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

251–260 of 277 posts

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#251

Post by temphn »

rprasad wrote: post #187
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

  It's also the reason why prosecutors at the federal level 
  generally do not have discretionary authority
"The USA [US Attorney] is invested by statute and delegation from the Attorney General with the broadest discretion in the exercise of such authority."

http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/tit...

  The United States Attorney, within his/her district, has 
  plenary authority with regard to federal criminal matters. 
  This authority is exercised under the supervision and 
  direction of the Attorney General and his/her delegates.

  The statutory duty to prosecute for all offenses against 
  the United States (28 U.S.C. § 547) carries with it the 
  authority necessary to perform this duty. The USA is 
  invested by statute and delegation from the Attorney 
  General with the broadest discretion in the exercise of 
  such authority.

  The authority, discretionary power, and responsibilities of 
  the United States Attorney with relation to criminal 
  matters encompass without limitation by enumeration the 
  following:

  Investigating suspected or alleged offenses against the 
  United States, see USAM 9-2.010;

  Causing investigations to be conducted by the appropriate 
  federal law enforcement agencies, see USAM 9-2.010;

  Declining prosecution, see USAM 9-2.020;

  Authorizing prosecution, see USAM 9-2.030;

  Determining the manner of prosecuting and deciding trial 
  related questions;

  Recommending whether to appeal or not to appeal from an 
  adverse ruling or decision, see USAM 9-2.170;

  Dismissing prosecutions, see USAM 9-2.050; and

  Handling civil matters related thereto which are under the 
  supervision of the Criminal Division.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#252

Post by jiggy2011 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #119
jiggy2011 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a rule I find it difficult to justify a prison sentence (beyond perhaps a short "scare them straight" visit) to somebody who has committed a crime that isn't violent (or causing others to commit violence) or perhaps something that causes widespread distress (certain types of fraud). Of course this would make it difficult to jail alcapones perhaps.

>Of course this would make it difficult to jail alcapones perhaps. I don't follow. Al Capone was convicted for tax evasion -- because he committed tax evasion. He also allegedly (and very likely actually) committed a whole list of other serious crimes they didn't prove. But tax evasion is an actual crime that should actually be prosecuted. If Al Capone had made all his money placing legal bets in Las Vegas and then f…

Oh, I agree.

I suppose my point is that it might make it easier though for those who order violent crime to distance themselves from it enough that it becomes extremely difficult to every give them a custodial sentence.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#253

Post by rdl »

jfager wrote: post #82
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 prosecutors actually working the case were Scott L. Garland and Stephen P. Heymann. (source: http://ia600504.us.archive.org/29/items/gov.uscourts.mad.137... )

Even sadder is that Scott L. Garland is a MIT alum :(

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#254

Post by SEMW »

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?…

> many people in this thread want to name and shame the individual prosecutor in this case. That is seriously misdirected effort that is not going to solve the systemic problems. It may even exasperate them, as it falsely implies that the problem is with individual overstepping prosecutors rather than a system in which it's the norm.

There's a good essay on exactly that point, descriptively entitled "Fix the machine, not the person". Written by... Aaron Swartz.

http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/nummi

It's perhaps interesting that, in a thread with dozens of HNers calling for everything from naming and shaming to harrassment, no-one so far has linked to his opinion on this.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#256

Post by michaelfeathers »

skyraider wrote: post #120
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…

Great post, and I hope everyone on HN follows your suggestions for bringing this to the attention of the public. But ultimately, it's the law that comes out of the legislative process that not only enables, but prescribes these prosecutions. Because of this, advocates for reform risk playing right, straight, smack into the hands of the system by resolving to do nothing more than stop one out-of-control public officia…

What would reform look like?

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#257

Post by MaysonL »

pekk wrote: post #156
MaysonL wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trouble is, if Obama hasn't shut down Guantanomo, let Bradley Manning be held in conditions amounting to torture, et bloody cetera, what in hell makes you think he's going to fire and shame one of his best US Attorneys over a tragic death that she contributed to? It's probably more likely (though not very) that she will resign of her own volition.

Aaron Swartz has nothing to do with violations of UCMJ or the political impossibility of the executive importing terrorist suspects to the continental US over intense Congressional obstruction.

And all the crackdowns on the various Occupy protests around the country were spontaneous and local.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#258

Post by PrudenceYuris »

ole_korrect wrote: post #249
vertr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, who is this prosecutor? http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/contact.html

Agreed. I'd imagine he'd appreciate hearing from you directly: Home: 23 Kenwin Rd Winchester, MA 01890-1309 (781) 729-4959 https://www.facebook.com/stephen.heymann [544593576] Office: 1 Courthouse Way, Suite 9200 Boston, MA 02210 stephen.heymann@usdoj.gov (617) 748-3181 (ofc) (617) 748-3100 (ofc) (617) 748-3974 (ofc fax) (617) 223-4607 AMA01(SHEYMANN) And surely his friends and family care deeply as well... Philip He…

He and his family members have numerous computing industry connections in their network. Turn these connections against him, and isolate him.

David E. Green is VP public policy at NBC Universal. He should be aware of what a pariah Heymann is.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#259

Post by langarto »

cwkoss wrote: post #226
erikpukinskis wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I'd say "too bad" for slow researchers. If someone can reproduce your results and publish a quality paper before you, that is better for society. Nobody gets to "own" an idea. This possessiveness and reputational greed is what is causing all of these problems.

In my experience as a researcher, this competitiveness and haste to publish leads very frequently to lower quality in the research. For a researcher's career is often more profitable to quickly publish a half-baked paper than ensuring that everything is correct and well explained. This is a quite difficult problem to solve.

Re: Prosecutor as bully

#260

Post by ooorion »

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…

What would happen if the 97% of cases that don't go to trial actually were to go to trial? It would seem that the prosecutors wouldn't have the resources to try everyone and would be forced to reduce or drop charges entirely. Not sure if this would be possible, but by coordinating this tactic among all federal defendants could discourage prosecutors from tacking on unnecessary charges.
Post reply on HN