News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case by chaostheory on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @03:40PM (#6129498)
That was only mentioned AFTER he died. Let's take a look at their press release: http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/news/2011/July/SwartzAaronPR....

"AARON SWARTZ, 24, was charged in an indictment with wire fraud, computer fraud, unlawfully obtaining information from a protected computer, and recklessly damaging a protected computer. If convicted on these charges, SWARTZ faces up to 35 years in prison, to be followed by three years of supervised release, restitution, forfeiture and a fine of up to $1 million."

Gee I wonder why someone would contemplate suicide?

Re:MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case by danielweber on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @04:05PM (#6129651)
That was only mentioned AFTER he died

Maybe to outsiders, but Aaron and Aaron's lawyers both knew the six-month plea deal was on the table.

The DOJ publicly said "up to 35 years," and they deserve what they get for saying that --

-- but Aaron's lawyers didn't just fall off the turnip truck. They knew federal sentencing guidelines. Even if guilty on all counts, there were good odds that Aaron would face 0 days in jail, being a first-time non-violent offender. There was a 0.00% chance of Aaron going to jail for 35 years.

Re:MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case by res0nat0r on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @04:05PM (#6129650)
Unless he had the worlds worst lawyer, he would have known that those terms are theoretical maximums which always get trotted out in the news and in press releases. This keeps getting ignored for some reason in this case.

Also there are thousands of people every year sentenced to possibly long term jail time who don't kill themselves, therefore I put the blame more on Aaron himself than MIT.

Re:MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case by chaostheory on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @04:38PM (#6129867)
"Andy Good, Swartz’s initial lawyer, is ­alternately sad and furious.

'The thing that galls me is that I told Heymann the kid was a suicide risk,' Good told me. 'His reaction was a standard reaction in that office, not unique to Steve. He said, ‘Fine, we’ll lock him up.’ I’m not saying they made Aaron kill himself. Aaron might have done this anyway. I’m saying they were aware of the risk, and they were heedless.'"

"Marty Weinberg, who took the case over from Good, said he nearly negotiated a plea bargain in which Swartz would not serve any time. He said JSTOR signed off on it, but MIT would not.

'There were subsets of the MIT community who were profoundly in support of Aaron,' Weinberg said. That support did not override institutional interests."

Re:MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case by res0nat0r on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @08:16PM (#6131026)
Dropping charges because someone is at risk of hurting themselves is not a good policy law enforcement policy. The charges could proceed as normal, but extended supervision should be the proper response.
Re:MIT releases report on its actions in the Aaron Swartz case by chaostheory on Tuesday July 30, 2013 @10:22PM (#6131520)
In this case, you're talking about the enforcement of keeping publicly funded research out of the public's hands. Was any of this necessary?