8 ms·
Carmen Ortiz’s Sordid Rap Sheet
- ScottBurson 14y agoDon't overlook the last paragraph.
- bambax 14y agoYes! > Thanks to tough-on-crime laws and mandatory-minimum sentencing, prosecutors are able to extort—if they so choose—a quick end to the proceedings and a headline-worthy admission of guilt. "Tough-on-crime" is the real culprit -- and it's what a strong majority of Americans support.
- nirvana 14y agoThey want toughness on violent crime, not government agents perpetrating crimes for their own benefit. These agents profit from destroying people's lives, and they Break the law when they do so. The problem is, who is going to prosecute the prosecutors? Whose going to collect evidence? The police who enjoy protection by prosecutors? The judges who work for the same employer?
- mercurial 14y agoBut it's all a balancing act. If you vote for a system where disproportionate penalties are possible, and the incentive to use it as leverage to secure convictions is built into the system, don't be surprised of the consequences: it's perfectly predictable. Remove disproportionate sentences and mandatory minimums, and prosecutes won't be able to exert the same pressure.
- __--__ 14y agoThey want to feel safe. In the case of the hotel owner, even some here on HN felt that the action was justified. They may not have condoned the methods, but they obviously liked the result - a hotel that seemed to attract crime was shut down. The reality is irrelevant - it made them feel safer to know the authorities would do something if a similar hotel were to be found in their neighborhood. It also makes people believe the authorities are doing something to clean up bad neighborhoods, which also makes them feel safer. I wish I had an answer to how to make sure this doesn't happen again, but I don't. As long as the majority of Americans have safety as their #1 concern, things are only going to get worse. And if I knew how to change the attitude of an entire nation, I would be making a killing in marketing.
- c3d 14y agoNo mention of Kim Dotcom or Julian Assange in the story. But that seems like higher-profile cases with the same kind of bullying tactics.
- fleitz 14y agoHer behaviour is by no means uncommon which is why the press is having no problem digging up other cases in which she leveraged the resources of the state against those who were defenceless. Don't think she's particularly evil, she's your everyday average prosecutor.
- javajosh 14y agoI don't understand why people keep saying this as if it's an excuse. Just because everyone does it doesn't make it not evil. When slave-owning was legal in this country, it was still evil.
- DanBC 14y agoPeople are pointing out that things are worse than a single bad prosecutor, and that getting rid of just her will do nothing to fix the system. I don't get the impression that anyone is saying "Everyone does it, so she's fine".
- Daniel_Newby 14y agoIf it was just her, she would have already been assassinated; the cops would have shook their heads and turned a blind eye because hey, she did need killin'. By getting mad at her personally, you are in effect becoming Timothy McVeigh. He took out an entire building full of feds and nothing happened. I'm not even sure that carpet nuking Washington, D.C. would put a dent in federal overreach. It's a mass social movement, not a breakdown of part of the system.
- chris_wot 14y agoGood Lord, am I ever glad you are being downvoted to oblivion. Nobody so far has suggested assasination or terrorism to solve these problems. You are the first (and hopefully the last) to suggest this as a solution.
- venomsnake 14y agoThe ceasing of the property - doesn't that make Mrs Ortiz guilty of RICO herself?
- wereHamster 14y ago"and—under civil law—the burden of proof is on the defense to demonstrate their property is innocent." Really? I thought the burden of proof was on the prosecution side to demonstrate guilt.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- pmorici 14y agoThe burden of proof is different for civil law than it is for criminal law http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm#anchor222222 http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm#anchor222222 "Innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt", is a criminal law thing. The situation in the article doesn't fall under criminal law since they aren't accusing the hotel owners of a crime.
- nirvana 14y agoIt does fall under criminal law because they are stealing his hotel. Theft is a crime. Of course, whose going to prosecute the prosecutors?
- DanBC 14y agoIn the UK for criminal trials you have "beyond reasonable doubt" - the prosecution have to prove guilt. But in civil cases it's "balance of probability".
- dthunt 14y agoI believe the phrasing is different in the States, but it's the same general principle. But there are ways to get that kind of low standard in criminal trials, as well. What's REALLY fun is when a case gives prosecutors the ability to throw in accusations they don't intend to prove to the usual standard just to inflate sentencing guidelines. Though, it looks like the Supreme Court is currently taking up a related issue (instance where someone was given additional time due to the judge's application of a 'accomplice brandished a weapon' allegation by the prosecution to raise the minimum sentence. So maybe this practice is on its last legs. (a man can dream).
- DanBC 14y agoThis thread has some comment about the motel case. (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5084791 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5084791)
- rusodepaso 14y agoThe arrogance and basic lack of human decency, on the part of Carmen Ortiz and her lackeys, are really stunning. Aaron Swartz is not the only case her office mishandled: see Carmen Ortiz’s Sordid Rap Sheet, http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/01/17/carmen-ortizs-sordid-rap-sheet/ http://whowhatwhy.com/2013/01/17/carmen-ortizs-sordid-rap-sh... Petition the Obama administration to: Remove United States District Attorney Carmen Ortiz from office for overreach in the case of Aaron Swartz https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-states-district-attorney-carmen-ortiz-office-overreach-case-aaron-swartz/RQNrG1Ck https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-stat...
- i4i 14y ago"Between 1989 and 2010, an estimated $12.6 billion was seized by US Attorneys in asset forfeiture cases. The growth rate during that time averaged +19.4% annually. For just 2010 alone, the value of assets seized grew by +52.8% over 2009 and was six times greater than the total for 1989." http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/forfeiture http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/forfeiture
- malandrew 14y ago"According to the sworn testimony of a DEA agent operating out of Boston, it was his job to comb through news stories for properties that might be subject to forfeiture. When he finds a likely candidate, he goes to the Registry of Deeds, determines the value of the property in question, and refers it to the U.S. attorney for seizure." Seriously? We, as taxpayers, indirectly support a job like that? That's disgusting. I'm shocked we have someone actively combing to discover assets the government might be able to seize in court. I'm further shocked that the accused is under the obligation to prove innocence instead of the other way around. That's not due process.
- smsm42 14y agoThis is one of the think that makes my blood boil, when I imagine taxpayer-paid functionary whose whole job is to look for citizens that can be legally robbed by the government. Overzealously prosecuting is one thing, that at least can be considered as wanting to do the right thing and going too far. But this is evil, plain and simple.
- InclinedPlane 14y agoYup. And it's been that way since the '80s. Welcome to the drug war. Today's quiz in remedial civics: what happens when law enforcement gains the power to control their own funding depending on the way they enforce the law. P.S. If you'd like a bit of disheartening theater, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_v._$124,700 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_v._$124,700
- saraid216 14y ago> Today's quiz in remedial civics: what happens when law enforcement gains the power to control their own funding depending on the way they enforce the law. Market-driven police state?
- nirvana 14y agoPolice operate using violence. Markets operate with free exchange. Thus you posit a contradiction.
- chris_wot 14y agoWhen I first heard about Carmen Ortiz, I realised there was very, very little I could do about it, given I am not a U.S. citizen. A few days later, more out of frustration, I created the following meme: http://memecrunch.com/meme/DV7N/carmen-ortiz-for-great-justice http://memecrunch.com/meme/DV7N/carmen-ortiz-for-great-justi... Image is here: http://memecrunch.com/meme/DV7N/carmen-ortiz-for-great-justice/image.png http://memecrunch.com/meme/DV7N/carmen-ortiz-for-great-justi... Hopefully someone here finds it darkly amusing.
- DoubleMalt 14y agoI share your concern about Carmen Ortiz' fitness for being at a position where she holds any power whatsoever over people. But your meme distracts from the real sinister elements of the system that are outlined in the article. It is a strawman argument that is easily dismissed, which is detrimental to the discussions. The system incentivizes abuse of power and coercion of suspects. No one in the system is honestly interested in absurdly high sentences. hey are only interested in "winning", which is the main problem. Competitiveness has its place in sport, in the economy and at hackathons. But a trial should NEVER be a competition. I am aware that the legal system in many countries devolved to this. BUt we should not rest to attack this aspect.
- pygy_ 14y agoThe petition asking for Heymann firing still lacks 15.000 votes. From what I read he was more instrumental than Ortiz in the aggressiveness the prosecution. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fire-assistant-us-.. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fire-assistant-us-.... Sorry for insisting, but I think it's important. I'm not a US citizen, and I can't vote, the only thing I can do is trumpet it. Not that the witch hunt is very useful in itself, but it keeps people involved and the more shit we stir, the most likely things will move.
- bravoyankee 14y agoNo need to apologize. Thank you for reposting the link.
- mavhc 14y agoApparently anyone in the world can sign a petition, also your link is broken
- pygy_ 14y agoIndeed, anyone can sign. I thought that being a US citizen was required.
- pygy_ 14y agohttps://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fire-assistant-us-attorney-steve-heymann/RJKSY2nb https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fire-assistant-us-... Here's the correct link (too late to edit). Also, you don't have to be a US citizen to sign (I just read the TOS)! Thanks to mavhc for pointing out these.
- pccampbell 14y agoThis is a huge, folks. Please, sign.
- RyanMcGreal 14y agoThe way US prosecutors operate - piling on large numbers of felony charges with decades in maximum sentencing and offering a shorter sentence in exchange for a guilty plea - is a clear violation of the 8th Amendment. It's functionally equivalent to using the threat of torture to extract a confession. http://quandyfactory.com/blog/103 http://quandyfactory.com/blog/103
- thoughtcriminal 14y agoYes, mental torture, and it can be administered by prosecutors for years before the victim succumbs to forced confession or death. Guantanamo Bay isn't the only proof the US government tortures it's citizens.
- saraid216 14y agoPsychological games to produce confessions are actually considered legal. FYI.
- thoughtcriminal 14y agoGames? This isn't a game. This is someone's life we're talking about, and about the freedom of citizens not to be tortured and punished before even being found guilty. Even if it is "legal", it's not right. You wouldn't want that done to your son or mother. No, because it's cruel, unfair and can produce devastating results. Are you sure you're even on the right website? Gamespot is here: http://gamespot.com http://gamespot.com
- saraid216 14y agoYes. The entire discipline of game theory is designed around making light of serious decision making. </sarcasm>
- monochromatic 14y agoa clear violation of the 8th Amendment Is that your legal opinion? You know, there are centuries of jurisprudence exploring the meaning of various constitutional provisions...
- barking 14y agoIt doesn't sound quite so paranoid anymore to arm oneself to the teeth and retreat to a wilderness redoubt in Montana.
- pccampbell 14y agoI'm in MA, and what really drives me crazy is that local TV news sources have basically made it sound like she's going to still try running for MA Governor. Essentially, she's using her public statement to sugar coat and bury the story amongst folks that aren't familiar with Aaron.