4 ms·

That's not the OPs point. The plea bargain system is principally unjust. If prosecutors had enough evidence of some crimes, then the accused should be tried for

by 13415 8y ago

That's not the OPs point. The plea bargain system is principally unjust. If prosecutors had enough evidence of some crimes, then the accused should be tried for them and not go freely. If prosecutors don't have enough evidence for some of the alleged crimes they stack up, then the charges should be dropped and the accused should only be tried for the crimes for which there is sufficient evidence. The please bargain system is nothing but institutionalized blackmail, and many innocent people have become its victims.

tptacek 8y ago
How exactly would Hutchins benefit from a system in which he was essentially required to take this case to trial? Stipulate that the FBI has him dead to rights, which it sure seems like they do. Then, in this case, the plea bargain system helped him: it enabled him to agree with prosecutors not to try him on all 10 counts, and to reduce his sentencing level, which prosecutors would not have an incentive to do otherwise.
- 13415 8y ago
  The idea of justice is not to provide some benefits to people who where accused of some crimes. If someone has committed a crime, then justice system shouldn't help him. If on the other hand the person has not committed besaid crime, then the justice system ought to carefully prevent wrong accusations and ensure a fair trial. The please bargain system does neither of that.
  - tedunangst 8y ago
    How do we decide who has committed a crime?
    - 13415 8y ago
      I have argued that the plea bargain system is unjust in both cases, when the accused has committed the crime and when the accused has not committed the crime. There is no need for anyone to decide who has committed a crime for that argument to go through. To answer your question, not "we" would do that but that's what fair trials are intended for.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    It sounds an awful lot like you're angry Hutchins isn't facing a harsher sentence.
    - 13415 8y ago
      No, if that's how you read my post you should read it again. I personally believe he should have faced 3 years maximum and that sentences are way too high in the US, up to 10 times higher than elsewhere, but that wasn't the point. I was laying out reasons why the plea bargain system is principally unjust. There are many more problems with the US justice system, of course.
      - tptacek 8y ago
        As a technicality, he faces a 5-year maximum sentence (the sentencing judge could simply ignore the plea bargain and all the sentencing guidelines and Hutchins lack of criminal history and simply impute the maximum statutory sentence). In reality, the guideline ranges stipulated in the plea bargain put him most likely under 2 years, and possibly as few as 6 months. Even with the maximum upward departure stipulated in the agreement, Hutchins would not be looking at 3 years.
- ALittleLight 8y ago
  The problem with the plea bargain system is that it helps the guilty and hurts the innocent. Suppose he was innocent but the prosecution had some coincidental but persuasive evidence. "You'll go to jail for ten years if you fight it and lose. Take a plea, do three months and pay a fine." The guilty get the benefit of reduced sentences. The innocent have to face the bullying behavior where prosecutors stack up charges to make the potential punishment more frightening in order to coerce a plea.
- travmatt 8y ago
  Orin Kerr’s analysis suggests that the charges against him were fairly aggressive and may have strained the language of the laws themselves, it doesn’t appear to be straightforward. Additionally, I imagine a lawyer could well argue that the venue itself was inappropriate, the charges do not at all specify why the district they were filed in had jurisdiction to try his alleged crimes. I’m not familiar with this case, but prosecutors stacking every applicable crime they can to stretch the resources of the defendants seems to be standard operating procedure. This could well be the best outcome his attorney was able to guarantee with the resources he was able to spend on this case, but Orin Kerr raised a lot of questions that a more resources defendant may have wanted to take to trial. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/08/03/the-kronos-indictment-it-a-crime-to-create-and-sell-malware/?utm_term=.501156d06086 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

by 13415 8y ago

tptacek 8y ago

How exactly would Hutchins benefit from a system in which he was essentially required to take this case to trial? Stipulate that the FBI has him dead to rights, which it sure seems like they do. Then, in this case, the plea bargain system helped him: it enabled him to agree with prosecutors not to try him on all 10 counts, and to reduce his sentencing level, which prosecutors would not have an incentive to do otherwise.

13415 8y ago
The idea of justice is not to provide some benefits to people who where accused of some crimes. If someone has committed a crime, then justice system shouldn't help him. If on the other hand the person has not committed besaid crime, then the justice system ought to carefully prevent wrong accusations and ensure a fair trial. The please bargain system does neither of that.
- tedunangst 8y ago
  How do we decide who has committed a crime?
  - 13415 8y ago
    I have argued that the plea bargain system is unjust in both cases, when the accused has committed the crime and when the accused has not committed the crime. There is no need for anyone to decide who has committed a crime for that argument to go through. To answer your question, not "we" would do that but that's what fair trials are intended for.
- tptacek 8y ago
  It sounds an awful lot like you're angry Hutchins isn't facing a harsher sentence.
  - 13415 8y ago
    No, if that's how you read my post you should read it again. I personally believe he should have faced 3 years maximum and that sentences are way too high in the US, up to 10 times higher than elsewhere, but that wasn't the point. I was laying out reasons why the plea bargain system is principally unjust. There are many more problems with the US justice system, of course.
    - tptacek 8y ago
      As a technicality, he faces a 5-year maximum sentence (the sentencing judge could simply ignore the plea bargain and all the sentencing guidelines and Hutchins lack of criminal history and simply impute the maximum statutory sentence). In reality, the guideline ranges stipulated in the plea bargain put him most likely under 2 years, and possibly as few as 6 months. Even with the maximum upward departure stipulated in the agreement, Hutchins would not be looking at 3 years.
ALittleLight 8y ago
The problem with the plea bargain system is that it helps the guilty and hurts the innocent. Suppose he was innocent but the prosecution had some coincidental but persuasive evidence. "You'll go to jail for ten years if you fight it and lose. Take a plea, do three months and pay a fine." The guilty get the benefit of reduced sentences. The innocent have to face the bullying behavior where prosecutors stack up charges to make the potential punishment more frightening in order to coerce a plea.
travmatt 8y ago
Orin Kerr’s analysis suggests that the charges against him were fairly aggressive and may have strained the language of the laws themselves, it doesn’t appear to be straightforward. Additionally, I imagine a lawyer could well argue that the venue itself was inappropriate, the charges do not at all specify why the district they were filed in had jurisdiction to try his alleged crimes. I’m not familiar with this case, but prosecutors stacking every applicable crime they can to stretch the resources of the defendants seems to be standard operating procedure. This could well be the best outcome his attorney was able to guarantee with the resources he was able to spend on this case, but Orin Kerr raised a lot of questions that a more resources defendant may have wanted to take to trial. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/08/03/the-kronos-indictment-it-a-crime-to-create-and-sell-malware/?utm_term=.501156d06086 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...