4 ms·
To be fair, it's pretty standard for crimes to have differing punishments depending on whether they were accidental or purposeful. Sometimes they're even consid
by sparky_z 10y ago
To be fair, it's pretty standard for crimes to have differing punishments depending on whether they were accidental or purposeful. Sometimes they're even considered different crimes entirely (i.e., murder vs manslaughter).
(I'm not defending Chelsea's treatment here. I just think it's odd that grizzles has singled out this particular aspect of the situation as worthy of outrage.)
- grizzles 10y agoPetraeus did it for sex. He got a fine, and no prison time.
- anonu 10y agoIt also ended his career...
- gozur88 10y agoHe also leaked far less data and had an idea of what he was leaking. Manning did far, far more damage to national security interests the law was designed to protect.
- ricksplat 10y agoHe was also in the military, which carries different expectations of behaviour, and a tougher system of account.
- DanielBMarkham 10y agoThe system of account should be stricter the higher you go up, no? Otherwise you seem to be making the case for civilian leaders to not have access at all to sensitive information. (Sidebar: Because of the way this played out, this is probably going to be an impossible topic to talk about for many years. And the system is going to suffer for it.)
- ricksplat 10y agoYeah but Hillary and the Petraeus are civilians no? Or at the very least not subject to military jurisdiction and standards.
- gozur88 10y ago>The system of account should be stricter the higher you go up, no? There's more than one dimension here. The "system of account", as you call it, should be stricter the higher up you go, and it should also be stricter if you're uniformed military.