> The expectation that SBF would be the breaking point where we fix that system is irrational I don’t have an expectation that it will be the breaking point, b

> The expectation that SBF would be the breaking point where we fix that system is irrational I don’t have an expectation that it will be the breaking point, but breaking points tend to come all of a sudden at once. Sometimes the straw that breaks the camel’s back isn’t the most significant straw. My reason for wanting to talk about it, is the breaking point will come earlier when we agitate more each time the injustice is made apparent. And Ken White is a great advocate. I also listen to him and read his works regularly. But he—while better than most lawyers—tend to have the same strong status quo tendency that lawyers have. They are embedded with the system as it is, and focused on the incremental reforms that make it better. Which is great! It’s super important to have people working on that problem and problem space. But it’s also important to have people pushing more… revolutionary ideas for reforms to the criminal justice system. I think both are important to be pushing for. The nuts and bolts incremental improvements to the existing systems are the most likely to have immediate impact now. But the big reformers are the ones that will push us towards a more equitable justice system in the long term. Frankly, I think the current justice system is a mockery of its own name, and count myself among those thinking it needs a more systematic overhaul. Hence my agitation over the SBF issues. But, again, I still think the incremental improvement work is important and necessary