9 ms·
Swartz didn't face prison until feds took over case, report says
- josephlord 14y agoThis article linked from the parent actually seems a better explanation. http://dankennedy.net/2013/01/24/the-swartz-suicide-and-the-sick-culture-of-the-justice-dept/ http://dankennedy.net/2013/01/24/the-swartz-suicide-and-the-...
- berlinbrown 14y agoHow did it go from state/civil to a federal case?
- Steko 14y agoBut the sweeping nature of federal computer crime laws allowed Ortiz and Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Heymann, who wanted a high-profile computer crime conviction, to pursue felony charges. Heymann threatened the free-culture activist with over 30 years in prison as recently as the week before he killed himself... The Boston U.S. Attorney's office was looking for "some juicy looking computer crime cases and Aaron's case, sadly for Aaron, fit the bill," Elliot Peters, Swartz's attorney at the Keker & Van Nest law firm, told the Huffington Post. Heymann, Peters says, thought the Swartz case "was going to receive press and he was going to be a tough guy and read his name in the newspaper."
- rosser 14y agoHeymann, Peters says, thought the Swartz case "was going to receive press and he was going to be a tough guy and read his name in the newspaper." The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again... EDIT: The notion I was trying to capture is perhaps better expressed by saying, "Be careful what you wish for." Heymann got all the things Peters accuses him of wanting, just not exactly in the form he was presumably hoping to receive them.
- twoodfin 14y agoWhy do you take Peters' claims about Heymann's motives seriously?
- jlgreco 14y agoThe shoe fits? It makes sense, and I have been given absolutely no reason to doubt it.
- rosser 14y agoI think you might be reading more into my beliefs wrt Heymann than is warranted, given what I said. (N.b., "Peters accuses him of wanting"; "the form he was presumably hoping to receive them.") I don't pretend to have any direct knowledge of Steve Heymann. That said, based on what knowledge I do have of him, his being a notches-on-the-belt and consequences be damned type of Federal prosecutor fits the facts well enough — in fact, better-enough than all the other alternatives combined — to consider my opinion accurate enough for an internet forum.
- RyanMcGreal 14y agoUnintended how? The prosecutor decided he wanted to ruin Aaron's life. He succeeded.
- jmillikin 14y agoThe prosecutor wanted another feather in his cap. I doubt he held animosity towards Aaron in particular, any more than a mugger would towards someone wearing an expensive watch.
- daniel-cussen 14y agoHis name ended up on the newspaper in a manner different than that he expected.
- tedunangst 14y agoThe US attorneys office has a dude just sitting around in Boston PD waiting for fun cases to show up?
- _delirium 14y agoThat seems correct, but points to two fairy different issues: the breadth of the CFAA in (likely) making this incident into a federal crime, and the prosecutors' choice to pursue it. The former is what I'd really like fixed. I don't at all disagree with putting pressure on Ortiz and Heymann for choosing to pursue the charges, especially with the apparent vigor with which they did so. But the fundamental problem is the law. Ortiz and Heymann, I think, exercised their judgment poorly, but by the letter of the law they were in the right, because the person they were pursuing probably was guilty of a federal felony, as Congress defined it. So that's the more fundamental problem. Put differently: if a prosecutor chooses not to pursue particularly stupid applications of a law, that's better than the opposite, so we should work to make sure our public prosecutors are as reasonable as possible. But that's a very weak kind of protection. Having very broad criminal laws where we rely on the wisdom of prosecutors not to charge the "bad" applications leaves defendants with basically no procedural protections, since not being charged when you violated the law as written isn't any kind of legal right.
- berlinbrown 14y agoI agree that the prosecutor went too far. But there certainly seems to be a case if just a minor one. I hate to use the adage but if you don't want to deal with the prosecutors you shouldn't get caught. On the case, I know a lot of technical people are responding that this case overreach on the prosecutor's side. I wish people would look at this from both sides. How does she know that Aaron was truly innocent? I bet she had expert witnesses on her side saying that Aaron was doing something illegal and excessive. Everyone is saying that he had access to download those files. But the prosecutor is looking at all of his seemingly suspicious behavior. 4 million downloads through a custom script. He walked into the computer closet to hard-wire in. If you are looking at the Aaron case abstractly and comparing his behavior with other cases. I bet the prosecutor thought they had something with the case against Aaron. He certainly wasn't entirely innocent. He didn't download 4-5 documents through a browser like a typical user.
- nitrogen 14y agoOne problem I have with the discussion around the Swartz case is the apparent assumption by prosecutors and/or the public that atypical equals wrong. It's a particularly offensive notion because I'd expect a huge chunk, maybe a majority, of geeks to be seen as highly atypical and maybe even suspicious by laypersons.
- betterunix 14y agoThe CFAA covers cases where the alleged computer crime involves a computer system that is involved in interstate commerce or communication. So basically, any alleged computer crime involving a computer connected to the Internet could be prosecuted by the federal government.
- erichocean 14y agoIf Swartz had stolen a $100 hard drive with the JSTOR articles, it would have been a misdemeanor offense that would have yielded probation or community service. If this doesn't illustrate how messed up the system is, I don't know what will.
- RockyMcNuts 14y agocan't help wondering to what extent the government's war on Manning, Wikileaks, Anonymous was related to Swartz's harsh treatment, whether he was perceived as working with groups actively opposing government policies, and therefore as a hacktivist in the same category as enemies of the state.
- roc 14y agoAll the available evidence says "no". This is just how our our system treats absolutely anyone who presents a prosecutor with a chance to shine up their resume. The only reason we seem to be hearing about Swartz, Manning, the Duke Lacross Team, et al. is that they have a socio-economic standing that most of the victims of this particular brand of "justice" do not.
- mpyne 14y agoManning is a Private First Class (E-3) in the U.S. Army, he's better off than someone in a ghetto I guess but he had no better socioeconomic standing than many other individuals who can commit computer crime. His infamy is due to the particulars of his case and because the hacktivists have latched onto him as a rallying point because of the association with WikiLeaks.
- roc 14y agoI was considering Manning's association with WikiLeaks and thus the larger 'free information' [1] online concern as part of his social standing. Because as soon as he became the name behind that leak, it was. As opposed to, say, the less-visible alleged members of Anonymous and Lulzsec who are likely facing the same exact sort of prosecution 'strategy' as Swartz [2], but because they aren't or are lesser parts of those crowds, no-one's paying much attention. Even though, criminals though they may be, it's just as likely their prosecutors are pursuing their cases with that same lack of justice or proportionality. [1] in the FOIA sense, not in the piracy sense. [2] I definitely draw a distinction between Manning and Swartz's prosecutions, as Manning being enlisted, gives the prosecution a distinct ability to go so much further with it.
- ytadesse 14y agoUnfortunately, this comment will probably get filtered to the bottom but this has to be said: Since the story of Aaron's passing, this site has been home to a lynch-mob asking for Ortiz's head on a plate. I wish I knew enough about federal prosecutions to say whether or not this one was far different from the norm - hell, I wish I knew enough about depression and suicide to say whether or not the prosecution was the primary reason for this sad turn of events - but, regardless, the users HN have been relentless ... almost as if they wished harm on Carmen Ortiz. I'm pointing that out for a reason. Bullying and outright harassment come in many forms. The end result of these actions are at times not the result that anyone truly intended even if they imply it with their words/actions. You can't on one hand accuse the feds of being overly aggressive while simultaneously doing the same to Ortiz and her family. Let the law and the current investigations run their course before there are more unwanted consequences of this tragedy.
- ytadesse 14y agoSomeone just down-voted this?! Really? I mean, really!? I post a polite, well-constructed, and well-reasoned opinion that's different from 99% of the opinions out there and instead of responding in a similar fashion, the best you could do is flag my comment? Very cowardly.
- YuriNiyazov 14y agoYou said "Unfortunately, this comment will probably get filtered to the bottom but this has to be said:" and then when it actually happened you flip out? I wasn't one of the ones to downvote you, but after seeing your reaction, I would have to say you most definitely deserved it. Also, allow me to point you to the HN guidelines that specifically frown on these particular behaviors: Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downmod you. http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ytadesse 14y agoGetting filtered down to the bottom is not actually just a result of getting down-voted. Having a lack of activity (from people essentially ignoring your message) is actually the other reason why comments slowly trickle down to the bottom - and the one I suspected would happen as often does when people write-off your opinion. As for your point about the "don't complain about being downmodded" - fair enough, and I'm sure I'll earn a few more downvotes thanks to your due-diligence :) At the same time, once in a while, you have to stand for something in your life. I made a serious point about a serious topic and some coward came along and decided to "down-vote" instead of having some dialog about it. I may lose digital karma but at least my conscience is clear for defending something I believe in.
- mikec3k 14y agoCarmen Ortiz needs to go. She's a publicity hound just trying to make a name for herself rather than someone who actually respects the law.
- lancewiggs 14y agoI wonder about the reverse problem. Are there any worthy yet unpopular cases that Ortiz not take up while she was pursuing these ones?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- arbuge 14y agoOne only hopes that this will lead to wholesale reform of the US attorney office in Boston in particular, and the plea bargaining process in general. It is unfortunate that it took Aaron's sacrifice to make this happen if it does, but it would at least be something positive coming out of his tragedy.
- baritalia 14y agoSwartz was a crackhead and a criminal. It's a good thing he's no longer with us.