someone requested you immediately copy all of your research.

Academia can be extremely competitive. Like, if a competing lab got ahold even of the title of your upcoming paper, they would and do rush to duplicate your results, and try to publish before you to get the scoop.

For that reason, I don't know if open access to everyone's hard drives would work.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#195

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #121

Man, if we could get this kind of outrage built up against over zealous prosecution when the defendant isn't a white techie, we might actually get some criminal justice reform in the U.S.

[deleted]

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#196

Post by jacoblyles »

I take exception to Lessig's description of Aaron's behavior as "morally wrong". It was no more "morally wrong" than enabling a slave to escape his master's plantation. Property rights that have their basis in injustice are not valid.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#197

Post by anewguy99 »

rayiner wrote: post #121

Man, if we could get this kind of outrage built up against over zealous prosecution when the defendant isn't a white techie, we might actually get some criminal justice reform in the U.S.

There is no time like a tragic death to collect some karma for hating whitey.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#198

Post by temphn »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #103
larrys wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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…

>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'…

Exactly. The DC police made the (correct) decision recently to use prosecutorial discretion to not pursue David Gregory, who DID have juice in DC.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/11/david-gregory-inves...

  Having carefully reviewed all of the facts and 
  circumstances of this matter, as it does in every case 
  involving firearms-related offenses or any other potential 
  violation of D.C. law within our criminal jurisdiction, OAG 
  has determined to exercise its prosecutorial discretion to 
  decline to bring criminal charges against Mr. Gregory, who 
  has no criminal record, or any other NBC employee based on 
  the events associated with the December 23, 2012 broadcast.
It would have been nonsensical to go after Gregory. He only got the benefit of the doubt because he was a DC political journalist who was literally interviewing Obama last week. And it was nonsensical to go after Swartz. But he did not get the benefit of the doubt.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#199

Post by davidgerard »

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?…

No, I think you're wrong: making an example to encourage the others would be a most productive step to take.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-stat...

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#200

Post by gbhn »

fatbird wrote: post #186
genwin wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

No. It is, however, a win to separate from prosecutorial power those who misuse it.
Post reply on HN