5 ms·

just to point out they were threatening aaron schwartz with 50+ years when he killed himself. he just downloaded medical journals from the campus networking clo

just to point out they were threatening aaron schwartz with 50+ years when he killed himself. he just downloaded medical journals from the campus networking closet. these guys were corrupt officials engaging in, hacking, conspiracy (RICO laws), theft, destruction of evidence and probably blackmail and money laundering and tax evasion. 6 years. schwartz was a political activist, these guys were just dirty special agents. thats how the book is thrown.

mikeyouse 11y ago
It's Aaron Swartz and he in no way was facing "50+ years". The cumulative max sentence is in no way representative of what the potential or likely sentence will look like. He was likely facing ~6 months based on the charges against him. Here's a good article about why this is the case; https://popehat.com/2015/10/08/bad-reporting-on-matthew-keys-possible-sentence-conceals-prosecutorial-power/ https://popehat.com/2015/10/08/bad-reporting-on-matthew-keys...
- loopdoend 11y ago
  It doesn't matter. They threatened him with it. They didn't threaten this DEA goon with it. His union lawyers or whatever made sure of it. It was real to Aaron.
  - ryanlol 11y ago
    Uh, what the fuck? Seriously? This guy was both facing a higher THEORETICAL maximum than Aaron, and got a significantly higher sentence than Aaron could have ever received. And no, Aaron was definitely not "threatened" with 50 years. Where are you getting that from?
  - notahacker 11y ago
    And your evidence for this is? Force faced a cumulative maximum sentence of sixty years and $750k in fines. He opted to plead guilty. There's no particular reason to believe the plea bargaining process was friendly. He got six years, and the prosecution argued for more.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > It doesn't matter. They threatened him with it. They didn't threaten this DEA goon with it. Even if that's true (for which no evidence is presented), the DEA agent, being a federal law enforcement professional, probably understands federal sentencing, so probably wouldn't be susceptible to threats that can only work on someone who doesn't understand that. > His union lawyers or whatever made sure of it. I am sure that any competent criminal defense lawyer makes both the theoretical maximum and the likely real sentences clear to their clients, yes. That's actually a good thing, I would say. Not, of course, that information on this is particularly hard to find even for reasonably intelligent laypersons with access to public information.
- ckozlowski 11y ago
  When I the beginning of this discussion line, I made a point to look up this Popehat article. Continued reading to see that you found it. =) Popehat (a group blog run by geek lawyers) is really fantastic for getting into the nuts and bolts of criminal law, and I cannot recommend it to HN readers enough.
  - mikeyouse 11y ago
    Yeah, I love their site. They do a ton of work on first amendment, free speech, and anti-SLAPP cases and will sometimes provide pro bono representation for the right cause. It also helps that they clearly explain all of the procedure and standards they're adhering to.
- yc1010 11y ago
  6 months would have pretty much destroyed his life, especially when it comes to getting a job
  - dogma1138 11y ago
    Not really, if you apply for a "traditional" unskilled/semi-skilled job yes, but in this case nope... Given his abilities and renown he would find a job both despite and because of his would be conviction. There are plenty of "security experts" that started as hackers/crackers and with time served on their records that don't have issue finding a job. If you apply to Walmart with a record well GL, but in Tech hmm you've hacked into the DOD? well how about 6 figures + equity if you come work for us... The guy was part of the RSS working group at what 14 and part of the RDF group at W3C at 15? If he would not have tragically ended his life he would've ended up working for Google or any other tech company he would choose to work for regardless of his conviction.
- vpkaihla 11y ago
  For a person who isn't a hardened criminal and hasn't done anything wrong, just the knowledge of being the focus of a huge investigation is more than enough to cause mental trouble.
skrebbel 11y ago
6 years in prison is a lot. And 6 years in an American prison is a lot. While I agree with your sentiment, the problem is that Swartz faced charges up to 50 years, not that this crooked cop got convicted of 6. Wishing this guy 50 years just because "that's what they threatened Aaron for" is the kind of attitude that is going to keep the US prison system as horrendously inhumane as it is today.
- deciplex 11y ago
  > Wishing this guy 50 years just because "that's what they threatened Aaron for" is the kind of attitude that is going to keep the US prison system as horrendously inhumane as it is today. On the contrary, if we apply the law equally we might see some push for reform from current groups that consider themselves basically above the law.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
ryanlol 11y ago
Where exactly did they threaten Swartz with 50+ years? Lying is a very questionable way to push your political agenda. "he just downloaded medical journals from the campus networking closet" isn't very accurate either, he broke into a server cabinet and actively evaded security measures to download medical journals. Keep in mind that he wasn't even ever sentenced, which makes him a REALLY shitty poster boy for US legal system abuses.
- grkvlt 11y ago
  I don't think he's lying, and I don't understand why people seem to use 'lying' as a synonym for 'wrong'. Lying requires an intent to decieve. In this case, the GP probably believes, albeit incorrectly, that the media reports about the sentence Swartz was likely to recieve were correct. Remember that the 50 year figure was widely reported at the time, often by sources that seemed reliable. Your issue should be with the media outlets that failed to fact-check in favour of a sensational story...
  - ryanlol 11y ago
    Anybody with the most basic understanding of the US legal system should understand that it's obviously not true. You'd expect for someone who is as ready to criticize the system as OP is to actually sort of understand what he's talking about. Honestly, I'm just really pissed because statements like that are actually really harmful as they only work to divert attention from the real issues that need fixing. Some kid killing themselves because they were too scared to face court isn't an issue with the legal system, but with the (mental) healthcare system. (Note that at the time Swartz hadn't even been found guilty, much less sentenced.)
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > In this case, the GP probably believes, albeit incorrectly, that the media reports about the sentence Swartz was likely to recieve were correct. I don't think there were any media reports claiming that Swartz was likely to receive anything like the max sentence, only that it was the maximum allowed in the law. Unsophisticated readers may have falsely concluded that Swartz was likely to receive that sentence, but that's not what any of the media reports I saw said. > Remember that the 50 year figure was widely reported at the time, often by sources that seemed reliable. None of the media reports I saw that presented the figure -- as an "up to" figure, invariably -- did so inaccurately, or claimed it was a likely sentence rather than the most extreme theoretically available for the offenses for which he was charged.

mikeyouse 11y ago

It's Aaron Swartz and he in no way was facing "50+ years". The cumulative max sentence is in no way representative of what the potential or likely sentence will look like. He was likely facing ~6 months based on the charges against him. Here's a good article about why this is the case; https://popehat.com/2015/10/08/bad-reporting-on-matthew-keys-possible-sentence-conceals-prosecutorial-power/ https://popehat.com/2015/10/08/bad-reporting-on-matthew-keys...

loopdoend 11y ago
It doesn't matter. They threatened him with it. They didn't threaten this DEA goon with it. His union lawyers or whatever made sure of it. It was real to Aaron.
- ryanlol 11y ago
  Uh, what the fuck? Seriously? This guy was both facing a higher THEORETICAL maximum than Aaron, and got a significantly higher sentence than Aaron could have ever received. And no, Aaron was definitely not "threatened" with 50 years. Where are you getting that from?
- notahacker 11y ago
  And your evidence for this is? Force faced a cumulative maximum sentence of sixty years and $750k in fines. He opted to plead guilty. There's no particular reason to believe the plea bargaining process was friendly. He got six years, and the prosecution argued for more.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > It doesn't matter. They threatened him with it. They didn't threaten this DEA goon with it. Even if that's true (for which no evidence is presented), the DEA agent, being a federal law enforcement professional, probably understands federal sentencing, so probably wouldn't be susceptible to threats that can only work on someone who doesn't understand that. > His union lawyers or whatever made sure of it. I am sure that any competent criminal defense lawyer makes both the theoretical maximum and the likely real sentences clear to their clients, yes. That's actually a good thing, I would say. Not, of course, that information on this is particularly hard to find even for reasonably intelligent laypersons with access to public information.
ckozlowski 11y ago
When I the beginning of this discussion line, I made a point to look up this Popehat article. Continued reading to see that you found it. =) Popehat (a group blog run by geek lawyers) is really fantastic for getting into the nuts and bolts of criminal law, and I cannot recommend it to HN readers enough.
- mikeyouse 11y ago
  Yeah, I love their site. They do a ton of work on first amendment, free speech, and anti-SLAPP cases and will sometimes provide pro bono representation for the right cause. It also helps that they clearly explain all of the procedure and standards they're adhering to.
yc1010 11y ago
6 months would have pretty much destroyed his life, especially when it comes to getting a job
- dogma1138 11y ago
  Not really, if you apply for a "traditional" unskilled/semi-skilled job yes, but in this case nope... Given his abilities and renown he would find a job both despite and because of his would be conviction. There are plenty of "security experts" that started as hackers/crackers and with time served on their records that don't have issue finding a job. If you apply to Walmart with a record well GL, but in Tech hmm you've hacked into the DOD? well how about 6 figures + equity if you come work for us... The guy was part of the RSS working group at what 14 and part of the RDF group at W3C at 15? If he would not have tragically ended his life he would've ended up working for Google or any other tech company he would choose to work for regardless of his conviction.
vpkaihla 11y ago
For a person who isn't a hardened criminal and hasn't done anything wrong, just the knowledge of being the focus of a huge investigation is more than enough to cause mental trouble.

skrebbel 11y ago

6 years in prison is a lot. And 6 years in an American prison is a lot. While I agree with your sentiment, the problem is that Swartz faced charges up to 50 years, not that this crooked cop got convicted of 6. Wishing this guy 50 years just because "that's what they threatened Aaron for" is the kind of attitude that is going to keep the US prison system as horrendously inhumane as it is today.

deciplex 11y ago
> Wishing this guy 50 years just because "that's what they threatened Aaron for" is the kind of attitude that is going to keep the US prison system as horrendously inhumane as it is today. On the contrary, if we apply the law equally we might see some push for reform from current groups that consider themselves basically above the law.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

ryanlol 11y ago

Where exactly did they threaten Swartz with 50+ years? Lying is a very questionable way to push your political agenda. "he just downloaded medical journals from the campus networking closet" isn't very accurate either, he broke into a server cabinet and actively evaded security measures to download medical journals. Keep in mind that he wasn't even ever sentenced, which makes him a REALLY shitty poster boy for US legal system abuses.

grkvlt 11y ago
I don't think he's lying, and I don't understand why people seem to use 'lying' as a synonym for 'wrong'. Lying requires an intent to decieve. In this case, the GP probably believes, albeit incorrectly, that the media reports about the sentence Swartz was likely to recieve were correct. Remember that the 50 year figure was widely reported at the time, often by sources that seemed reliable. Your issue should be with the media outlets that failed to fact-check in favour of a sensational story...
- ryanlol 11y ago
  Anybody with the most basic understanding of the US legal system should understand that it's obviously not true. You'd expect for someone who is as ready to criticize the system as OP is to actually sort of understand what he's talking about. Honestly, I'm just really pissed because statements like that are actually really harmful as they only work to divert attention from the real issues that need fixing. Some kid killing themselves because they were too scared to face court isn't an issue with the legal system, but with the (mental) healthcare system. (Note that at the time Swartz hadn't even been found guilty, much less sentenced.)
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > In this case, the GP probably believes, albeit incorrectly, that the media reports about the sentence Swartz was likely to recieve were correct. I don't think there were any media reports claiming that Swartz was likely to receive anything like the max sentence, only that it was the maximum allowed in the law. Unsophisticated readers may have falsely concluded that Swartz was likely to receive that sentence, but that's not what any of the media reports I saw said. > Remember that the 50 year figure was widely reported at the time, often by sources that seemed reliable. None of the media reports I saw that presented the figure -- as an "up to" figure, invariably -- did so inaccurately, or claimed it was a likely sentence rather than the most extreme theoretically available for the offenses for which he was charged.