4 ms·

The Carmen Ortiz interview begins at around 20 mins in. Nothing much to hear though, she refuses to talk about anything of importance other than claiming "menta

The Carmen Ortiz interview begins at around 20 mins in. Nothing much to hear though, she refuses to talk about anything of importance other than claiming "mental illness" in the Aaron Swartz case.

cjbprime 14y ago
Even worse, claiming that the problem is that they didn't know that he was at risk from mental illness. Swartz's lawyer claims to have told the prosecutor directly: > The thing that galls me is that I told Heymann the kid was a suicide risk,” Good told me. “His reaction was a standard reaction in that office, not unique to Steve. He said, ‘Fine, we’ll lock him up.’
daniel-cussen 14y ago
Yeah, just like every Samurai developed serious mental illness just when he had to commit suicide.
mpyne 14y ago
Given that the vast majority of people on Federal charges don't commit suicide, including persons facing much stricter punishments than Aaron Swartz, I'd be interested in hearing why a mental illness of some sort would not be the primary suspect. The motel owner fighting against Ortiz to keep his property out of the hands of the Feds didn't kill himself. Did Ortiz just screw up her methods when she failed to drive him to suicide?
- homosaur 14y ago
  In regards to the US Attorney's behavior, Swartz's mental state and actually his suicide in general is irrelevant. He could be alive today and Ortiz's actions would be just as wrong.
  - bostonpete 14y ago
    That may be, but I don't recall seeing any outrage to speak of when he was still alive.
    - Kylekramer 14y ago
      In fact, it was quite the opposite around here. A submission asking to contribute to his defense fund had a top post saying essentially "Man up and deal with the consequence of your actions". The community is general has been very inconsistent and reactionary around this issue.
      - analog 14y ago
        I believe no-one here at the time knew how aggressively he was being treated. If we had known I'd like to think people would have been more supportive.
        mpyne 14y ago
        Well, "how aggressively he was treated" was within 1 delta or so of how the average CFAA case is handled, so I don't think that's the reason either, unless this is the first CFAA case that has ever become known to the majority of the hackers on HN. In fact I think the notable thing was how very quiet the reaction had been. A lot of CFAA cases that did acquire wide acclaim (including places like HN) were for things like accessing the "wrong" publicly-accessible URL, or finding security vulns and getting in trouble for just trying to let the organization know that they were vulnerable. In this case it seemed to me there was a strong sense of "huh, this guy [Swartz] actually did break into a network, and server closet too" and therefore there was not nearly the outcry as we'd seen for most.
        analog 14y ago
        You may well be right. I missed the first discussion when the appeal for legal funds was made. It is disturbing that some are still claiming he broke into the closet when it was unlocked [1], and others here apparently believe that changing your MAC address should be enough to trigger federal charges. [1] Swartz broke into a closet in the basement of a building at MIT http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/

The Carmen Ortiz interview begins at around 20 mins in. Nothing much to hear though, she refuses to talk about anything of importance other than claiming "mental illness" in the Aaron Swartz case.

cjbprime 14y ago

Even worse, claiming that the problem is that they didn't know that he was at risk from mental illness. Swartz's lawyer claims to have told the prosecutor directly: > The thing that galls me is that I told Heymann the kid was a suicide risk,” Good told me. “His reaction was a standard reaction in that office, not unique to Steve. He said, ‘Fine, we’ll lock him up.’

daniel-cussen 14y ago

Yeah, just like every Samurai developed serious mental illness just when he had to commit suicide.

mpyne 14y ago

Given that the vast majority of people on Federal charges don't commit suicide, including persons facing much stricter punishments than Aaron Swartz, I'd be interested in hearing why a mental illness of some sort would not be the primary suspect. The motel owner fighting against Ortiz to keep his property out of the hands of the Feds didn't kill himself. Did Ortiz just screw up her methods when she failed to drive him to suicide?

homosaur 14y ago
In regards to the US Attorney's behavior, Swartz's mental state and actually his suicide in general is irrelevant. He could be alive today and Ortiz's actions would be just as wrong.
- bostonpete 14y ago
  That may be, but I don't recall seeing any outrage to speak of when he was still alive.
  - Kylekramer 14y ago
    In fact, it was quite the opposite around here. A submission asking to contribute to his defense fund had a top post saying essentially "Man up and deal with the consequence of your actions". The community is general has been very inconsistent and reactionary around this issue.
    - analog 14y ago
      I believe no-one here at the time knew how aggressively he was being treated. If we had known I'd like to think people would have been more supportive.
      - mpyne 14y ago
        Well, "how aggressively he was treated" was within 1 delta or so of how the average CFAA case is handled, so I don't think that's the reason either, unless this is the first CFAA case that has ever become known to the majority of the hackers on HN. In fact I think the notable thing was how very quiet the reaction had been. A lot of CFAA cases that did acquire wide acclaim (including places like HN) were for things like accessing the "wrong" publicly-accessible URL, or finding security vulns and getting in trouble for just trying to let the organization know that they were vulnerable. In this case it seemed to me there was a strong sense of "huh, this guy [Swartz] actually did break into a network, and server closet too" and therefore there was not nearly the outcry as we'd seen for most.
        analog 14y ago
        You may well be right. I missed the first discussion when the appeal for legal funds was made. It is disturbing that some are still claiming he broke into the closet when it was unlocked [1], and others here apparently believe that changing your MAC address should be enough to trigger federal charges. [1] Swartz broke into a closet in the basement of a building at MIT http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/