4 ms·

Have you actually read anything about this case? Some facts include: a) He was threatened with 35 years in prison for downloading journal articles from MIT. Bo

by hluska 12y ago

Have you actually read anything about this case? Some facts include: a) He was threatened with 35 years in prison for downloading journal articles from MIT. Both MIT and JStor (the wronged parties) were against this heavy handed prosecution. b) Aaron was not convicted because he chose to kill himself while the prosecution was ongoing. The prosecution wanted him to serve six months in a federal prison; Swartz refused this plea deal. Aaron killed himself shortly after the prosecution declined his offer. c) This style of prosecution (ie - go to court and risk 35 years in prison vs plead guilty and spend six months) goes against justice.

jdong 12y ago
Aaron was a good friend of mine, I know quite a bit about this case. a) No he wasn't, this is a common misconception by people who don't understand how the US court system works. b) Aaron had a good deal, the indisputable breaking-and-entering charge would probably have gotten him more than 6 months. (Clarification: Aarons state charges were dropped to make way for the more serious federal charges, so in the end he didn't even get charged for the breaking-and-entering.) c) Again, read up on the US court system. You're disrespecting his memory by using him as a weapon for your misguided crusade. Here's a good article written by Orin Kerr regarding Aarons charges http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/
- mindslight 12y ago
  a) Even if we want to bicker about the exact time, can we agree that he was facing a possible 5 years? That's ten times longer than what the prosecutors thought an appropriate punishment (the 6 month offered plea). b) Not for a college-class first time offender into an unlocked network closet, especially given the institution. That would have been handled at the local level, and would have most likely ended up in probation. c) Yes, this case was business as usual for the US "justice" system. That doesn't make it right. If Aaron was a good friend of yours, then you probably do have some different insight. Please share it here instead of repeating the same tired he-got-what-he-deserved FUD.
  - jdong 12y ago
    a) Sure, he was facing a possible "5 years" (most likely much less) and was well aware of that. b) Debatable, a prison sentence of a few years definitely wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary c) You make it sound like there's something wrong with deals by prosecution, I don't think so. The deals don't hurt anybody and offer an easy way out. Aaron knew what he was doing, he made a conscious decision to do it. I believe Aaron also knew that he'd get in trouble for doing this, what he was doing was civil disobedience. Orin Kerr describes this fairly well in his article http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-against-aaron-swartz-part-2-prosecutorial-discretion/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-agains...
    - gaadd33 12y ago
      A few years in prison for breaking and entering a maintenance closet on a college campus for a first time offender is ordinary? Wow, I guess the hacks that happen at MIT do carry quite the risk then. I can only imagine how many decades people would have gotten if they were caught putting the Lunar Module on the Great Dome.
    - javajosh 12y ago
      > most likely much less And with that, you lose a great deal of credibility. It goes against your claim to have a great deal of knowledge about this case. > The deals don't hurt anybody and offer an easy way out With this, you lose a great deal of reputation you might have as a moral person, since you seem to think that extortionate behavior is acceptable, particularly from those with overwhelming power, such as the USG prosecutors. True, you are in good company, as the US justice system largely agrees with you that they have the right to extort; but that doesn't justify your position so much as emphasize that theirs, and yours, is evil.
    - swift 12y ago
      > The deals don't hurt anybody and offer an easy way out. Plea bargaining is a system that leads the state to extort guilty pleas out of innocent people. If you think it doesn't hurt anybody, quite frankly you have no idea what you're talking about. If you'd like to learn more, here's a well-known paper on the subject: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1546&context=fss_papers http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- badubu 12y ago
  Based on your account, "Aaron was a good friend of mine" requires substantial bonafides to bring you out of the realm of Astroturf.

by hluska 12y ago

jdong 12y ago

Aaron was a good friend of mine, I know quite a bit about this case. a) No he wasn't, this is a common misconception by people who don't understand how the US court system works. b) Aaron had a good deal, the indisputable breaking-and-entering charge would probably have gotten him more than 6 months. (Clarification: Aarons state charges were dropped to make way for the more serious federal charges, so in the end he didn't even get charged for the breaking-and-entering.) c) Again, read up on the US court system. You're disrespecting his memory by using him as a weapon for your misguided crusade. Here's a good article written by Orin Kerr regarding Aarons charges http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/14/aaron-swartz-charges/

mindslight 12y ago
a) Even if we want to bicker about the exact time, can we agree that he was facing a possible 5 years? That's ten times longer than what the prosecutors thought an appropriate punishment (the 6 month offered plea). b) Not for a college-class first time offender into an unlocked network closet, especially given the institution. That would have been handled at the local level, and would have most likely ended up in probation. c) Yes, this case was business as usual for the US "justice" system. That doesn't make it right. If Aaron was a good friend of yours, then you probably do have some different insight. Please share it here instead of repeating the same tired he-got-what-he-deserved FUD.
- jdong 12y ago
  a) Sure, he was facing a possible "5 years" (most likely much less) and was well aware of that. b) Debatable, a prison sentence of a few years definitely wouldn't be anything out of the ordinary c) You make it sound like there's something wrong with deals by prosecution, I don't think so. The deals don't hurt anybody and offer an easy way out. Aaron knew what he was doing, he made a conscious decision to do it. I believe Aaron also knew that he'd get in trouble for doing this, what he was doing was civil disobedience. Orin Kerr describes this fairly well in his article http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-against-aaron-swartz-part-2-prosecutorial-discretion/ http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-agains...
  - gaadd33 12y ago
    A few years in prison for breaking and entering a maintenance closet on a college campus for a first time offender is ordinary? Wow, I guess the hacks that happen at MIT do carry quite the risk then. I can only imagine how many decades people would have gotten if they were caught putting the Lunar Module on the Great Dome.
  - javajosh 12y ago
    > most likely much less And with that, you lose a great deal of credibility. It goes against your claim to have a great deal of knowledge about this case. > The deals don't hurt anybody and offer an easy way out With this, you lose a great deal of reputation you might have as a moral person, since you seem to think that extortionate behavior is acceptable, particularly from those with overwhelming power, such as the USG prosecutors. True, you are in good company, as the US justice system largely agrees with you that they have the right to extort; but that doesn't justify your position so much as emphasize that theirs, and yours, is evil.
  - swift 12y ago
    > The deals don't hurt anybody and offer an easy way out. Plea bargaining is a system that leads the state to extort guilty pleas out of innocent people. If you think it doesn't hurt anybody, quite frankly you have no idea what you're talking about. If you'd like to learn more, here's a well-known paper on the subject: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1546&context=fss_papers http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?artic...
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
badubu 12y ago
Based on your account, "Aaron was a good friend of mine" requires substantial bonafides to bring you out of the realm of Astroturf.