Does Hacking Grades Warrant 20 Years in Jail?

While there have been many students who decided they would rather change their grades than come by them the usual way, the punishments for the most part have been pretty reasonable. However, the latest chapter in this type of behavior finds two culprits facing a $250,000 fine and 20 years in jail based on the number of charges leveled against them. "The guys have been charged with "unauthorized computer access, identity theft, conspiracy, and wire fraud." Obviously, these guys did a bad thing, but it's hard to see how the possible sentence matches with the crime. Of course, it seems unlikely that any judge would give them the maximum sentence, but even hearing that it's possible just for changing your grades seems ridiculous."

Comments

Re:Confusing The Issue

[twistedsymphony]

blockquoteOTOH, changing grades, while juvenile, is breaking into a system for purposes of committing fraud. It's technically no different than the guy who breaks into a computer system to produce a fake id or to alter financial records./blockquote Not if Ferris Bueller made me do it!

Re:The Rub is the Sentencing Guidelines...

[Anonymous Coward]

Their usual intent is to PREVENT
judges from meting out reasonable and just sentences.

I think you're confused. Sentencing guidelines are in place to ensure that everyone gets the same treatment. So that the mayor's son doesn't get 40 hours of community service and the poor kid with no real ties to the government network receives two years in jail.

Ignoring of course the fact that judges should not be deciding if the laws are reasonable. SCOTUS should be deciding if they are constitutional, but any other court should be ruling within the scope of the law regardless of whether it seems that the prescribed punishment is excessive. The legislature decides what the laws are and what the ranges of punishments should be. Judges decide that the facts fit a particular statute.

What's more, the mandatory guidelines could easily come back by merely requiring that the process not include facts not presented at trial.

Re:Confusing The Issue

[msslc3]

Federal sentencing "guidelines" are both mandatory and very unfair in a large number of cases. But Congress has enacted them and the courts uphold the guidelines. District judges, who impose the sentences, often complain about the guidelines.

Re:Confusing The Issue

[GreyPoopon]

Having said that, 20 years is by far too much for something like this. Some murders don't do this.

And most likely the final sentence (as was already stated) will not be twenty years. If you want to compare to murder, since we only have the maximum sentence for these crimes, we'll have to compare to the maximum sentence for murder. Speaking from the experience of a member of my family who was shot in their home by a thief trying to pay for their drug habit, the list of charges were (roughly): breaking and entering, illegal possession of a concealed weapon without license, possession controlled substances, theft, and felony murder. The perpetrator received a life sentence, and was released from prison on parole after less than ten years. I would imagine that even if the maximum sentence is given, the perpetrators will be eligible for parole in five years or less.