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

Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 228 posts

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#161

Post by tomjen3 »

tehwalrus wrote: post #88
impendia wrote: post #14

I was on a jury for a murder trial, and so I have some insight into how juries work. At one point, when I was splitting some hairs and discussing the meaning of some small details from the evidence, one of the other jurors got impatient and reached for the coroner's photo of the victim. "Someone died here, you realize."

I was on a jury (robbery) in the UK. It's a crime to say, afterwards, what happened in a jury room in the UK.

So could you punch one of the other Juriors and get away with it, since they can't press charges?

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#162

Post by rhizome »

jlgreco wrote: post #159
reginaldjcooper wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you add "jury nullification" to the mass emails also? That's what I tell my friends and family about.

If I ever get "fuck you" money, I am going to entertain myself by renting billboard space around courtrooms urging jurors to Google "jury nullification". I figure there would probably be some entertaining fallout of some sort.

Depends on your definition of "entertainment," but you'll probably want to do your homework first, regardless:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/nyregion/26jury.html?_r=0

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#163

Post by Zimahl »

lightbritefight wrote: post #146
Ruska wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't say anything. At all. Nothing you say will help your circumstances, but it can hurt you.

Actually, according to the supreme court, you have to verbally invoke your right to remain silent. If you dont, and they harass you for 16 hours and you say anything, its fair game. If you do, and they opt to keep harassing you, its not.

I know what you are getting at, but that recent SCOTUS decision didn't implicitly say that. However, it did make it clear that you can't talk with police (thus waiving your right), refuse to answer a question, and then answer other questions. In essence, it's not the police's job to figure out whether or not you're invoking your right.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#164

Post by tomjen3 »

Fuxy wrote: post #87

That's the problem with the American judicial system. Whenever they want to convict someone innocent of a bullshit crime they just assemble of idiots who just say guilty to go home to their trailer. Have they heard of the phrase "jury of their pears" that actually means pears not of the same species. I wouldn't consider any of the people on that jury my pears.

jury of one's peers n. a guaranteed right of criminal defendants, in which "peer" means an "equal." This has been interpreted by courts to mean that the available jurors include a broad spectrum of the population, particularly of race, national origin and gender. Jury selection may include no process which excludes those of a particular race or intentionally narrows the spectrum of possible jurors. It does not mean that women are to be tried by women, Asians by Asians, or African Americans by African Americans.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/jury+of+one's+...

But originally jury of ones peers was a right of (so called noble) Englishmen to be judged by other lords, and not by commoners. Sadly, it does not give intellectual people the right to be judged by others with above room temperature IQ (what is it they say, a jury consists of 12 people not smart enough to get out jury duty?).

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#165

Post by smacktoward »

kasey_junk wrote: post #101
ig1 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The exact details (which aren't disputed) are covered in: http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/021110aleyn... Basically he'd written a backup program which was specifically designed to compress both his home directory and propriety code from elsewhere on the system into a file (which it would do depended on parameters passed). On his last day of employment he ran it several times with different parameters…

I don't doubt he did something illegal and I don't care particularly what his reason is. What is way more troubling to me is how apparently easy it is for Goldman to get the highest levels of government involved and throw the criminal book at someone over what is typically a civil matter.

"The highest levels of government" and "Goldman Sachs" are pretty much interchangeable: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20001981-10391695.html

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#166

Post by dragonwriter »

tomjen3 wrote: post #164
Fuxy wrote: post #87

That's the problem with the American judicial system. Whenever they want to convict someone innocent of a bullshit crime they just assemble of idiots who just say guilty to go home to their trailer. Have they heard of the phrase "jury of their pears" that actually means pears not of the same species. I wouldn't consider any of the people on that jury my pears.

jury of one's peers n. a guaranteed right of criminal defendants, in which "peer" means an "equal." This has been interpreted by courts to mean that the available jurors include a broad spectrum of the population, particularly of race, national origin and gender. Jury selection may include no process which excludes those of a particular race or intentionally narrows the spectrum of possible jurors. It does not mean t…

> Sadly, it does not give intellectual people the right to be judged by others with above room temperature IQ

The closest English precedent for that was not the "jury of one's peers" but the "benefit of clergy".

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#167

Post by jlgreco »

rhizome wrote: post #162
jlgreco wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I ever get "fuck you" money, I am going to entertain myself by renting billboard space around courtrooms urging jurors to Google "jury nullification". I figure there would probably be some entertaining fallout of some sort.

Depends on your definition of "entertainment," but you'll probably want to do your homework first, regardless: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/nyregion/26jury.html?_r=0

I'm familiar with that man. That more or less is my definition of entertainment. I think somebody with money and who did it right (billboards on major roads surrounding but not necessarily in front of the court house, never approaching individuals in any way) could get into some interesting legal battles.

Do it right and it is plainly free speech; if I were to write/publish a book instead of design/rent billboards it would be very unambiguously legal. The entertainment comes in the form of seeing how they would try to stop me.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#168

Post by dllthomas »

rhizome wrote: post #162
jlgreco wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I ever get "fuck you" money, I am going to entertain myself by renting billboard space around courtrooms urging jurors to Google "jury nullification". I figure there would probably be some entertaining fallout of some sort.

Depends on your definition of "entertainment," but you'll probably want to do your homework first, regardless: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/26/nyregion/26jury.html?_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/20/nyregion/indictment-agains...

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#169

Post by digipaper »

Symmetry wrote: post #111
clicks wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should have taken him to a side and told him to go watch 12 Angry Men when he gets home.

12 Angry Men might, perhaps, not be the best example. http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.com/2012/11/odds-again-ba... EDIT: Actually, this is the one I should have linked to: http://www.avclub.com/articles/did-12-angry-men-get-it-wrong...

That doesn't dispute anything about 12 Angry Men for me.

Re: Did Goldman Overstep in Criminally Charging Its Ex-Programmer?

#170

Post by pigscantfly »

rollo_tommasi wrote: post #115

This article is also interesting in that the total blind trust McSwain put in Goldman's explanation of the situation really illustrates the typical mob hit-man mentality of most law enforcement agents. The Big Boss gives them a name and they take that guy out, no questions asked.

It's all down to laziness, IMO. That FBI agent could have done some research for verification and realized that Goldman was selling him an overblown story. What's the point, though; the courts will do their background research eventually, right? And by then they'll be arresting the next poor schmuck Wall Street doesn't want to lose to a competitor.
Post reply on HN