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

U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

blogs.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 300 posts

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#21

Post by jacquesm »

anonymouz wrote: post #16
Maxious wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ALLEGED HACKER CHARGED WITH STEALING OVER FOUR MILLION DOCUMENTS FROM MIT NETWORK July 19, 2011 > AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution…

It is obvious from this press release from the formulation "faces up to 35 years in prison", that they are simply quoting the maximum penality for the charges. The prosecutors press release says that they didn't intend to push for maximum penality. These two statement are perfectly compatible with each other.

I think those two statements are in direct contradiction with each other, and Aaron's lawyer is on the record that they were putting up a > 10:1 ratio for a plea bargain.

So they may not have been seeking the technical maximum but they were definitely beating their drums quoting that maximum where ever they could. Now that that makes them look terrible they're backpedaling on that but there is enough documentation out there to make this look like what it is: full-on damage control.

The Aaron Swartz story is starting to get some serious play in mainstream media and that is something that worries people like Carmen Ortiz more than anything else.

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#22

Post by binarymax »

Before this statement was issued, I didn't think we should be chasing them down to make an example of them[1]. Now that she is dishonest and trying to brush everything aside as 'business as usual', I am changing my stance. She needs to go. Not to make an example of her, but because we should not tolerate such dishonesty and smugness in our federal court system.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5053980

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#23

Post by blablabla123 »

erichocean wrote: post #12

At no time did this office ever seek – or ever tell Mr. Swartz’s attorneys that it intended to seek – maximum penalties under the law. The absolute dishonesty of this statement has only further convinced me that firing this political appointee to prevent her from further harming citizens is the only appropriate action for our government to take.

You have any proof for your statement?

This 35 year (or 50 year) thing mentioned in many blogs might be questionable. To be frank I feel myself a bit fooled by this information, reading yesterday that 6 month have been proposed to Swartz. When talking about things as serious as death, we seem to assume that every information is depicted really carefully, but this is far from being true.

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#24

Post by huhtenberg »

Let me just throw something out there.

It's obvious that the investigation was a contributing factor to Aaron's decision to take his life, but to what extent? Was this at all investigated by the media, or have everyone just made the connection, because it was the easiest explanation?

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#25

Post by bgmasters »

> That is why in the discussions with his counsel about a resolution of the case this office sought an appropriate sentence that matched the alleged conduct – a sentence that we would recommend to the judge of six months in a low security setting. While at the same time, his defense counsel would have been free to recommend a sentence of probation.

That is terrible writing. Ms. Ortiz should be doubly ashamed.

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#26

Post by [deleted] »

droithomme wrote: post #8
RobertHoudin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide a link to that please?

http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/news/2011/July/SwartzAaronPR.... > AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution, forfeiture and a fine of up to $…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#27

Post by 3amOpsGuy »

anonymouz wrote: post #16
Maxious wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ALLEGED HACKER CHARGED WITH STEALING OVER FOUR MILLION DOCUMENTS FROM MIT NETWORK July 19, 2011 > AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution…

It is obvious from this press release from the formulation "faces up to 35 years in prison", that they are simply quoting the maximum penality for the charges. The prosecutors press release says that they didn't intend to push for maximum penality. These two statement are perfectly compatible with each other.

That's a strange line of argument.

It's obvious that the communication to Aaron was "up to 35 years", he wasn't told "up to 7 years" or "up to 3 years", the communication he received was "up to 35 years in prison".

To argue that the prosecutors didn't intend to push to maximum penalty would be to do so without any basis in fact - it would be mere speculation and of 0 value compared to the recorded facts as they stand.

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#28

Post by blablabla123 »

Maxious wrote: post #6
RobertHoudin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide a link to that please?

> ALLEGED HACKER CHARGED WITH STEALING OVER FOUR MILLION DOCUMENTS FROM MIT NETWORK July 19, 2011 > AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution…

+1 for "us common folk"

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#29

Post by josephlord »

erichocean wrote: post #12

At no time did this office ever seek – or ever tell Mr. Swartz’s attorneys that it intended to seek – maximum penalties under the law. The absolute dishonesty of this statement has only further convinced me that firing this political appointee to prevent her from further harming citizens is the only appropriate action for our government to take.

It is a lawyer's statement. Absolutely true (probably) but completely beside the point because what they would seek in the event of a trial was still massively inappropriate (years of jail time).

Re: U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Issues Statement on Aaron Swartz Case

#30

Post by [deleted] »

Maxious wrote: post #6
RobertHoudin wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide a link to that please?

> ALLEGED HACKER CHARGED WITH STEALING OVER FOUR MILLION DOCUMENTS FROM MIT NETWORK July 19, 2011 > AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN