4 ms·
"Eighteen of the 44 counts in Salinas’ indictment, for instance, were for cyberstalking an unnamed victim. But each of those charges was based on Salinas merely
by mbreedlove 12y ago
"Eighteen of the 44 counts in Salinas’ indictment, for instance, were for cyberstalking an unnamed victim. But each of those charges was based on Salinas merely filling out a public contact form on the victim’s website with junk text. Every time he clicked “submit” had been counted as a separate case of cyberstalking."
This is obscene... There seems to be an utter lack of understanding by the prosecutors handling these cases.
- njharman 12y agoThey understand just fine. Their job isn't to be reasonable or to serve justice. That should be the judges job but USA has moved too much power and control into police/prosecutor.
- LordKano 12y agoI agree. A lot of prosecutors harbor a desire to one day become the District Attorney or Attorney General and they do whatever they can get away with to pad their stats.
- ci5er 12y ago> There seems to be an utter lack of understanding by the prosecutors handling these cases. Not at all. They know exactly what they are doing. It isn't about them not understanding the intent of the law. It is about them understanding how to use the blunt tool of that law's language to satisfy their own objectives.
- genwin 12y agoAnd if it goes to trial, the jury's likely to think in terms of compromising on the multitude of charges (rather than outright rejection), in which case the defendant still goes to prison for many years.
- lawnchair_larry 12y agoThis is the problem I have with the contrarian's position in all of these threads. As usual, the answer is somewhere in the middle.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]