The law is the law, so it's burglary. Not sure why I'm answering an obvious question for you - feels a bit ad hominem-ish as it's not the same situation Aaron

The law is the law, so it's burglary. Not sure why I'm answering an obvious question for you - feels a bit ad hominem-ish as it's not the same situation Aaron was in. There would be circumstances where I'd be ok with it, like if you were a neighbor and I knew you and you apologized for it. My choice to prosecute. Sometimes laws need to be broken or bent when there is no other way to bring awareness of a newly forged wrong to light. Whether or not Aaron approached the freedom of information issue correctly here is not the issue, but how the school reasoned through 'handling' it is. They were the ones with the power to make a hard decision regarding the interpretation of the law. As for me, I'm simply trying to clarify how to spot cognitive dissonance in the wild - you look for statements that are conflicting and then try to understand why both sides of the 'argument' were weighed in making a decision. In this case the school would appear to hold some value in Aaron's actions, even though what he did was clearly wrong. It's worth wondering if they did the right thing when considering the validity of some portion of his actions. Frankly, I'm not sure how to feel about it other than what has become the norm. We (the US) tends to over-react to things a fair amount. It's getting a little old and needs to stop.