Live data from Hacker News

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

blogs.wsj.com

51–60 of 300 posts

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

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When cops come across otherwise nice young white guys who believe themselves invulnerable or above the law and are doing stupid, impulsive things, their usual practice is to "scare them straight." So they get tough on them, tell them all of the awful consequences they're in for, put them in a horrible, cramped cell, maybe throw them in with some real nasty characters, and, above all, get their parents involved. It's…

Hey, I recognize what you're saying and agree with it. I too have been in that unfortunate and TERRIBLE cold cell once in my life and know what it feels like to have your freedom stripped from you (and mine ended up costing 10k+ in the end). No one will ever know why Aaron killed himself fully, and that is unfortunate. Most of us only learned of him fully through his suicide. When I watch youtube videos of the guy, h…

Thanks for the thoughtful response. My experience is with the New Zealand legal system so I should probably not be commenting on the American situation in the first place. I'm sure you know these issues much better than me.

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

#52

While it is nice that she is passing blame to Congress, if it were only a "6 month low security setting" being discussed, why wouldn't Aaron have been told of this? Why the additional and ultimately 13 felony charges when he was MOST concerned with not being labled a felon. Why hold that 50 year sentence above his head with no HOPE in his own mind because he was left in the dark. "As a parent and sister", would you w…

When cops come across otherwise nice young white guys who believe themselves invulnerable or above the law and are doing stupid, impulsive things, their usual practice is to "scare them straight." So they get tough on them, tell them all of the awful consequences they're in for, put them in a horrible, cramped cell, maybe throw them in with some real nasty characters, and, above all, get their parents involved. It's…

Problem is Aaron wasn't the average kid. He had enemies, and he was a major annoyance to people wanting to tame the Internet.

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

#53
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When cops come across otherwise nice young white guys who believe themselves invulnerable or above the law and are doing stupid, impulsive things, their usual practice is to "scare them straight." So they get tough on them, tell them all of the awful consequences they're in for, put them in a horrible, cramped cell, maybe throw them in with some real nasty characters, and, above all, get their parents involved. It's…

Problem is Aaron wasn't the average kid. He had enemies, and he was a major annoyance to people wanting to tame the Internet.

Who were his enemies? I'm interested. Do you think the US justice dept was acting as an organ of these would-be tamers?

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

#54
post #9
post #7

> I must, however, make clear that this office’s conduct was appropriate in bringing and handling this case. That's why you assign investigations to independent entities, and that's why butchers aren't allowed to do their own health inspection. Whether it was appropriate or not is not for Carmen Ortiz to say. "The prosecutors recognized that there was no evidence against Mr. Swartz indicating that he committed his ac…

"...did not warrant the severe punishments authorized by Congress and called for by the Sentencing Guidelines in appropriate cases." Scapegoating Congress now, she is truly shameless in invoking the Nuremberg Defense.

Can we please not Godwin this?

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

#55

There are people along history (and I mean specifically civil servants, like Thomas More -the first that comes to my mind but by no means the only one-) who have even given his life because they did not want to comply with 'the law'... This 'complying with the law' is fedding me up. Someone has already noticed that bankers did also act 'with the law on their part'... And all the rating agencies, they suddendly 'just…

In our opinion not, but the rules are that only money decides the rules.

And the rules are that other people are always to blame and that the law, no matter how corrupt, is the law.

The problem is that especially these people (civil cervants) are chosen on this fallacy, are only loyal to their families and peers, all others don't exsists or are there to pull a leg out.

There is a huge Us vs. Them attitude amongst most people (not all, gladly) serving any government.

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

#56
post #10
post #7

> I must, however, make clear that this office’s conduct was appropriate in bringing and handling this case. That's why you assign investigations to independent entities, and that's why butchers aren't allowed to do their own health inspection. Whether it was appropriate or not is not for Carmen Ortiz to say. "The prosecutors recognized that there was no evidence against Mr. Swartz indicating that he committed his ac…

She can be technically telling the truth if the maximum penalty was 50 years (based on maximum possible value of damage), and they were only seeking 7 years.

The maximum penalty was not 50 years. There are several criminal laws that overlap, and on act can lead to a defendant being charged with several overlapping crimes. If the defendant is convicted for multiple of these overlapping crimes, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines call for just sentencing based on one of the violations. In other words, it is essentially max(), not sum().

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

#57
Statement Deconstruction

STATEMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEY CARMEN M. ORTIZ REGARDING THE DEATH OF AARON SWARTZ

As a parent and a sister, I can only imagine the pain felt by the family and friends of Aaron Swartz, and I want to extend my heartfelt sympathy to everyone who knew and loved this young man.[Sympathy - a good start but no apology.] I know that there is little I can say to abate the anger felt by those who believe that this office’s prosecution of Mr. Swartz was unwarranted and somehow led to the tragic result of him taking his own life.[Acknowledges anger and public feeling. No comment on their actions.]

I must, however, make clear that this office’s conduct was appropriate in bringing and handling this case.[States that they were correct to bring and handle the case. May be read as they handled the case correctly BUT does NOT actually state that.] The career prosecutors handling this matter took on the difficult task of enforcing a law they had taken an oath to uphold, and did so reasonably. [Claims the career prosecutors were reasonable. Were all involved 'career prosecutors' or is someone about to be hung out to dry? Alternative reading is that 'career prosecutors' is just trying to make them sound better.] The prosecutors recognized that there was no evidence against Mr. Swartz indicating that he committed his acts for personal financial gain, and they recognized that his conduct – while a violation of the law – did not warrant the severe punishments authorized by Congress and called for by the Sentencing Guidelines in appropriate cases. [OK. Then why would they (note Ortiz is not taking responsibility for this judgement) want to seek 7 years if it went to trial] 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. [not stated also admission of 13 felonies or that if he wanted a trial because he believed himself not guilty the appropriate sentence to seek would have been 7 years. Thats what you get for believing you have a right to a trial and not just doing what we say.] While at the same time, his defense counsel would have been free to recommend a sentence of probation. [Not stated: for 13 admitted felonies.] Ultimately, any sentence imposed would have been up to the judge. [Not our responsibility really.] 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. [We were really generous and told Mr. Swartz's attourneys that we intended to seek something between the maximum and ten times what was appropriate (by our admission) if he didn't plead guilty]

As federal prosecutors, our mission includes protecting the use of computers and the Internet by enforcing the law as fairly and responsibly as possible. [Sounds reasonable but does it match their actions?] We strive to do our best to fulfill this mission every day.[But we aren't commenting on the rest of our mission or how we have done matching this mission in this case.]

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

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/news/2011/July/SwartzAaronPR.... Downloading four million files, apparently. And if by breaking terms and services you mean illegally distributing protected content and threatening the business model of JSTOR then yes, I suppose that is true.

> illegally distributing protected content Aaron never did that. He may have been planning that but nobody can say this for a fact.

Like Philip Greenspun says, for all we know he wanted to do metaanalysis. There's no evidence at all he planned to distribute the files.

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

#59
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is Aaron wasn't the average kid. He had enemies, and he was a major annoyance to people wanting to tame the Internet.

Who were his enemies? I'm interested. Do you think the US justice dept was acting as an organ of these would-be tamers?

Aaron was founder of Demand Progress, organization that actually fought laws like PIPA/SOPA, and many other things, and the laws didn't pass.

This is a list of campaigns by Demand Progress: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_Progress#Campaigns

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

#60

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.

> This 35 year (or 50 year) thing mentioned in many blogs might be questionable.

It's not just in blogs, it is also in DOJ press releases attributed to Carmen Ortiz, linked elsewhere in this thread.

Post reply on HN