3 ms·
Had they gone to trial, however, he was likely facing 7 years, according to another article on the front page: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-cha
by scott_s 14y ago
Had they gone to trial, however, he was likely facing 7 years, according to another article on the front page: http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-against-aaron-swartz-part-2-prosecutorial-discretion/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-agains...
- res0nat0r 14y agoCorrect. He could have gone to trial, or taken the 6 month plea bargain.
- mpyne 14y agoIn fairness to the prosecution, pushing for the same exact sentence that the defendant refused to accept on a "gracious" plea bargain is poor economic policy. If the plea bargain sentence is really sufficient then there needs to be incentive to take the plea. 7 years is far less than the maximum sentence so she's still correct in saying they didn't push for the maximum (pending other evidence that might come out).
- scott_s 14y agoNot doing it is poor strategy, yes, but that doesn't mean that we have to accept it as good public policy. I found the recently posted paper on the German system enlightening: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5059044 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5059044