61–70 of 118 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No offense, but you've managed to wrap up a perfectly decent thought with a wording that makes you look like an asshole.
Disagree. Chasing's response does sound a bit prickly, but there's no ad hominem in it, and I can see why he/she took some offense at being told what to do.
The death of Aaron Swartz is a loss to his family, his friends, and to society. The focus on the prosecutors, however, makes me uneasy. I can support a review of the conduct of the prosecutors but I can't call for their firing. From what I have read, the conduct of the prosecutors was close to standard procedure. If it was wrong of the prosecutors to make an example out of Aaron, it is equally wrong to make an exampl…
"the conduct of the prosecutors was close to standard procedure" This is part of the problem. It is standard procedure and it needs to be changed. Firing those who've acted too aggresively will help to change the way prosecutors operate. "If it was wrong of the prosecutors to make an example out of Aaron, it is equally wrong to make an example of the prosecutors" No it is not equally wrong because we're not suggestin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh come on. That's like asking "is there any evidence this particular bear shat in these particular woods?" The path to success for prosecutors is successful high-profile prosecutions. Everybody knows that. I don't actually know that Heymann's career had been fading, but the rest of this quote seems pretty reasonable based on what we know.
Ah, so the reason why we know this assertion is true is because everyone knows that such assertions are always true?
Taren's quote portrays him as ruthless. I concede that we don't know exactly what went through his mind, but based on the facts in evidence, I think that that appears to be an accurate characterization. I, at least, cannot imagine how anyone with any compassion or principles could have looked at what Swartz did and concluded that it deserved to be treated as a felony worth years in federal prison.
Anyway, as I said upthread, the point is not so much what happens to Heymann as it is publicly making the point that Federal prosecutors in general have too much power and inappropriate incentives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No offense, but you've managed to wrap up a perfectly decent thought with a wording that makes you look like an asshole.
To be fair, he's responding someone who is telling us to not talk about the issue and simply perform the action he favors, in so many words.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, so the reason why we know this assertion is true is because everyone knows that such assertions are always true?
We, the citizens, have set up a system that rewards this kind of behavior. It would be odd if Heymann didn't respond to the incentives we have placed before him. Taren's quote portrays him as ruthless. I concede that we don't know exactly what went through his mind, but based on the facts in evidence, I think that that appears to be an accurate characterization. I, at least, cannot imagine how anyone with any compass…
Seriously, this is getting out of control. I have no idea whether an investigation will turn up evidence of misconduct, but I doubt you do, either.
Why not lynch him? If we're going to do mob rule, we should do it right, no? Pitchforks and torches and all.
You can claim that this is all pathos and that this action is not merited on the facts, but your sardoncism about collective action seems misplaced. I'll even agree that Heymann is unlikely to be fired, but to equate either TarenSK's suggestion or petition signing with a lynching is both unfair and unkind.
The death of Aaron Swartz is a loss to his family, his friends, and to society. The focus on the prosecutors, however, makes me uneasy. I can support a review of the conduct of the prosecutors but I can't call for their firing. From what I have read, the conduct of the prosecutors was close to standard procedure. If it was wrong of the prosecutors to make an example out of Aaron, it is equally wrong to make an exampl…
Careful, you're being dangerously logical about this situation. My primary account got hell-banned for saying stuff like this. You're right about the need to address the structural issues before the personnel implementing the structure. If we just swap out the personnel, they'll conform to the system as it currently exists and we'll have the same problems...but with different people.
We do need to address the structural issues, that's clear.
But in the meantime, sending a signal that we want prosecutors to seek justice, not just rack up convictions, is not, I think, a bad idea. After all, justice is our ultimate purpose.
And I think prosecutors will take note, even if their public statements suggest otherwise. If Heymann were actually fired, which I don't expect, they would take even more note.
Heymann saw Aaron as a scalp he could take. He thought he could lock Aaron up, get high-profile press coverage, and win high-fives from his fellow prosecutors in the lunchroom. Aaron was a way of reviving Heymann’s fading career. Heymann had no interest in an honest assessment of whether Aaron deserved any of the hell he was being put through. Is there any evidence for any of this seeming mind reading?
Did you stop reading after that paragraph? The next paragraph says, "I believe that Heymann is guilty of prosecutorial misconduct on several levels, but I can’t prove it until we have a proper investigation."
I'm not sure what the right outcome is, but the issue needs a chance to be fought for; and so I've signed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"the conduct of the prosecutors was close to standard procedure" This is part of the problem. It is standard procedure and it needs to be changed. Firing those who've acted too aggresively will help to change the way prosecutors operate. "If it was wrong of the prosecutors to make an example out of Aaron, it is equally wrong to make an example of the prosecutors" No it is not equally wrong because we're not suggestin…
It should not be a matter of degree. Selective punishment is unjust whether it is done in a courtroom or a kindergarten class.
The system in which he works doesn't necessarily remind prosecutors of that as often or as impactfully as it should, and you're right, we need to fix that. There definitely are structural issues here that start with the knee-jerk "tough on crime" mentality of many voters.
That's exactly why we need to make as much noise as we can -- to show the politicians and prosecutors that some of us feel strongly that the system has been over-optimized in the direction of prosecution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Careful, you're being dangerously logical about this situation. My primary account got hell-banned for saying stuff like this. You're right about the need to address the structural issues before the personnel implementing the structure. If we just swap out the personnel, they'll conform to the system as it currently exists and we'll have the same problems...but with different people.
I half agree. We do need to address the structural issues, that's clear. But in the meantime, sending a signal that we want prosecutors to seek justice, not just rack up convictions, is not, I think, a bad idea. After all, justice is our ultimate purpose. And I think prosecutors will take note, even if their public statements suggest otherwise. If Heymann were actually fired, which I don't expect, they would take eve…