Hang on, I said you were being unduly lenient with her, not the court. And I made clear that the leniency stems not from your disagreement with the sum, but you

Hang on, I said you were being unduly lenient with her, not the court. And I made clear that the leniency stems not from your disagreement with the sum, but your willingness to absolve her from any intent in distribution when the evidence is that she was more savvy (and dishonest) than she was willing to let on. In essence, you're just defending her because you hate the RIAA, not because her position has any merit. And that I find jarring.