I agree, and I think that people should be able to make the distinction between legally correct and morally correct. (It's very easy to make a Godwin here) Is

I agree, and I think that people should be able to make the distinction between legally correct and morally correct. (It's very easy to make a Godwin here) Is it that uncommon to factor in the situation? I've heard of judges in the Netherlands who find people guilty, but give them just a small fine. Likewise, they might rule that technically, someone is guilty, but that this application of the law is not in the spirit of the law. In the US, this might be less common. However, Steve Jobs was legally responsible for Apple backdating options in 2006. He plays the "Oh, I didn't know"-card and sure enough, an exception to the law can be made. However, a woman in Texas was jailed for 8 years for crossing a wrong box on her voting form. Now suddenly "I didn't know" is not a valid excuse. The law is not that independent. Screwing over someone powerful is likely to yield repercussions, even if it is morally and legally the right thing to do. Screwing over someone without power mostly goes without consequences, so this happens more often.