3 ms·
I think the problem is not the Law itself. The problem is that in order to protect yourself (even if you're not guilty) you have to spend ENORMOUS amount of mon
by isalmon 14y ago
I think the problem is not the Law itself. The problem is that in order to protect yourself (even if you're not guilty) you have to spend ENORMOUS amount of money. From this perspective rich people have more access to the basic rights (in this case ability to defend themselves) rather than poor.
- Shivetya 14y agoConnected people have a better ability, being rich does not guarantee you protection from Federal prosecutors. The Feds act with near impunity and only someone connected with the press or government officials really stand a chance against them. A relatively unknown internet person, regardless of money, is an easy mark to them. The issue I take with the case is the piling on by the prosecutors. There needs to be some limit to the number of charges one can apply and total time applied for cases where no life is lost. The current rules simply allow prosecutors to intimidate people into accepting punishment, even when those accused are not guilty of a crime; see the many false imprisonment stories around the net. People cheer on these laws when applied to people they don't like, financial fraud cases are very similar and involve the same strategy, bury them in charges so they have to accept something.