3 ms·

There seem to be two camps on HN, on this issue and on the case in general. One camp says: "The total penalty possible was 35 years. In general this scared Aar

by edanm 14y ago

There seem to be two camps on HN, on this issue and on the case in general. One camp says: "The total penalty possible was 35 years. In general this scared Aaron Swartz. In specific Carmen Ortiz now saying that they weren't pursuing this penalty is a lie, since it was always a possibility." The other camp says: "Forget the total that was theoretically possible. Every knowledgable person to talk about this case has said that Aaron would almost certainly have gotten only a few months jail time. And this is also what Carment Ortiz meant when she said 'We're only seeking a few months in jail'. Never mind the theoretical maximum that her office published, that's what was actually on the table". It seems all the arguments here are about which point is "more true", but everyone seems to agree on the basic facts. The only fact we don't know, is how much the potential, theoretical threat of 35 years in jail affected Aaron. And about that, no amount of internet arguing will help get to the truth. Personally, I'm in the second camp - I don't see a reason to keep bringing up the 35 year figure, because I imagine that in a similar situation, I would be listening to the many people who know more than me telling me that 35 is not even close to a realistic possibility. And I certainly don't think it's lying for Carmen Ortiz to state the truth: her office did NOT seek the maximum penalty, and this was known to Aaron Swartz.

podperson 14y ago
Nice synopsis although I suspect faction A will claim you're misrepresenting them. My take on it is that the prosecution did what prosecutors do. Jason Swartz seems to me to have been somewhat bipolar, and in manic phases he was brilliant, enthusiastic, idealistic, and a bit nuts -- which is what got him in trouble. In his depressive phase he killed himself. Blaming the prosecutors for his decisions is a tad harsh. The truth is complex and sad.
- jacquesm 14y ago
  > Nice synopsis although I suspect faction A will claim you're misrepresenting them. There are two kinds of people, those that try to divide the world into two groups and those that don't. > My take on it is that the prosecution did what prosecutors do. Likely true, but that does not make it right or morally defensible in this case. > Jason Swartz ... > seems to me to have been somewhat bipolar, and in manic phases he was brilliant, enthusiastic, idealistic, and a bit nuts -- which is what got him in trouble. No, what got him into trouble is his tendency to stand up against vested interests. If he'd been picking on the neighborhood streetpeople nobody would have noticed. But he wasn't that kind of person, he tried very hard to improve the world as he saw it, to fix broken parts of it using his skills. > In his depressive phase he killed himself. That's a shortcut for which you are missing a bunch of supporting evidence. > Blaming the prosecutors for his decisions is a tad harsh. Saying they don't carry any blame at all is equally harsh. The truth is - contrary to those that want to divide the world into black and white or two groups - something in the middle of that. There is plenty of blame to go around here. > The truth is complex and sad. That part of your comment we can agree on.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
btilly 14y ago
The "second camp" that you describe does not really understand the situation. 6 months is the plea bargain. If Aaron rejected that, which is the path he was taking, he was facing anything in the range from winning the case to likely the 6-7 years the prosecution was pushing for. Thus there was a significant chance that he'd have gotten more than a few months of jail time. Now re-read Carmen Ortiz. She never said she was only seeking a few months in jail. She said she offered him only 6 months in jail and was never going to seek the maximum sentence. What she didn't publicly say is that she was going to seek 6-7 years.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

by edanm 14y ago

podperson 14y ago

Nice synopsis although I suspect faction A will claim you're misrepresenting them. My take on it is that the prosecution did what prosecutors do. Jason Swartz seems to me to have been somewhat bipolar, and in manic phases he was brilliant, enthusiastic, idealistic, and a bit nuts -- which is what got him in trouble. In his depressive phase he killed himself. Blaming the prosecutors for his decisions is a tad harsh. The truth is complex and sad.

jacquesm 14y ago
> Nice synopsis although I suspect faction A will claim you're misrepresenting them. There are two kinds of people, those that try to divide the world into two groups and those that don't. > My take on it is that the prosecution did what prosecutors do. Likely true, but that does not make it right or morally defensible in this case. > Jason Swartz ... > seems to me to have been somewhat bipolar, and in manic phases he was brilliant, enthusiastic, idealistic, and a bit nuts -- which is what got him in trouble. No, what got him into trouble is his tendency to stand up against vested interests. If he'd been picking on the neighborhood streetpeople nobody would have noticed. But he wasn't that kind of person, he tried very hard to improve the world as he saw it, to fix broken parts of it using his skills. > In his depressive phase he killed himself. That's a shortcut for which you are missing a bunch of supporting evidence. > Blaming the prosecutors for his decisions is a tad harsh. Saying they don't carry any blame at all is equally harsh. The truth is - contrary to those that want to divide the world into black and white or two groups - something in the middle of that. There is plenty of blame to go around here. > The truth is complex and sad. That part of your comment we can agree on.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

btilly 14y ago

The "second camp" that you describe does not really understand the situation. 6 months is the plea bargain. If Aaron rejected that, which is the path he was taking, he was facing anything in the range from winning the case to likely the 6-7 years the prosecution was pushing for. Thus there was a significant chance that he'd have gotten more than a few months of jail time. Now re-read Carmen Ortiz. She never said she was only seeking a few months in jail. She said she offered him only 6 months in jail and was never going to seek the maximum sentence. What she didn't publicly say is that she was going to seek 6-7 years.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]