Carmen Ortiz, the US Attorney in Massachusetts, appears to be feeling some of the heat of the global anger over her prosecution of Aaron Swartz — an unrelenting prosecution that many (including the family) blame for his suicide. Ortiz is attempting to portray this abusive and unnecessary prosecution as prosecutors merely enforcing the law in compliance with their oath. They were, according to Ortiz, something akin to a legal version of Inspector Javert — committed to the enforcement of the federal law without discretion or judgment. Ortiz, who had remained silent, appears to have accepted that the case is presenting a serious problem for her and begins with a statement of sympathy that was entirely absent in the treatment of Swartz by her office and Assistant United States Attorney Stephen Heymann who has been linked to another suicide of a defendant.
Here is the statement:
January 16, 2013
STATEMENT OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEY CARMEN M. ORTIZ
REGARDING THE DEATH OF AARON SWARTZ
As a parent and a sister, I can only imagine the pain felt by the family and friends of Aaron Swartz, and I want to extend my heartfelt sympathy to everyone who knew and loved this young man. I know that there is little I can say to abate the anger felt by those who believe that this office’s prosecution of Mr. Swartz was unwarranted and somehow led to the tragic result of him taking his own life.I must, however, make clear that this office’s conduct was appropriate in bringing and handling this case. The career prosecutors handling this matter took on the difficult task of enforcing a law they had taken an oath to uphold, and did so reasonably. The prosecutors recognized that there was no evidence against Mr. Swartz indicating that he committed his acts for personal financial gain, and they recognized that his conduct – while a violation of the law – did not warrant the severe punishments authorized by Congress and called for by the Sentencing Guidelines in appropriate cases. That is why in the discussions with his counsel about a resolution of the case this office sought an appropriate sentence that matched the alleged conduct – a sentence that we would recommend to the judge of six months in a low security setting. While at the same time, his defense counsel would have been free to recommend a sentence of probation. Ultimately, any sentence imposed would have been up to the judge. At no time did this office ever seek – or ever tell Mr. Swartz’s attorneys that it intended to seek – maximum penalties under the law.
As federal prosecutors, our mission includes protecting the use of computers and the Internet by enforcing the law as fairly and responsibly as possible. We strive to do our best to fulfill this mission every day.
It is always amusing to hear an Obama Administration official speaking of the obligation to prosecute federal crimes after President Obama promised CIA officials no one would be prosecuted for torture (a war crime as well as a federal crime) and the Justice Department was unwilling to bring a single charge — even for CIA officials who admitted that they destroyed evidence to bar prosecution. The Justice Department was unwilling to even bring bar complaints against attorneys facilitating the torture program. Yet, they had no alternative but to prosecute Swartz even though he downloaded academic papers later released free of charge and never had a financial or personal motive in his actions.
Her claim of an office struggling with its desire not to severely punish Swartz is belied by the evidence. First, asking for jail time was always an absurdly out-of-proportion demand and Ortiz admits that they insisted on jail time.
Second, her office ADDED CHARGES to the indictment rather than, as she suggests, seeking a sensible plea. The original indictment contained four charges against Swartz with a maximum potential jail time of 35 years. Her office issued a press released heralding their severe charges against Swartz as linked in the article below. Then her office piled on NINE MORE CHARGES with a maximum sentence of up to 50 years. In other words, the statement is at best misleading and at worse intentionally deceptive.
Moreover, reports indicate that Heymann was insisting on more severe punishment in any plea.
For the record, the US Attorneys manual stresses
“The statutory duty to prosecute for all offenses against the United States (28 U.S.C. § 547) carries with it the authority necessary to perform this duty. The USA is invested by statute and delegation from the Attorney General with the broadest discretion in the exercise of such authority.”
The entire prosecution was abusive and not only Ortiz but the Obama Administration was subject to criticism for months for their mistreatment of Swartz. They continued the prosecution because they had no sympathy or decency. However, when their prosecution became a global scandal, Ortiz and the Administration suddenly has portrayed themselves as reluctant — even tortured — public servants forced to prosecute this man. Ortiz should not be surprised if her “heartfelt sympathy” seems a bit forced and opportunistic after the public outcry. More importantly, such sympathy would be more credible if it were accompanied by greater veracity in her statement of the underlying facts of this case.
Source: TechDirt
yea, raf, mine is too far gone for antibiotics, bwhahahahahah
Interesting comment from orion at fdl:
in reading about u.s. attorney carmen ortiz, i read she was tight with holder.
if so, she would have needed little instruction to ask heymann to double the charges (by “data sllicing” them), and then doubling the penalties and and doubling time up the river.
the united states department of justice is so about justice under the emperor obama.”
Shano,
Be sure to take some antibiotics to cure that leftist syndrome! 🙂
But you are wrong, ralph. If Aaron was Mulsim, he would probably have been treated much worse, imho. no, just ramble on, not going to try to understand insanity or drunken babbling.
But you will never know the true extent of my leftist agenda..bwahahahahahahahah
Shano, you must be a leftist, which makes you blind to the very point I made. Of course, Aaron Swartz’s heritage is relevant. Leftists like Obama favor Islamo-panderers and they typically hate Jews, mainly because the Muslims hate the Jews and they always pander to the Muslims; but also because Jews thrive in an environment of freedom, and leftists hate freedom and liberty with a passion. That’s why they want to kill the Second Amendment. That’s why they support the Islam-first Senator Hagel. Thus, in persecuting Swartz, but letting the CIA commit crimes at will, and persecuting a Jew, but letting Muslim terrorists into high positions in the military (like Nidal Malik Hasan) to commit murders, Obama does double duty in his double-standards. Maybe one day, if you give up your leftist agenda, you might be open to facts, logic, and reasoning. But that day is probably not coming soon for you. Ignorance is bliss for the leftist.
Gene, Bron, et al., leftists cannot be convinced of anything. If it fits your double-standard agenda, you take it in. If not, you discard it. As I’ve pointed out, ad infinitum, leftists do not want to hear facts, evidence, support, or anything remotely empirical. Logic or reasoning play no part whatsoever in the thought process (if it can be called that) of leftists. Logic, reasoning, facts, evidence, etc. are anathema to leftists.
Leftists have an agenda, and the end justifies the means of that agenda. But I don’t need to explain any of this to you leftists. You leftists know what you are, and you take great pride in your hypocracy.
holy moly nick, you are nuts. this is not a right/leftist issue at all. Why bring up Aarons heritage at all. It is not relevant.
I was going to post that entire thread, DonS.
Anyone who supported Manning or Wikileaks in any meaningful way was always a target.
Very good investigative reporting
Bron,
That amongst other things.
“Was Aaron Swartz’ Effort to FOIA Bradley Manning’s Treatment Why DOJ Treated Him So Harshly?”
—————————————————
“As I mentioned earlier, John Cornyn asked Eric Holder whether Aaron Swartz was prosecuted because of his FOIAs.
[Cornyn] ” Second, was the prosecution of Mr. Swartz in any way retaliation for his exercise of his rights as a citizen under the Freedom of Information Act? If so, I recommend that you refer the matter immediately to the Inspector General.”
. . . . . .
“But there’s a series of FOIAs Swartz submitted that almost certainly pissed off the government: he FOIAed tapes that would have had Bradley Manning, describing in his own words, how he was being treated at Quantico.
. . . . . .
“Suffice it to say that Swartz was pursuing the same information that got State Department Spokesperson PJ Crowley fired just as USSS intensified its investigation of him.
“While I don’t think Swartz’ pursuit of details on Manning’s treatment would be the only reason they would deal with him so harshly, the Obama Administration clearly was dealing harshly with those who were critical of the treatment of Manning.
http://www.emptywheel.net/2013/01/18/was-aaron-swartz-effort-to-foia-bradley-mannings-treatment-why-doj-treated-him-so-harshly/#comments
Gene H:
what did Ralph convince you of?
Can I guess? starts with D and ends in K?
Wow. You’ve sure convinced me Ralph. Just not of what you think you’ve convinced me.
I have explained the leftist syndrome many times before, but it bears repeating. Leftists are notrious hypocrites. Thus, double-standards are de rigueur in the leftist playbook. You can see that in everything that they say and do.
Jonathan Turley points out the double-standard that the CIA is not only permitted, but encouraged, to commit war crimes as well as federal crimes, but was, nonetheless, “obliged” to send in its government persecutors to maliciously destroy that Jewboy Aaron Swartz (Oops, Freudian slip, I meant to say “prosecutors”). Had Swartz instead been named Nidal Malik Hasan, the government would not have pursued the matter at all. Because leftists hate Jews and love Muslims (especially Islamo-Nazis), Obama also gets to work in an extra double-standard in this particular case.
You can see that double-standard in Obama’s use of Warren Buffett to promote Obama’s tax schemes directed at the Middle Class, but disguised as an attack on the rich. Warren Buffett’s companies already owe more than $1.3 billion in back taxes, not including interest and penalties. But does leftist Obama direct his government prosecutors to nail Buffett for tax evasion and seize his assets? Of course not. They are planning on quietly settling the tax liabilities for pennies on the dollar. Do you like that double-standard?
And, of course, as the NRA has pointed out, Obama thinks it’s just fine to have armed guards to protect all of the members of his family (at taxpayer expense, of course), but wants to take away all Americans’ right to bear arms in violation of the Second Amendment, if he had his way.
That is always the way of the leftist: hypocracy, malicious double-standards, and heinous lying. Just another day in the life of a leftist with the power to actually carry out his megalomaniacal fantasies. Most of the people on this message board, including Jonathan Turley, are, ironically, leftists. So you have yet another double-standard. Most of you voted for Obama, yet you think that when Obama makes a leftist-based decision that in your heart-of-hearts know is wrong, you argue that you “disagree” with Obama. That is just more hypocracy. (You’re like those Germans who voted for Hitler and then said that you had no idea that he would actually carry out his promises of genocide.)
The bottom line is that there is pleny of guilt for all of you leftists. But, I;m sure you’ll forget about all of that over the weekend, and more one to your next double-standard. Just another day.
shano,
Just little ol’ emotional me doing my bit to fight the crapola coming from the enablers.
One thing I learned walking the civil rights path back in the 60’s and 70’s … if it looks like bullshit, sounds like bullshit, and smells like bullshit … it is bullshit.
I’d like to project Schwartz on a larger map, which entails looking at our USA system.
Is our system here on earth and on a smaller space such as the USA subject to chaos effects, one of which is pointed out in the quote below from Wikipedia???
Both the impossibility of excluding noise which requires redundancy of information, ie possibly a parallel to the corrective factors in our society in the USA, see second sentence. (Gov and corporations, etc.who try to keep us on their track).
And consider the “Noah” effect which says that catastrophic divergencies in non-linear systems (weather and particularly long term climate effects) will occur at some unforseeable time, and will be beyond influencing for a unknown interval.
There are many scientists who try to avoid chaos inevitable presence in our Universe. Heisenberg undermined such ideas long ago.
Schwartz then? He introduce what can become a factor (strange attractor in Lorenz theories) which will draw the system into previously unknown and uncharted regions (or orbits if you prefer).
Schwartz was enabled by enablers of the internet, and met the peoples desire to know and to communicate. See Wiki List of Internet Pioneers. They were many, while DoD tries to hog the scene, We are many also, driven by our own needs.
I think that Schwartz was persecuted as he was a threat by enabling us to act as factors, influencing far more than butterfly wings can or that which certain factors would permit us to influence..
====================================
“In 1963, Benoît Mandelbrot found recurring patterns at every scale in data on cotton prices.[31] Beforehand, he had studied information theory and concluded noise was patterned like a Cantor set: on any scale the proportion of noise-containing periods to error-free periods was a constant – thus errors were inevitable and must be planned for by incorporating redundancy.[32] Mandelbrot described both the “Noah effect” (in which sudden discontinuous changes can occur) and the “Joseph effect” (in which persistence of a value can occur for a while, yet suddenly change afterwards).[33][34] This challenged the idea that changes in price were normally distributed. ……….
Biological systems such as the branching of the circulatory and bronchial systems proved to fit a fractal model.” ref Wikipedia Chaos Theory.
The only offense was that of breaking into some closet and putting his device there. State charge. Feds had no reason to barge in. It is not like he rode around on a bike on steroids. He is not a kid. The 26th Amendment makes us all adults at age 18 and we can then vote and go to bars. He was 8 years beyond kiddom. The prosecutor did not make him kill himself. But they are responsible for putting the thought in his mind, the weapon in his hand. When their time comes, at the Pearly Gates, the interview will not go well. Ortiz is going to Hell. Nuff said.
ouch, Blouise, so true it hurt.
Please join us this weekend to celebrate the life, mourn the passing, and defend the legacy of Aaron Swartz.
When: Saturday, January 19, 4:00pm to 6:00pm.
Where: The Great Hall at Cooper Union. The Great Hall is located in the Foundation Building, 7 East 7th Street, between Third and Fourth Avenues in Manhattan. (Google maps link here)
Who: Speakers include friends and loved ones of Aaron Swartz.
Note from the organizers:
“Aaron’s insatiable curiosity, creativity, and brilliance; his reflexive empathy and capacity for selfless, boundless love; his refusal to accept injustice as inevitable—these gifts made the world, and our lives, far brighter. We’re grateful for our time with him, to those who loved him and stood with him, and to all of those who continue his work for a better world.
Aaron’s death is not simply a personal tragedy. It is the product of a criminal justice system rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach. Decisions made by officials in the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney’s office and at MIT contributed to his death. The US Attorney’s office pursued an exceptionally harsh array of charges, carrying potentially over 30 years in prison, to punish an alleged crime that had no victims.
As we grieve, we are heartened by the outpouring of support from people around the country and across the globe who want to ensure the injustice that ensnared Aaron never claims another victim. Investigations have begun, a draft “Aaron’s Law” has been proposed in Congress–but the work has only begun.
We hope a large turnout on Saturday will help demonstrate that Aaron’s story has sparked a sustained cry for reform that cannot be ignored.”
OS,
Nothing that serious! I was arrested at a post Kent State protest for unlawful assembly. A crowd control ordinance that said it was illegal to be in a group larger than two people! I was acquitted, but I could have used Mespo!
Oh, and by the way, and of topic of course … Obama needs to get his library built so corporate donations will be needed.
Wow … just think of all that free access we citizens will have to that info!
Quick, smelling salts … I fear I may swoon.
Aaron Swartz stood for something … freedom … pieces of the Net’s physical infrastructure, and much of what flows over it, are either property outright, or subject to property claims. Aaron was good at drawing distinctions between the two, and — far more importantly — building tools and services that made it easier to understand those distinctions and do more within the boundaries they provide. (Doc Searls)
From the age of 14 and on he was a builder and in the 27 short years he was alive he accomplished incredible good. He harmed no one and took little for himself. He was instrumental to the defeat of an Internet censorship bill. His programming and technical skills were legendary. He was well known as a developer of Reddit, the inventor of RSS.
His alleged crime involved no victims and no damages and the only entity that could be construed as a victim, JSTOR, refused to press charges.
He’s dead now and we’re left with people like or Ortiz and Heymann and their enablers. Wow, aren’t we the lucky ones!