3 ms·
Maybe "pragmatic prosecutors made pragmatic decisions instead of satisfying random internet commenters looking for perfect justice."
by differentView 5y ago
Maybe "pragmatic prosecutors made pragmatic decisions instead of satisfying random internet commenters looking for perfect justice."
- watwut 5y agoMaybe that still means there is larger issue in the system anyway?
- cies 5y agoStrawman. He's not advocating perfect justice. He raises awareness to something that I also found gut wrenching when reading the article: investors (super rich) mattered, commoners did not. Calling that "pragmatic prosecutors made pragmatic decisions"... Well. You do you.
- babarock 5y agoYou're making the assumption that Holmes wronged "commoners" with malicious intent. As far as anyone can tell, this is just an allegation. So either: 1. you have incredible insight into the inner workings of the company. 2. you're joining an online pitchforking mob. As much as I rejoice seeing a Silicon Valley poster child be exposed as a phony and a fraud, I would be very careful before jumping to conclusions and asserting with high confidence that the court verdict is flawed.
- cies 5y ago> You're making the assumption that Holmes wronged "commoners" with malicious intent. Nope. I take from the text that prosecutors-and-or-law-itself defend the interests of super rich better than the interests/well-being of commoners. > I would be very careful before jumping to conclusions and asserting with high confidence that the court verdict is flawed. Good for you. I'm not saying it is flawed, neither am I passing judgement on who's guilty... I'm saying it seems the whole system is favoring the some over others.