Slashdot Mirror
Aaron Swartz Prosecution Team Claims Online Harassment
twoheadedboy writes "Members of the legal team responsible for prosecution of Aaron Swartz have claimed they received threatening letters and emails, and some had their social network accounts hacked, following the suicide of the Internet freedom activist. Following Swartz's death, his family and friends widely lambasted the prosecution team, who were accused of being heavy-handed in their pursuit of the 26-year-old. He was facing trial for alleged copyright infringement, accused of downloading excessive amounts of material from the academic article resource JSTOR. U.S. attorney for Massachusetts Carmen Ortiz, who headed up the prosecution, and another lead prosecutor, Stephen Heymann, have reportedly become the target of 'harassing and threatening messages,' and their personal information, including home address, personal telephone number, and the names of family members and friends, was posted online. Heymann also received a postcard with a picture of his father's head in a guillotine."
Get used to it.
Being constantly harrassed like that must be hell. I'm sure Aaron Swart's family and friends have nothing but sympathy for those poor harried prosecutors.
They deserve to rot away in prison for a few decades. They should be happy that harassment is all they get.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
The prosecution still has the files for the prosecution under a gag order. They are asking to extend this gag order and are using the excuse that their safety could be harmed if a judge lifted it. In reality, all they are trying to do is cover up their misconduct.
Activism is useless when it is aimed at unproductive channels. Instead, they should have signed the petition to remove the DA in question. Or written a letter to the state.
Petition to remove DA Carmen Ortiz
And I'm using it to write a song called "Carmen Ortiz and Stephen Heymann can fuck themselves like the useless cunts they are."
For some reason, I just can't seem to feel bad for these assholes.
There is a war going on for your mind.
I don't see a problem with it at all.
You reap what you sow.
Gee whillikers. Karma. How's that work?
Infuriate left and right
Maybe they and other prosecutors will think twice before trying to ruin people's lives. They wanted to make an example of Aaron Swartz, so as to deter others from following in his footsteps. Now they're being made an example of, so as to deter others from following in their footsteps. Turnabout is fair play.
Eye for and eye, tooth for a tooth. It could be much worse, you politically driven RIAA/MPAA hatchetmen, aka Federal Prosecutors.
sudo make me a sandwich
Where is their name and address? I want to vent my anger on them as well!
I think we all know "someone paid me money to do it so it's not my fault" doesn't actually fly. As individuals we have free will and the responsibility to behave ethically. To unquestioningly execute commands is to give up our humanity.
Throughout history we have frequently rejected "I was following orders" and "I was just doing my job". These mantras do not provide absolution.
When a bunch of people think you killed a dude, you're going to get harassed. Look at OJ. Those guys are just like OJ. All "looking for the real killers" out on the golf course. The difference? One is a petty thug, while the other used to play football. :-P
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
That didn't fly for people working in the concentration camps, it doesn't fly here.
If something doesn't pass even the basic sniff test, then you need to say NO.
UPS Sucks
No they weren't, they were applying pressure to force a plea bargin rather than, you know, actually do their jobs, and take him to court for a fair trial.
Is it their fault this seems to be a huge flaw in the way Americans approach justice?
No.
Are they still cunts for waiving around excesssive charges to subjugate their quarry?
Yes.
Instead, they should have signed the petition to remove the DA in question.
Yeah, that's gonna work...
Maybe instead, we should vote out the republicans and democrats, but I suppose that's too much to ask. Besides, we would probably just end up with the tea party loons, or worse. I think majority rule has run its course. All the ignorance is becoming such a burden.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
What are they going to do? Kill themselves?
It's more likely they sent themselves these badly Photoshopped guillotine pictures to create sympathy for themselves. Lawyers, always trying to out maneuver everyone with lies and deceit.
Stephen Heymann, have reportedly become the target of 'harassing and threatening messages,' and their personal information, including home address, personal telephone number, and the names of family members and friends, was posted online. Heymann also received a postcard with a picture of his father's head in a guillotine."
A single tear is rolling down my cheek while this nano scale violin plays really sad music..
Karma's a bitch, isn't it?
Yes, Mr. Godwin, they were... That relieves them of all responsibility.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
"Sucks to be you"... Aw, shoot, I already did.
Seriously, though, threats are not the way to accomplish anything here. Rather than online vigilantism, people who have strong feelings about this should be talking to newspapers, senators, congressmen, etc. That way they might actually get something changed, and incidentally make these peoples lives difficult as a happy bonus. Remember, these are the people who (for this purpose) define right and wrong. If you want to go after them, short of full revolution, you have to play by their rules. Otherwise you're just another criminal they can use to justify their tactics.
Said every Nazi ever.
sudo make me a sandwich
"...and their personal information, including home address, personal telephone number, and the names of family members and friends, was posted online. "
Harassment is not cool and should investigated, but privacy is dead, even for federal prosecutors. Stop acting like publishing ordinary information that's available in countless databases in the private and governmental sectors which can be seen by any number of people is tantamount to releasing classified secrets.
> received threatening letters and emails
So do child molestors. what are your point? people hate bullying thuggish federal prosecutors who abuse their office and the law to drive good people to death. a hundred of those asshole prosecutors aren't worth one Aaron Swartz. at least if they killed themselves they would be off the public payroll. So kill yourself Heymann. do it. do it.
> Heymann also received a postcard with a picture of his father's head in a guillotine
If it didn't drive Heymann to death like he drove Swartz to death then what is he complaining about? besides Heymman's father is another prosecutor cunt. who knows how many lives he destroyed so he could put his shit of a son through sleazy lawyer school?
> personal telephone number, and the names of family members and friends
My heart bleeds go fuck yourself Heymann with a retractable baton.
we do not give a shit.
As a former DOJ employee involved mainly with the BOP (Federal Bureau of Prisons), I witnessed a long history of overaggressiveness on the part of US Attorneys (mainly, the AUSA's- the Assitants)... my experience with the court people was often that the AUSA's were trying to make names for themselves and build up their resumes, in hopes of: 1) becoming full US Attorneys, 2) seeking phat money employment in the private sector, or 3) eventually running for some political office.
The females I interacted with were often the most aggressive and over the top- often utilizing severe bias based on their personal lives to make decisions affecting cases... female USA's with histories of being abused by men often saw no possibility of innocence in ANY male defendant, regardless of any facts. In several instances I witnessed state prosecutors refuse to indict based on lack of evidence and/or the specifics of the defendant (i.e. no criminal history, relatively minor charge at state level), only to have a federal prosecutor (an AUSA) throw federal charges at the defendant based on something loose like "the crime involved phones (i.e. modem)", so therefore it could be considered interstate blah blah and allow federal jurisdiction. The startling statistics I discovered were the following:
over 90% of individuals indicted at the federal level are convicted without trial (i.e. plead guilty)
of the remaining approx. 10% who go to trial, 90% LOSE, and are convicted
Do we really believe the federal investigators are so good they really only catch that amount of "bad guys"?
The prosecutors often have NO CLUE whatsoever of technical details of complex issues (i.e. computer related incidents, copyright/piracy, etc). They further confuse things by often presenting information that is outright wrong or confusing to judges or others involved in the process, and often play on the fact the defendants often have no clue of the true law and their rights. At the federal level at least IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS INDEED A VALID DEFENSE. Several federal laws have been changed over the years to add the specific wording "whoever knowingly", because in some cases obscure laws were being abused to prosecute people who had no valid way of knowing that what they did was illegal (i.e. the law was not some "common sense" thing... like a law saying it is illegal to sow grass seed on Tuesday).
I have no comment on the Aaron Swartz case as I don't know all the facts and it is always a damn shame when someone chooses to resort to suicide, but based on my personal experience with "the system" from the inside, I can say that there is no doubt the prosecutor and others on "that side" did indeed play a major role in pushing this troubled young man towards a terrible fate-- and no matter what they say to the contrary, their overaggressiveness in a case involving copyrights for God's sake was truly uncalled for and ultimately serves no proper purpose for the sake of society.
I am afraid this sort of vigilante action is never actually productive. Already the targets are using this to justify keeping details on this case from public view.
What should be going on is pressuring public officials and the press to demand a review of the actions that led to this tragedy, and changes to laws to prevent this from happening again. Instead these attacks are only likely to be used to institute more draconian laws.
In a certain sort of twisted way this seems appropriate. I mean that there is no accountability for their actions in the harassment of Aaron Swartz. If these prosecutors went well above and beyond the normal course of action to give this guy a hard time they should have some accountability for their actions. If the legal system / government isn't going to hold their own representatives accountable for their actions then maybe it needs to come down to the people holding them accountable directly. Sort of like the old time lynch mobs that form up and grab up the criminals and take care of things. People stop respecting the law when it seems undeserving of respect. When it is used arbitrarily and over-handedly to bludgeon people they don't like for personal reasons or makes everyday actions a crime it becomes hard to find a reason to respect the law anymore. I have lost so much respect for the criminal organization known as the police force that I give a little cheer for the news stories about one of them being gunned down. I root for the cop-killer as I find they are doing me good. How crazy is that!
-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
In their minds, they were just "doing their jobs"
They are clearly unrepentant.
Does that justify taking this any further?
Of course not.
Vigilante expressions like this never promote good results.
Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
cry me one.
online harassment?
ONLINE harassment?!
You scum-sucking douches hectored someone into killing themselves with hyperinflated charges intended to "send a message" to score political points. MESSAGE RECEIVED . You should never work in law or government again. You probably should be in jail for abuse of power.
I would have no problem if someone PHYSICALLY broke each and every one of your collective kneecaps.
Signing Internet petitions is only marginally less useless and pointless than harassing government employees. In fact, if I made a list of the most pointless activism on Internet, they would be:
1. Printing form letters and mailing them to Congresspeople
2. Writing e-mails to Congresspeople
3. Signing Internet petitions
4. Complaining loudly on Internet forums
5. Hacking and vandalism
6. Publishing a batshit crazy manifesto
7. DDOSing the government
8. Sending death threats via e-mail
That's in vague order of (comparatively) least pointless to most pointless.
Aaron Swartz Prosecution Team Claims Online Harassment
As you sow, so shall you reap Monsieur Javert.
This particular phrase and verse is most fitting to describe whatever they are going through (that which will forever pale in comparison to what Swartz when through.)
What comes around goes around and shit like that, and you reap what you sow. C'est la fucking vie.
Government, specifically law enforcement, tend to threaten people with all sorts of scary crap in order to get people to do things they don't want to do. In Swartz's case, he wasn't doing anything strictly illegal but they wanted to believe he did so badly and the JSTOR people want to believe he did so badly that they were willing to harrass and frighten this guy to the point of suicide. After all, they were threatening his life in the sense that he would no longer have a good one.
So now, there is turn-about and they cry foul.
Why is it acceptable for law enforcement to use threats and fear as a means of getting their jobs done. Isn't it they that went too far? Shouldn't it be "okay, we have evidence of X, let's charge him with X" and be done with it? Why is it "we think he has done Y, but we only have evidence of X which is not specifically illegal. So let's threaten him with Z until he pleas to Y."
Harrassment and intimidation by government should not be allowed. Just do straight business.
I can. Not for the harassment, or the "hacking" of their social network pages. That's an almost inevitable consequence. I feel bad for them because they were doing their job of prosecuting a law that shouldn't exist. Nothing says prosecutors have to agree with the law.
Ever heard of prosecutorial/judicial discretion? It is part of our legal institutions, and it is what differentiate good prosecutors from Javert-wannabes trying to make their mark.
Reading the article helps. He was arrested for "downloading excessive material". In other words, he had a legal JSTOR account, he wasn't accessing it illegally, he just downloaded more material than they wanted him to. Really? That's a crime now?
Where were you when we went over this in all its gory detail? Yes, this is Slashdot and everything The Man does is evil, so I get the whole simplification thing. But the real situation was actually a bit complicated. He basically tried to download every article they had, which went beyond the terms of use of the service. His downloads impacted other users of the service at the time by slowing them down because - wait for it - he was trying to download everything and chewing up resources to do it. His plan was to make all these articles available for free when access to them required a paid service. He also hid the computer doing the work in a closet and took actions to hide his face from security cameras when going to the closet to check on his equipment. From a legal standpoint, this can be interpreted to mean he knew his actions were wrong. There's a lot wrong with how the prosecutors handled this, but he was hardly some innocent school boy who got bullied for no reason.
As we know, there is no privacy anymore. Hence, prosecutors are going to be facing more and more of this sort of thing. You cannot hide. Ask that DA in Texas. Once prosecutors become aware of this, they might become smart enough to NOT mount silly prosecutions like this - but I doubt it. If you as a prosecutor think your own bureaucracy can protect you, think again. I'm predicting an increase in violence against prosecutors and law enforcement in general.
http://www.businessinsider.com/texas-da-killing-is-unprecedented-2013-4
Although this is an unpopular view, my take on it is that if we abandon the legitimate means in our system of recalling these people, we weaken those means and force the debate into an unnecessarily volatile mode.
Think with your logic, not your emotions :)
It involves a noose.
I would actually put it at significantly more useless. Internet petitions do nothing, they have no impact, they will not represent a negative consequence for the party they are aimed at hurting. Harassment, while not a very good tool, and a tool with its own problems, at least has a personal impact on the person being targeted, one that both they and others in similar roles can see and factor in to future decision making.
Actually it did fly for people working in the concentration camps.
All of germany was not considered war criminals, actually only a very very few people where. And only very very few people in the entire country offered any resistance at all to the genocide.
That is why we conducted studies like the Milgram experiment, that clearly show that the average person will torture someone to death or commit mass genocide if simply asked to by someone with the appearance of authority.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
No, they were abusing their positions to further political aspirations. A big part of the problem is they were not doing their jobs....
Activism is useless when it is aimed at unproductive channels. Instead, they should have signed the petition
Lolwut?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
... playing the world's saddest song. On the world's smallest violin.
Let me play devil's advocate.
Ideally, the legal system works best if you have optimal lawyers on both sides. The difference between the legal arguing and reasoning ability of a superstar lawyer and a merely competent lawyer is probably less than the difference between the legal abilities of randomly-selected folks, so the system in practice isn't grievously broken.
The weird part is that for the system to work, a lawyer has to contractually agree to represent a client's interest as well as possible before knowing all the facts from both sides of the case. The practical consequence of this is that lawyers end up having a duty to promote the interests of even rotten and nasty clients to the best of their ability. For all the lawyer knows, the other side's client may be secretly even worse. Lawyers are able to sleep well at night knowing that they are not in the business of deciding what's right for themselves, and so long as they obey the law and do everything legally possible to promote their client's interests, overall the system will work out better than if people had to advocate for themselves.
Comparing a lawyer to a concentration camp guard is merely inflammatory. A better analogy might be comparing a lawyer with a soldier conducting symmetric warfare, since ideally both sides are roughly equally-equipped, but still the lawyers use words and not guns, which in my view puts them ahead.
Expected time to finish is 1 hour and 60 minutes.
This isn't activism at all, it's a bunch of pissed off people lashing out at what makes them angry. It's like the mob of angry people you might get on your ass if you cause someone to commit suicide by harassing them ceaselessly and then people find out who you are. Just online. Of course, that shouldn't be how things are done in a civilized society. That goes for the treatment of these people and also for the treatment they gave Swartz.
I think we all know "someone paid me money to do it so it's not my fault" doesn't actually fly. As individuals we have free will and the responsibility to behave ethically. To unquestioningly execute commands is to give up our humanity.
Throughout history we have frequently rejected "I was following orders" and "I was just doing my job". These mantras do not provide absolution.
Nope. In the US that doesn't fly. You'll go to jail, and the ones who gave the orders will put you there. (See Abu Ghraib)
A functional justice system keeps us from descending to the level of personal vengeance and feuding.
It is very sad to see the Justice system failing here.
No one has officially called these prosecutors out on their failings in any other way so we get this. I don't think harassment of these prosecutors and MIT and JSTOR is the appropriate reaction. Nor do I think it is the appropriate reaction that the prosecutors have not been reprimanded and appropriate taken to keep non-sense like this from happening.
How high does this failure in the Justice system go?
to include in your list:
3.1 Public Protests
Those things are an equivalent to funeral ceremonies in that it's an occasion to reflect and move on, not to cause any change.
They were just doing their jobs....
There's this little thing called "Prosecutorial discretion". You may not have heard of it. As it turns out, at least in the US, the prosecutor has fairly broad latitude, within the scope of 'doing their job' to push or not push specific cases. This is arguably a bad thing from a 'rule of laws not of men' perspective; but thems the rules as they stand. In this case, the 'victim' wasn't even asking for prosecution, so their hands' weren't being forced even by 'stakeholder' request or public opinion.
Am not surprised in the least.
Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
They were just doing their jobs....
Is that like just following orders?
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
the very, very tiny violins...
Activism is useless when it is aimed at unproductive channels. Instead, they should have signed the petition to remove the DA in question. Or written a letter to the state.
Thanks for the laugh. I needed that right now.
I am not a crackpot.
Can anyone send the forementioned addresses and mails etc.?
For non-nefarious purposes, of course.
Having been the defendant in a situation like adam was in, and having seen the options laid out in front of me by the prosecutor (Pay 25,000$ now and avoid the case all together, or chance spending time in prison and pay $25,000 later) I can say that maybe if these prosecutors didn't believe in what they were doing with the conviction that they exhibit when they're flat out telling you to cough up some cash or you're going to prison, If they did, then maybe, just maybe they wouldn't be waffling about their decision now.
(I realize thats a bit of a rant but I just woke up and am constantly appalled, albeit not surprised, by the prosecution of this case not fully standing by what they did).
If you can't stand by your decision in the face of adversity, then what good is it?
FFS, why on earth hasn't she been sacked yet?
She tried to undermine the courts using an insane number of BS claims, trying to force Aaron to accept a guilty plea rather than let the court decide.
THAT'S NOT HER JOB. It's the OPPOSITE of her job.
She made political speeches on the back of this case, to promote her political career. At some point she should have been fired for misconduct, but she wasn't. The threats and anger relate to HER INCOMPETENCE at the job.
Just resign already Carmen, nobody wants you, every prosecution with your name on it, is tainted, because judges will automatically assume you're doing another insane overreach. Do the nice thing, hand in your resignation, you made a mistake, you want to spend more time with your family and FUCK OFF.
Don't mess with the nerd, he is the bully of today.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If you devote your entire life to destroying other people's lives, I don't have much sympathy if people try to take you down as well at some point. Live by the sword, die by the sword, etc etc.
Given the choice between doing something immoral to follow orders and refusing orders, people follow orders. And given the choice between doing something immoral and losing money, people do the immoral thing. Morals take a back seat, except for really fundamental social norms. (Most people won't rape someone for money, for example.)
Morals take a back seat, whether because of the almighty dollar or because of societal norms or even norms within most environments. There are some exceptions--for example, where the person giving the orders is not respected, such as an insurance company.
The fact is that the goal is to make money/stay employed/be respected by peers/bosses. Moral calculus rarely enters the picture.
This is also true in law. The law does have ethics, a particular set of rules, which have their own problems (in design and enforcement). Legal ethics do not prohibit charging someone with anything you can make even a colorable argument they are guilty of. In elected legislative policymaking, the incentive is for overcriminalization, which has been known for centuries. In addition, the culture of prosecution is such that success is measured by putting people away for long periods of time.
As a result, the system does a great deal of harm. It also does good (limiting the ability of people to offend again and incentivizing people not to offend), but the good is intangible, whereas the harm is readily apparent.
Hey prosecutors, Aaron himself showed one way to deal with the problem of truly-worthless piece-of-shit assholes, who are able to act completely without any accountability or sense of responsibility, with a totally reckless disregard for the effect of their actions upon people who don't deserve their abuse.
Have you considered doing what he did? It seemed to have worked.
Good grief, of all the people who would dare to complain about threatening letters, this is the dumbest. This is like a blackmailer who gets confronted by someone else who tells them, "I learned you're blackmailing so-and-so. If people learned you're a blackmailer, that could be embarrassing for you. Pay me, and I won't tell anyone that's how you make your living."
I don't really understand what Aaron went through so I never did make up my mind, as to whether or not he made the right decision to just give up and die. I can see both sides of that, but overall I don't think I would have done what he did, in his case.
But in this case it really does seem easier. They should consider it.
Would you ever hire Carmen Ortiz or Stephen Heymann? If you found out your local government hired one of these people as a DA or something, wouldn't you call that blatant negligence and a betrayal of the public trust, sort of like hiring a convicted pedophile to be the new school superintendant?
Our system of government is set up to keep feds mostly unaccountable from the voters (that's what allows these sadists to get away with what they do), so they're in relatively safe positions for the moment, but that safety isn't absolute. It's quite possible that through pressuring the president (alas, the current one has no more elections) these people will eventually be made to answer for their professional misconduct and ethics violations, and thereby lose their jobs. After that, their employment options just get worse and anyone who hires them is going to take a major PR hit.
Ortiz, Heymann, just make sure your insurance is paid up, and then go have an "accident." Everyone will know what you did, but if you do it right, there will be no proof so it could end up being the very best thing for your families.
Nope. In the US that doesn't fly. You'll go to jail, and the ones who gave the orders will put you there. (See Abu Ghraib)
I'm not sure if it should be +1 or -1, but there should be a "Depressing" mod.
I am not a crackpot.
We live in a country where the powerless are routinely made scapegoats for the crimes of the powerful, and the powerful are almost never brought to account. Given that, it is no surprise that the citizens are taking matters into their own hands. Expect for it to get worse as long as those preconditions continue.
Maybe instead, we should vote out the republicans and democrats, but I suppose that's too much to ask. Besides, we would probably just end up with the tea party loons, or worse.
Um, this is exactly what happened in 2010.
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
But then again, if they do, there's no crime because they did it themselves.
Right?
"lawyers use words and not guns"
Bullshit. In criminal law two lawyers squabble over the accused, who is often bound in chains, & will be shot if he attempts to escape. If two Nazi officers are arguing whether a prisoner of war should be executed, or put in a concentration camp, the threat of lethal force is just as real as if they are commanding an enlisted soldier to aim an artillery piece at the accused's location.
Bullshit. See: My Lai massacre. The Nuremburg defence was accepted.
They already established they were losers.
Sorry, they may have been assholes, but they didn't murder anyone. That's just ridiculous babble. Aaron killed himself, and that was all on him. Plenty of people get shafted by Federal Government and don't kill themselves, and there's no reason to believe that the prosecutors even thought that was a possibility. They want convictions, not dead defendants.
"Swartz broke into a private computer network in order to commit copyright violatio"
Nope, he didn't.
1) Logged in, no breaking in.
2) It wasn't private.
3) It wasn't a copyright violation since they were public documents he had a right to (see also #1)
We will only be satisfied when you are all receiving your lethal injections - I for one do not wish to pay to keep any of you alive.
I, for one, do. When you die it's not likely to be pretty. It will be painful and disgusting. You'll either have a heart attack, a stroke, an accident, alsheimer's, or simply wither away until you're completely dependant on others.
When a condemned man dies (they almost never execute women) he goes painlessly and peacefully.
Damned bleeding heart cheap-assed conservatives! Everyone has to die. Not everyone has to spend decades locked in a six by nine room. I'm more than willing to pay for them to suffer, I'm NOT willing to pay for execution drugs that remove the suffering and pain of death.
Anyone know how to filter stories in Google Reader? If I have to read another story about Aaron fucking Swartz I'm going to vomit.
It is useful just not by the people who sign them. It gives politicians a list of people to target should they need a scapegoat for something lascivious. "I am deeply disturbed that my rival was viciously attacked! It must have been petition signer #37 on petition X since they had a grievance against him."
Good, I hope people keep harassing them the rest of their lives. The can always go and plead their case to Aaron, then the harassing will stop, just as it did for him.
What a shock.
He was "guilty" of scripting access to data he had every right to download.
Accessing it without scripting was fine.
It was AT WORST a breech of a civil contract and therefore not a criminal offence, nor even a misdemeanour.
An eye for an eye leaves one man with one eye, and we know already that in the land of the blind, the one-eye'd man is king.
Yeah, about that...
This "turn the other cheek" thing is great and all, but when taken to extremes it allows (and condones) complete oppression of the meek by the strong.
A more nuanced view might hold that "turn the other cheek" is a recognition that people sometimes make mistakes, and if they're contrite they're deserving of forgiveness.
If they're a self-serving bastard however, society is better served by taking an attitude of stand your ground.
There was a recent incident in NH where an electrician discovered two people breaking into his truck, containing lots of equipment and supplies necessary to his job. He tried to scare them away, they didn't back off, so he beat the crap out of them. Allowing them to continue (the police arrived 45 minutes later) would have seriously affected his ability to make a living.
"Turn the other cheek" has context; it is not universal, to be used in all situations. In the case of Carmen Ortiz, we also have "responsibility for ones actions", "recurrent behaviour", and "value to society".
And?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
You're all forgetting the most important item for the list:
9. Anything.
Don't bother protesting, your masters don't approve of it. Just learn to accept your slavery like all the other good tools, you will never change anything.
A dictatorship could of course work. If you have a dictator who has the good of the nation, its well being and its prosperity in his mind and not his personal gains, his own well being and his own good.
Now, we don't assume that we will find one such person. Hence we don't support dictatorships. But in the twisted logic of the human mind, we think that if we cannot find one such person, finding 300 millions with that quality and calling it democracy is easier.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I agree that it seems that way, at first. However, it seems unlikely to actually affect meaningful change. More likely, it will either be ignored or eliminated. A petition has just as much chance of scaring politicians into changing their behavior, and it doesn't bring about connotations of vigilantism and what I suspect will come to be known as "Internet terrorism".
Bullshit. See: My Lai massacre. The Nuremburg defence was accepted.
That was 4 decades past. Things have changed a bit since then, Sparky.
Ok, we have accounted for the useless bits. Now please inform us what we CAN do. From this vantage point it seems the only thing that seems to work in your mind is to pick up that rifle, get some good buddies and head for the state capital.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If they had to bring up BS charges to get a felony, then there can't have been an ACTUAL felony committed, can there.
petitions and letters represent lost votes. They are much more effective on a local level than a national one where 25,000 votes is a hell of a margin.
And unlike with the concentration camp guys, I guess a negative answer wouldn't have resulted in a few deaths within the family in this case.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Yes, because a White House petition that no one will ever fucking read isn't an "unproductive channel" for "activism."
God you people are getting even more fucking stupid by the day.
Hell, I think voting is kind of pointless, but I was trying to limit myself to just Internet activism.
Regardless, I finally voted again, in 2012, after 20 years of boycotting the voting booth. It felt as pointless as ever, but I got a nice sticker that says I voted.
It fucking sucks ass yeah?
And that excuse works everywhere. Corporate America is built on this excuse.
A department head having to lay off 20% of his workforce will do so, because he has no option, he's gotta do his job. He's got that order from further up the chain. That works up 'til the CEO, who in turn has to do it. He has to keep the company competitive or else it will go under, he's gotta do his job, because if the stock plummets, the investors will bail. Investors are also just doing their job, they're working at a bank and they have a responsibility towards their customers that trust them with their hard earned money, if they picked the "wrong" stocks for the portfolio just to "protect" that company and its jobs, their portfolio would go bad and people who gave them their money would be losing. Investors are by no means just big moneybags, every kind of pension fund works that way too, and they, too, are just doing their job.
So, next time you get fired and want to know who's that bastard that caused it all, find a mirror. If you have some kind of stock option, some kind of 401k plan, some kind of "preparation for your retirement", chances are that you just fired yourself, in the name of doing your job.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Did da widdle pwosecutahs get theh widdwe feewings hurt? Mommy will kiss it and make it bettew.
Remember all the anti-bullying laws (online/offline) that were passed after several people committed suicide after being bullied???
Anything someone does that leads to another person committing suicide is now a form of murder.
Choice of weapon, removal of hope, increased shame, increased guilt, removal of the will to live. Deadly as a bullet, and yes, they are murderers.
I've been the target of unethical attorneys like the scum who went after Swartz.
Death is too good for such scum.
A long life which is full of terrible suffering would be best for them.
Finding such a person won't be difficult to find at all, but force that all the minions down to the last cop would have a similar behaviour is just impossible.
So it's only a justice system when it's convenient for you? Swartz repeatedly committed an offense and refused to cooperate, breaking several laws in the process.
As for the supposed Wall Street crimes, can you link a name with a specific crime ? Last I heard greed and stupidity weren't illegal, so unless your planning to jail all the Americans who knowingly purchased properties they couldn't afford along with the Bankers who approved them knowing they couldn't pay along with the Politicians that loosened the regulations because the public demanded it, then you're just blowing hot air.
You're missing the point, I think.
There are a lot of "big fish" which are ripe for harvesting, yet the justice department spends money and resources pig-piling on the weak and vulnerable. They concentrate on the cases that don't make much of a difference, while giving colossal social injustice a "bye".
To respond to your question directly, HSBC was investigated and found to have a long history of criminal activity, including "... senior bank officials were complicit in the illegal activity.". Prosecutors chose not to press charges, simply because the bank is too important: [Assistant attorney general] Lanny Breuer stating "it could have cost thousands of jobs".
But lets put this into a better context.
Aaron Swartz was harassed to death based on the legal theory that violating a site's TOS is a felony.
At the same time, spammers are allowed to take people's money, despite being relatively easy to track down ("follow the money") and robocall laws are unenforced despite being relatively easy to track down ("follow the money").
The government has excellent tools for following money trails, and could do society a great service by sending a chilling effect to fraudsters.
Instead, they hound a lone engineer to death for violating a TOS.
Good to know that we all have your implied permission to bully and harass you and your family! Defending the prosecutors in this case is pretty much like defending the war criminals during the Nuremberg Trials. If you do it, you will suffer severe repercussions for betraying your own humanity.
Well, once they start committing suicide...
Ya know, the "prosecutors" have essentially and factually and publicly made statements
supporting their over-achievement/over-reaching in the handling of his case. So, yes people are upset.
A person is supposed to do what they were supposed to [be] doing, but you forgot that that statement
requires a conscience decision, unless you're okay with Nazi guards' handling of the Jews during WWII - as they
were simply following orders themselves. This is what happens when a point is not thought through to its conclusion...
Nope. In the US that doesn't fly. You'll go to jail, and the ones who gave the orders will put you there. (See Abu Ghraib)
Actually, if Abu Ghraib is any indication, you'll be thrown into jail, and the ones who gave the orders will, at worst, have to take a cut to their retirement pay. The military even has a term for this: different spanks for different ranks.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
These ass-clowns will get sent to the country-club prisons, play 9 holes of golf before being bedded by their female prison guards.
Why pay that? by lethal injection, I was thinking air embolism, or blood clot - preceded by acid injection - something nasty and painful, that takes weeks to die, writhing and wailing in pain.
Maybe it's called getting what you deserve.
People will need to start gang up and refocus the resources. Start getting your people to elected from the lower level and moving up. Pirate party is a good example.
If you can't beat the system, join the system.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation (or similar orgs) needs to be reformed to include a paramilitary that intended to combat prosecutorial miscounduct. After all, force is what this administration only understands, because that's how they do things, and that is why they orchestrated all these false flag massacres in preparation to revoke your second amendment rights.
New Economic Perspectives
of them ACTUALLY being harrassed? I mean this could just be whining on their part.
Let's get one thing perfectly clear about the United States justice system. It is not equitable and in no way just. Police are not objectional investigators any more that Prosecutors are looking for justice. The job of the police is to strictly gather any evidence that they can use to pin the accusations on the individual. They interview using coerction, lies, and threats to try and break a subject. Once they "think" you've done something the game is over. They are not out for the truth any longer, they are out to set you up. Prosecutors are the same. They will level 30 or more trumped up charges to intimidate the individual into accepting a plea bargain. The plea bargain adds a "win" to their statistics and doesn't cost them an arm and a leg to prosecute and get a win. Let's change the laws to even the playing field. Don't allow them to use lies, coerction, or threats to gain a conviction! If they are the upstanding honest hard working individuals that they claim to be then this would be fine by them. Also remove their protections under "color of law". If they screw up, make them personally liable for any and all damages. Then you will begin to see an equitable system of justice.
Do you take it apart and wear the plastic cable sleeve on your head, or what?
No, he didn't physically break into it.
He didn't break in at all. He had valid access to the system. The civil contract said that he shouldn't script access and he did, but that isn't breaking in.
I would never condone threatening messages to the prosecutors. Keep in mind that it is their job to prosecute, and they don't keep their jobs if they don't get convictions. It sounds sad, but there is in fact enough crime that there are plenty of real criminals to prosecute that they could do this job legitimately under those pressures. Unfortunately, many lesser criminals are easier targets. It's important to point out that regardless of what they did, threats of violence are inappropriate, simply because threats of violence are ALWAYS inappropriate. This is not a defensive military statement or action against someone with nukes; these people are just asshole attorneys who happen to be responsible for someone's death by gross neglegence. When someone is convicted of neglegent manslaughter, the sentence is lesser than when someone is convicted of premeditated murder and will involve jail time rather than lethal injection.
That being said, I think these prosecutors deserve a lot of flak for what they did, and they too should be the target of some heavy-handed prosecution.
This feels right because quite frankly some people who were... unpleasant or so stupid that they cause harm to someone for NOTHING at all are getting their comeuppance. I think maybe this sort of social justice is missing from today's spread out society. See? It is totally impersonal! Just a job with no consequences for ill thought out actions!
Does that make their own torment right? Not really. But it is needed and they have noone truly to blame but themselves. Just a self correction of a small system. Deserved probably since they eneded up causing such a heavy price to be payed so unfairly.
You know what, usually, I have some sympathy - doxing is a noxious practice and two wrongs do not make a right. So I feel a little bit conflicted.
Just a little bit, mind, because I think if there was ever a time when doxing was justified - when it would be impossible to work within the system to address a grievance with an agent of the government who abused their power this is that time.
They abused the law and hounded a young kid to his death. They ruined a man's life in order to do nothing more than prop up their careers. There was no public safety issue here, nor was there any real consideration of the facts independent of "can we win a big computer case?"
I want these guys fired, disbarred, and possibly prosecuted if they did indeed break laws. But the practical matter is that it's not likely to happen - in fact I'm almost positive that it isn't.
I would *never,* ever, participate in vigilante justice. But you can be damn sure that if I was asked to serve on a jury for someone who took things a "little too far," I would find "not guilty" by jury nullification.
They killed a person, and not just a random persin but a person fighting for our rights.
You're right, and yet, not really.
In theory, yes, we should deal with this and most issues by "talking to newspapers, senators, congressmen, etc." rather than through lashing out (or just peeing and moaning on the internet).
In reality, unless lots of people do that, it achieves nothing; frequently, lots of people can do that and it STILL achieves nothing unless it's pursued with such overwhelming numbers, money, and persistence that is absolutely impractical to sustain for anything close to the number of Things That Are Completely Screwed Up.
Meanwhile, peeing and moaning on the internet is easy and (thanks to the social web) often gratifying, while online vigilantism allows small groups or even individuals to make a real difference. One that is, yes, probably counterproductive, but a difference all the same.
By contrast, one notices after a while that "their rules" seem intentionally and effectively designed to ensure that they always win.
I don't care.
In 1988, Jonathan Pollard's (America's more prolific spy) father defended his son by claiming members of the U.S. military were proliferating swasticas against his son. I'm surprised when those who went over-the-top whine.
Actions have consequences, and not all are within the legal system. This is the modern equivalent of being tarred and feathered. They deserve it.
Does anyone have said information on said prosecutors?
I didn't harrass them. I am glad that there is some justice, since the prosecuters obviously are not the ones who are bringing it to the country. Would I harrass them? No. Am I happy they're being harrassed? Sure.
Good point. +1 to internet activism only.
The public protest issue is one the really gets under my skin though.
While we are on the topic of voting and the "I voted" sticker, it occurred to me that, as consumers, what we choose to consume is rather like a vote. Businesses fail if they don't have a way to move their products or services. By choosing to consume certain product or service we perform the equivalent of "voting" for a firm by helping keep them in business.
In that light, by consuming a product that is manufactured by a company who outsourced its production facilities, we "vote" for outsourcing. We vote against using our own workforce. We vote for a degradation in the symbiosis between factory and worker/household in the micro-economy model diagram.
Organizations that choose that type of strategy depend on at least two things: 1. disorganization of the consumption of the public or that the irrationality of the image of consumption is more important than the reality. 2. The continuation of the nexus of greed (selfishness) in purchase decisions.
Games theory.
I'm not saying that capitalism should be abandoned, only that we, the people, should govern ourselves better. We should have made a bigger deal of Swartz before he had to pay the ultimate price. And since that's not possible anymore, we need to be ever more vigilant that it doesn't happen again.
Please excuse the long winded off-topic.
LOL. You think Obama reads those?
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
AMEN and I *hope* somebody mods you up. You would have had all my points if I had them.
I would only add, that "excuses" sound like somebody is trying to dodge their personal responsibility for their actions. Which is exactly what they are doing, and it should not be tolerated in any part of society. Its what got us into the economic collapse, various wars, etc.
C|N>K
Just so that when they track down some peon they are throw a life sentence at him.
http://www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org/ Don't take it personally. People are sometimes mean. Often it's because they're bullies and they have no understanding of how abusive they are, or the hurtful consequences of their actions.
It's not about politics dickhead, it's about just having a moral compass. Yes he broke the law. They proceeded to charge him with tons of shit he wasn't guilty of instead of just what he had done. This is an officer of the court we're talking about, not some gutter thug going "give me your money or I'll kill you" but that is essentially what she did to him. Plead to this or we'll utterly destroy your life even though we know you aren't guilty of anything but this minor stuff. It's abuse of power. They should be fired. People have every right to be angry (although the death threats are over the top) because she's not even getting her wrist slapped. I don't like the fact that so many people are sinking to her level though. By acting this way instead of calling their elected officials and raising hell they become the same filthy shit that she is. Don't become what you hate.
Still easier than trying to get 300 million honest, selfless people who put the well being of their country over their own, don't you think?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Maybe the assholes won't be pricks to others in future eh?
nt
When the bully runs to the principal and cries that the girls called him fatty-fatty-fat-fat.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It's nice that they're alive to tell us about how they feel. Aaron is not. I can't imagine the amount of pain he went through that drove him to kill himself, but I imagine he felt something close to what someone in a burning skyscraper might feel, and did what they might do. Take the least painful route. These guys face a different situation, and have a different choice. When your worst problem is getting hate mail, you have options.
Love taps...
Their financial stuff is probably next... nothing changing a few debit cards can't fix
Then when they think they're all clear comes the anonymous tip turning them in for the illegal porn on their work computer(s)...
Cyberbullying can be a terrible thing... especially when it becomes asymmetrical warfare conducted against those who believe in their own power
As well they should be. An innocent lawyer is an oxymoron.
memo to Ortiz and Heymann: remember what they did to Ridiculously Photogenic Guy http://goo.gl/hQ0St and his only sin was looking good; Steven Heymann and Carmen Ortiz were the federal prosecutors that left no stone unturned, spared no expense and basically engaged in an orgy of beyond the pale hyper-legal tactics that haven't been applied to any white-collar criminals in the banking/Wall Street sectors that contributed to the near collapse of the American economy, hmm I wonder why that is? time for some clever people to turn them 2 into internet memes like they famously did to UC Davis police officer Lt. John Pike http://goo.gl/yQ7bD caught pepper spraying student demonstrators on camera and video and who six months later was fired. from Slatest 8-1-2012: "After Pike was identified as the officer in the video, the hacker group Anonymous posted his home- and cellphone numbers online. Since the incident, he’s reportedly received 17,000 angry emails, 10,000 text messages, and hundreds of letters. He changed his phone number, email address, and has moved several times." let the good times roll Heymann and Ortiz
The petition reached it's goal nearly 2 months ago and not a peep has been heard. Perhaps if there had been a meaningful response to that petition, these other measures wouldn't be in play now.
...slashdotted...
I haven't seen any response to either the petition to discipline Carmen Ortiz or Steve Heymann, but I'm hoping the White House knows that tech professionals are watching.
The actions of these prosecutors is just an example of what is wrong with the system. I have a number of friends and family in law enforcement, but I have to say that my reaction to the recent news of harassment (even attacks) on prosecutors is ambivalence. If their version of "justice" is extorting a plea, they deserve anything they get. I feel sorry for honorable men and women who are stuck in a profession that no longer values anything other than expedience.
An eye for an eye leaves one man with one eye, and we know already that in the land of the blind, the one-eye'd man is king.
By the way: "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" was really about avoiding escalating vendettas by limiting retaliation (official or otherwise) to no more than the original offense.
Draconian punishments for copyright violation (or allegations of it) seem to be a textbook case of what the prescription was about. If the massive escalation on the institutional side led to substantial retaliation against those administering it, resulting in an escalatory spiral, that would be unsurprising.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
In response to my own comment, I should add that I don't encourage or endorse violence against these folks (or even harassment) -- the correct method is to peacefully work with the system to advocate change and to seek punishment for egregious violations such as the prosecution of Mr Swartz. (In re-reading my comment, I think it came across a bit harsher than was intended).
tl;dr Their (alleged) lack of honor in dealing with Mr Swartz doesn't give us a pass to also act dishonorably.
Today's Tom Sawyer knows that changes aren't permanent, but change is.
He also apparently gets high on energy. Either too much Red Bull or he needs to stop sniffing the oxides off of aluminum electrical wires.
</nonsequitur>
Fuck off JSTOR shill.
and so is Carmen Ortiz.
How are she and Heymann still employed?
Howdy howdy howdy
Given that we've at least seen evidence that someone knows about the harassment, but none at all that anyone has noticed the petition, apparently harassment is more effective.
That and run their pants up the flagpole.
Activism is useless when it is aimed at unproductive channels. Instead, they should have signed the petition to remove the DA in question. Or written a letter to the state.
Petition to remove DA Carmen Ortiz
Like most of the ill-worded and jurisdictionally misdirected petitions on that site, that one exists to make the public feel as if they've done something about a problem and therefore can dismiss it from the collective consciousness and go back to business as usual.
The request in that petition is not actionable by the executive branch of the Federal government.
The petition reached it's goal nearly 2 months ago and not a peep has been heard. Perhaps if there had been a meaningful response to that petition, these other measures wouldn't be in play now.
You have missed the point, I think.
That IS, in fact, a meaningful response, you just don't like what it means.
They deserve a lot more than harassment, and should themselves be in jail!
http://www.pereanu.com/comic/us-justice-system/
Fuck them, they harassed their victim mercilessly with the full weight of the law behind them to justify their phony self-righteous indignation. I have zero sympathy for these self-pitying assholes. Nobody is threatening to put them in jail for a few decades with any credibility but that's what they did to Aaron.
That said it really takes a full-retard to threaten a federal prosecutor online, even if you THINK you've covered your tracks.
It's the worlds smallest violin, and it's playing just for you.
> If he didn't commit to a crime, then he should have gone to trial, and made the prosecution make the case that he broke the law.
That's the theory. In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not. In practice, when a defendant goes to trial, the stakes go up, way up: you're either going to walk, or the judge is going to impose a sentence more severe than the plea... and given Federal sentencing guidelines, that means *considerably* more severe. In addition, a defendant not of means is going to be at least broke, and likely deep in the hole.
Even down at the County level, that's why a lot of innocent people plead out. They can't afford to lose, can't afford to defend, and probably don't have anyone a judge/jury will believe to witness on their behalf. Instead, they do their six months plus years "in the system", plus a criminal record, rather than risk years in the can.
Luke, help me take this mask off
First off no one should be doing anything illegal to either of these prosecutors because doing illegal things is just working against what Aaron REALLY stood for and only serves to give these creeps ammo to mischaracterize and re-frame the entire issue away from prosecutorial abuse of power lack of perspective and good judgement which is THE issue here.
That said, you're a very public official with the ultimate power to take away citizen's rights and freedom, potentially forever and with the power life and death over citizens- a power you apparently get off on and anyways have proven you wield casually, recklessly with no concern for the dictates of justice, never mind common sense and proportionality.
So what exactly IS harassment of such a public official? People graphically , imaginatively and repeatedly expressing their displeasure directly at you? You think society should give you immunity from that when it really starts to "get" to you? You think you ought to be somehow lofted above and beyond the voices of the people you casually trample on? You think they have no right to tell you to your face what they think of you, and what you did, or they should stop doing it when you grow tired of it ?
May I suggest to you that you are a person who does not belong in the kitchen.
Do you suppose any of the people you sent to jail on charges as trumped up and inflated in gravitas and consequence as the Schwartz case was have grown "tired" of being in jail? Think any of those people are traumatized ? Think any of their families have been traumatized and wanted the nightmare you created, frothed up and then unleashed on them to further your career, to "just stop"? Think any of your victims think that what you did to them was "out of bounds" or constituted "harassment" or do you think, like the rest of us do, that what you did to them is far far more corrosive to the bonds which hold civil society together than anything they did to society?
The prison-industrial complex is always hungry for fresh meat and to be frank, you're clearly a person who understands their job is to feed that monster. After you've locked up all the Black marijuana peddlers you can scrounge up out of the tax-base starved, opportunity -free zones you call ghettos and put away every anyone unlucky enough to have some lying, someone doesn't-like-you !, witch-hunt finger pointed at them which you prosecuted with just a thimble-full of circumstantial-only evidence slathered over with copious amounts of the most sickly, evidence starved your-office-made-it-up narrative, who is left to feed to the beast with but the young flesh of anyone who goes through life with an insufficiently timid and deferential attitude towards the well connected and powerful whose bitch you ultimately are?
You'll live with this to the day you die. That's just an observation of fact, in case you overlooked it. THIS is what you'll be known for now, tomorrow and long after you're dead. If you're remembered at all it will be for THIS. You'll go to parties, you'll meet new people and THIS is what people will think about you, silently behind their smiles and handshakes. Get used to it.
Life sentences are bitch.
Given that the DOJ is part of the executive branch, I am pretty sure the White House can act on it by firing their sorry asses and ordering a criminal investigation into these scumbags.
Oh their personal info was let out! A terrible crime.
Yet it's ok to film our every move. Hypocrites!