Two things.
Two things. Firstly, please spell his name correctly. It's Aaron Swartz. That respects him and makes sure that your audience isn't distracted by that tiny detail and can focus on your message. Secondly, the petition was too narrow and targeted the individual prosecutor for that case. Even if she was removed, it wouldn't prevent the same sort of thing happening again. The larger issue (and one closer to the point) is that the law is broken. - There are overlapping laws such that Swartz was charged with several distinct offences for what was fundamentally a single (though repeated) action. - Maximum sentences for such offences (crimes against property, in particular those that use technology, even crimes that are on the face of it relatively victimless) are grossly overstated when compared to violent crimes. - Prosecutors are permitted to present the charges in a way that maximizes the sentencing, by adding them consecutively. - All of the above points join together to maximize the number of cases where the defendant pleads guilty to avoid a court case, so there is a ridiculously small number of such cases that go to trial (and a correspondingly vast majority of cases of which the defendant is, as a result, convicted), even where the defendant is actually innocent of some or all charges, or when it is likely that a trial could result in a not guilty verdict. No reasonable person could say Swartz deserved 35 years in prison for what he is alleged to have done. The legal system that enabled Ortiz to present the charges as she did is much bigger than any prosecutorial overreach she is accused of in that petition. Let's not make it about one prosecutor. Let's make it about all of them.
Posted by jeremysmyth on Jan 8, 2015, 2:57 PM
Tags
Related issues
- I hate that folks recommend random extensions.
- This is my biggest problem with agents, they constantly defensively code for cases that have no chance of happening and in most cases a p...
- I wish there was something like LEAN for biology.
- The issue is really the extreme difficulty of programming them, especially for anything sequential (rather than combinatorial).
- I probably could have beared with it if it was only limited to programming, but it showing up in creative fields has made me feel all sor...
- I hate that I'm in deep enough to know what you mean.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.9,000 issues0 comments
reliability (Other)
I hate that folks recommend random extensions.
NewThis is my biggest problem with agents, they constantly defensively code for cases that have no chance of happening and in most cases a p...
I wish there was something like LEAN for biology.
The issue is really the extreme difficulty of programming them, especially for anything sequential (rather than combinatorial).
I probably could have beared with it if it was only limited to programming, but it showing up in creative fields has made me feel all sor...
I hate that I'm in deep enough to know what you mean.
The biggest problem with “AI” is that big corps are shoving it down our throats.
in the middel of a coding session with 5.6 sol.
Two things.
Two things. Firstly, please spell his name correctly. It's Aaron Swartz. That respects him and makes sure that your audience isn't distracted by that tiny detail and can focus on your message. Secondly, the petition was too narrow and targeted the individual prosecutor for that case. Even if she was removed, it wouldn't prevent the same sort of thing happening again. The larger issue (and one closer to the point) is that the law is broken. - There are overlapping laws such that Swartz was charged with several distinct offences for what was fundamentally a single (though repeated) action. - Maximum sentences for such offences (crimes against property, in particular those that use technology, even crimes that are on the face of it relatively victimless) are grossly overstated when compared to violent crimes. - Prosecutors are permitted to present the charges in a way that maximizes the sentencing, by adding them consecutively. - All of the above points join together to maximize the number of cases where the defendant pleads guilty to avoid a court case, so there is a ridiculously small number of such cases that go to trial (and a correspondingly vast majority of cases of which the defendant is, as a result, convicted), even where the defendant is actually innocent of some or all charges, or when it is likely that a trial could result in a not guilty verdict. No reasonable person could say Swartz deserved 35 years in prison for what he is alleged to have done. The legal system that enabled Ortiz to present the charges as she did is much bigger than any prosecutorial overreach she is accused of in that petition. Let's not make it about one prosecutor. Let's make it about all of them.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.