back to article Federal lawyers, MIT threatened following Aaron Swartz' death

Prosecutors associated with the case against the late Aaron Swartz have received "harassing and threatening communications", including postcards of disembodied heads pictured next to guillotines. Government lawyers have detailed the harassment in a court filing urging the court to keep details of the case redacted to protect …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Pen-y-gors

    Two wrongs don't make a right

    ...as my dear mother used to say.

    Threatening public officials with violence for doing their job is wrong. If they have acted wrongly then the correct approach is to have them disciplined/fired, not decapitated.

    However I'm not sure what action one should take if the system is sufficently corrupt that they cannot be disciplined/fired as the system perceives that they have acted correctly.

    And the whole US 'plea bargaining' system with threats of insanely disproportionate punishments in return for a plea of guilty to an offence that the victim did not commit is clearly completely corrupt and unjust, and long overdue for a complete overhaul. Let the punishment fit the crime.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

      However I'm not sure what action one should take if the system is sufficently corrupt that they cannot be disciplined/fired as the system perceives that they have acted correctly.

      Isn't that one of the reasons for the Second Amendment?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

      Back in the "good old days" the crowd would be lighting the torches forming a mob and just hang the person in question or better yet burn it.

      We sure come a long way to merely make empty threats with vivid photoshops.

      1. ratfox
        Joke

        And two rights don't make a wrong

        …Yeah, right.

        1. hplasm
          Happy

          Re: And two rights don't make a wrong

          Three rights do make a left, though.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Thumb Down

        Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

        >"We sure come a long way to merely make empty threats with vivid photoshops."

        Those "empty threats" don't seem so empty after two prosecutors and a prosecutor's wife were brazenly gunned down recently in Kaufman County, Texas, and a Prison Chief was gunned down in Colorado.

        The Anonymous kiddies picked a bad time to send guillotine postcards to federal prosecutors. If they are caught, I doubt any federal judges will be exhibiting a sense of humor at their sentencing hearings.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

      I don't know - there's a saying somewhere that the victor gradually turns into the vanquished, and the US legal system certainly seems to be adopting the techniques of Stalin.

      There is something deeply wrong with the mindset of American lawyers, and there are too many people who would like to replicate it over here. The more their overbearing comes back to bite them the better. They should feel themselves lucky they did it to a technology geek and not an NRA member, because those guys probably don't stop at postcards.

      Or perhaps the reason for the disproportionate response to computer "crime" versus gun misuse actually reflects the lawyers estimate of the different likely consequences?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

        Im sure part of it is that the guns are enshrined, where as there is no right to commit crimes with a computer.

        That said, the issue does seem to just show that the mentally unstable shouldnt be allowed computers, let alone guns.

    4. Vic

      Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

      > Threatening public officials with violence for doing their job is wrong.

      Indeed.

      However, at the moment, we only have those officials' word for it that they have been threatened. I wonder if the judge will force them to produce evidence of such threats in court before allowing them to censor any documents...

      Vic.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

        "just following orders" has not been an acceptable defense for quite awhile.

        It is the duty of government officials, from military to civil, to oppose illegal orders. Not to hide in the bureaucracy like they typically do.

    5. James Micallef Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

      " if the system is sufficently corrupt ..."

      The US justice system IS sufficiently corrupt. There is a lot of nominal oversight that in reality is completely ineffective. For example, police keep detailed records of how many police are injured / shot / threatened etc, and they willingly publicise these to show off how dangerous their job is and please can we get some more funding?

      The stats on police use of force, on the other hand, are either non-existant or a state secret. Police there routinely use SWAT teams to break into suspects' houses in the middle of the night, for trivial cases such as MJ possession. They routinely shoot pet dogs with no provocation and quite often also break into the wrong house. No-one is ever seriously disciplined if anything goes wrong.

      I have no reason to think the AGs offices are any different. At heart most of the US is still a wild west mentality of lynch mobs rather than justice, pandering to the 'tough on crime' crowd instead of seeking real solutions to real social problems. Oh, and, speak it very quietly, but you're still FAR more likely to be stopped/searched and to end up in jail if you are brown or black than if you are white. True story

      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        Stop

        Re: James Micallef Re: Two wrongs don't make a right

        "....The stats on police use of force, on the other hand, are either non-existant or a state secret. Police there routinely use SWAT teams to break into suspects' houses in the middle of the night, for trivial cases such as MJ possession. They routinely shoot pet dogs with no provocation and quite often also break into the wrong house. No-one is ever seriously disciplined if anything goes wrong....." So, first you claim there are no publicly available stats on such events, but then you claim they happen routinely. Of course, when you get asked to prove your hyperventilating whimsy, you'll just say "I can't, because The Man keeps it a secret....!" You are a posterboy for blind faith. We need a combined Fail-Stop-WTF-ROFLAMO icon for the nonsense you post.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: James Micallef Two wrongs don't make a right

          That combination of low melanin and XY chromosomes sure pays off in hubris in your case. Perhaps a dose of modesty might serve to balance the inexperience of negative discrimination your post is airing out. That or shipping you off to a country where none of the cops share your hue.

        2. James Micallef Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: James Micallef Two wrongs don't make a right

          "first you claim there are no publicly available stats on such events, but then you claim they happen routinely"

          No contradiction. There are many such events reported in the press, and private organisations such as ACLU do their best to keep track of what these events, but police refuse to collect or release any statistics about, for example, how many warrants they serve to the wrong address etc.

          I don't need to prove any hyperventilating whimsy, you just need to google "US police brutality" or any related term and you will come up with thousands of episodes reported in the press. But any stats that exist are compiled by private organisations and are perforce incomplete.

          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
            FAIL

            Re: James Missing a Clue Re: James Micallef Two wrongs don't make a right

            ".... There are many such events reported in the press, and private organisations such as ACLU do their best to keep track of what these events....." Great! So now you back up your wild claims with some ACLU stats, right? Yeah, like I really think that will happen.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The next move of the DA will be

    to press for the death penalty (or life without parole if the state has abolished it) for ANY computer crime no matter how trivial.

    Copy a few mp3's? Life. no three strikes.

    Look at Porn? Life as a sex offender but in the general population

    Hack the Feds? Gitmo here you come.

    Yep, the US Legal system is in fine health.

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: The next move of the DA will be

      Yep, the US Legal system is in fine health. .... AC Posted Tuesday 2nd April 2013 13:24 GMT

      What you have to understand about the health of the US legal system ..... to understand where you are going when you support it ......America's Public Enemy No 1 ...... is an odd question, which leads to an ugly truth which only the programmed to be foolish and the mad would deny?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The next move of the DA will be

        Ask yourself this...

        Why do DA after DA stand on the steps of Courthouses all over the US telling the world that they are going to press for the maximum sentence (for example 100years without parole) for any crime that happens to hit the headlines?

        Yes, in some places they are up for re-election every few years but honestly, are they really interested in justice at all? Or, are they justusing their position as a stepping stone to Congress/Senate?

        I was arrested in May 1982. I'd had a few too many and the cops thought I was going to drive my car home. Their evidence was a set of car keys I had in my coat pocket. I was threatened with 5-10 years inside because they said that I 'resisted arrest and threatened a police officer'. That didn't stand up when a passer-by came to my resuce.

        I didn't get an apology when the so called set of car keys didn't fit my car but that of my wife's and she was 500 miles away in said car at the time. I'd left my car keys in the Bar where I'd been drinking.

        My opinion of the whole US Justice System is that it should be flushed down the toilet. It is so corrupt it is beyond belief.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      WTF?

      Re: The next move of the DA will be

      So you come up with several absurd scenarios and then use them as evidence that the system is broken?

      The legal system here has issues, but your ability to say something doesn't mean it can happen. I'm not even sure where the 'porn' thing even came from, given that I haven't heard anyone even mentioning anything about pornography recently, and that the supreme court has specifically and repeatedly upheld not only pornography's noncriminality but has in no uncertain terms stated that the government has no remit to restrict it as long as it involves consenting adults.

      There are legitimate things to complain about when it comes to the US legal system - why include something which is probably an example of its greatest strengths? A reader might get the impression that you care more about slating the US for any reason possible than about the actual issues...

  3. Thomas 4

    The protestors are doing it wrong

    Oritz et al were legally entitled to threaten Aaron Swartz, which makes it Okay.

  4. Naughtyhorse

    typo... again

    protect individuals involved in the prosecution of the internet activist

    protect individuals involved in the persecution of the internet activist

    there fixed it for you!

    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: typo... again

      Wow, a sheep that thinks it's a horse!

  5. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Get used to it, IT is not going away ever, and the Truth has a *R*R* World of Pain for its Enemies.

    Worlds have changed .... and the targeting of politically incorrect officials personally for acts of decidedly gross indecency, rather than the pitiful and pathetic prosecution of offices in which others toil for them to skulk behind, pretending to exercise power and control with the assistance and complicity of dodgy media and big brother business interests, is the new healthier stealthier norm for reality and the future.

    If you wanna be a prat in the media, well, expect to be treated like a prat in the media, and be prepared for the return of all of your own medicine, in spades. It is called natural justice, methinks, and is to be applauded and supported for a better beta world model ........ New Orderly World Order.

    I hope that is not ambiguous and it is surely not at all difficult to understand, although I might admit to it being quite an inconvenience for many to ponder on. Oh dear, what a shame, and whatever were/are they doing to realise that feeling? Starting wars, willy nilly ..... stealing billions anonymously inside systems of control they have administration levers in?

    *R*R* ..... Remorseless and Relentless

    1. Shades
      Stop

      Holy sh*t!

      Is it just me or did a amanfromMars1 post actually make sense??

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Holy sh*t!

        ...it scares me too...

  6. Naughtyhorse

    and another

    Federal lawyers, MIT threatened following Aaron Swartz' death

    Feral lawyers, MIT threatened following Aaron Swartz' death

    man im on fire!

    lol

    fixed!

  7. Lars Silver badge
    Flame

    Some hope, still

    Some hope for the US still, might not be the best way to react, and probably is not, but it is still a reaction.

    I sometimes wonder if the Americans understand the meaning of the word "amendment". "The second amendment" has started to sound like the "first five books of the Bible". Still a amendment is a change, for good reasons, most likely, to something needed to be amended. Good reasons to amend some of it still.

    1. Fred Goldstein

      Re: Some hope, still

      Lars, most Americans don't know what "amendment" means. But in the case of the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution, collectively known as the Bill of Rights, they were adopted along with the original text, not added later. They're amendments because the drafters wrote the base text, literally constituting the form of the federation, but couldn't get it ratified without adding the Bill of Rights. Actual amendments come along very infrequently and in the present-day context of the US are virtually impossible, unless perhaps they're really really stupid.

  8. Daniel B.

    Oh the irony!

    The people who bullied Swartz into suicide, saying he had to suffer the consequences of his activities, are asking for themselves not to suffer the consequences of THEIR activities.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Oh the irony!

      While I lack knowledge of the state of mind of Aaron it does appear that it was not good and sadly people in that state can resort to the only, (NOTE did not say the easy) way they see of dealing with the issue. However, the argument that stacking up enough real or idle threats is a sound way to make laws sounds more like the wish of underworld than of rational people.

      Could it be that rather a lot of his new friends have a degree of concern over their own part in the sad saga and that they did not give him the level or style of support that he needed when he was alive?

      Creating a martyr is very romantic but does little to help the one you seek to martyr.

      If the law is wrong, do something more constructive than throw your toys out of the pram. Provide real support to those who are trying to fight for a cause, and lend weight constructive to the effort.

      I understood that the repository of the papers had not asked for pursuit of the case, was that not right?

      If so why are they being pilloried?

      Or is it another case of people not understanding the case and sounding off like the citizens against child molesting who sought to attack paediatricians

      1. Daniel B.

        Re: Oh the irony!

        Yes, JSTOR decided not to press the charges further. But the prosecution decided to do so anyway, especially Ortiz; *those* are the guys who are actually being pilloried.

        1. Stevie
          Thumb Down

          Re: Oh the irony!

          "Yes, JSTOR decided not to press the charges further. But the prosecution decided to do so anyway, especially Ortiz; *those* are the guys who are actually being pilloried."

          And at least one person who had nothing whatsoever to do with it. You aren't forgetting him, are you?

    2. Alan Brown Silver badge

      Re: Oh the irony!

      It strikes me that more appropriate postcards would feature the people concerned in bright orange jumpsuits, or their personal details on unemployment welfare applications forms.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    They make...

    ...prisons for those who can't live within the laws of society. Swartz made bad life decisions and now he's gone. Hating those who enforce laws is wasted energy and a very distorted view of reality. Hopefully those making threats will be found, prosecuted and shipped off to prison to live with the other folks in serious denial.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: They make...

      The early Quakers went to prison because they could not live within the laws. Massachusetts even executed them. Now the POTUS sends his kids to a Quaker school. People like you abhor progress, but others don't see standing up for it as a 'bad life decision'.

      1. Stevie

        Re: They make...

        Are you seriously comparing the prosecution of Aaron Swartz for illegal downloading with the Quaker suppression?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: They make...

          Actually, yes. In our early days Quakers were imprisoned because they were seen as a threat to those in authority since they did not recognise official jurisdiction over matters of conscience. They were threatened with hugely disproportionate punishments to frighten them into obedience.

          In this case someone was frightened in this way to avoid a trial which officials might well lose. It's the same abuse.

          Just because Swartz wasn't 'good' in the US sense of social conformity doesn't justify his treatment. George Fox and James Naylor were right PITAs. So can Lindis Percy be. The land grab on IP is a similar abuse to church control of ideas and US attempts to control British foreign policy, and arises from the same root. As Quakers, although we disagree with one another a lot - goes with the territory - we endeavour to identify with people who share our concerns.

      2. Mike Moyle

        Re: They make...

        The point that people seem to be missing re: the Quakers and many other civil-disobedience actors is that they understood and accepted the risks that their actions entailed, they took their day in court and they took their punishment standing up and facing their accusers. I dislike speaking ill of the dead but the simple fact is that, when push came to shove, rather than face his accusers and ARGUE his point Swartz punted.

    2. Shades
      Stop

      Re: They make...

      Jeez, why are you still lurking around here Morris?!

    3. Intractable Potsherd

      Re: They make... @AC

      By your definition, anyone that fought for the end of the Soviet Union from within is a criminal that made bad life decisions. They should not have hated those that enforced the laws, because it was a distorted view of reality. They will hopefully be found, prosecuted, and shipped off to prison to live with other folks in serious denial.

      In other words, you are a total moron who does not understand that laws can be bad, and even good laws can be applied badly by those with a vested interest in doing so. Those who do so should have a little "skin in the game" to keep them closer to "honest".

      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        FAIL

        Re: Intractable Potsherd Re: They make... @AC

        "....anyone that fought for the end of the Soviet Union from within...." Your comparison is stupidly wrong seeing as we live in a democracy - you vote for the people that make the laws and the majority view prevails - whereas the Soviet Union was a dictatorship where the minority imposed laws on the majority against their wishes. The majority could not influence the laws by voting in new law-makers, therefore the law-makers had little regard for the opinion of the majority. In a democracy like the US, politicians know they have to pander to the majority or risk not being elected or re-elected. Sucks if you're in a tiny minority of gormless sheeple like you are. Fail!

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Intractable Potsherd They make... @AC

          do you fail to appreciate the irony of calling others sheeple when it is your opinion that is most in line with those of the ignorant masses of America?

          1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
            FAIL

            Re: AC Re: Intractable Potsherd They make... @AC

            ".....your opinion that is most in line with those of the ignorant masses of America?" So we're back to the usual Leftie line "the people are too ignorant to think for themselves therefore we will remove their right to think for themselves and do the thinking for them". And you wonder why your opinions are firmly in the minority? LOL!

  10. robin48gx
    WTF?

    It was a gross overreaction though, threatening prison for what really was a university prank involving computers. Anyone with a uni account can download papers, and its common practise to email them to people who you want to read them after that.

    It was the criminal justice systems weapons designed for hardened criminals aimed at someone intelectual and sensitive. A criminal criminal justice system IMHO.

  11. Alan Brown Silver badge

    Justice has nothing to do with it.

    The very first thing taught in law courses is that what is in place is a LEGAL system and it is not a JUSTICE system in any way shape or form.

    Calling it a "ministry of justice" is no different to the newspeak which renamed a certain govt department to the "Ministry of Defence". Calling it a ministry of "law and order" would be far more accurate (department of Law and Order for the USAians here)

    Once you understand that, a lot of the other pieces fall into place. Just because legal system decisions usually result in justice being done is no guarantee this will always happen - or that it is required in the current scheme of things.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Justice has nothing to do with it.

      After dealings with the Court of Abuse, (they think that they have some alternative name), I always thought that there were a few typing errors in the ministry name name, should it not be the Menace of Injustice?

  12. tempemeaty

    US Gov on over drive

    The Gov agencies in the US have swung the way of unrestrained tyranny recently here like a 3rd world dictatorship. No surprise at the blow back it's getting them.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: US Gov on over drive

      Yeah, because an overzealous prosecutor hounding a guy is *just like* Robert Mugabe crushing press freedom, arresting opposition government officials, and hiring squads of thugs to machete voters to death.

      Sometimes I wonder about people...

      1. Vic

        Re: US Gov on over drive

        > an overzealous prosecutor hounding a guy is *just like* Robert Mugabe crushing press freedom

        The first step is the hardest one...

        Vic.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: US Gov on over drive

          Yeah, except these kind of steps have happened all over the place. Prosecutors have done terrible things since time immemorial; you give several thousand guys across the country a whole lot of power and some of them are going to be assholes. It goes with the territory. But you do your best to make sure the system as a whole doesn't fall to the level of the worst people in it.

          There's plenty of injustice in the US, and plenty more of it elsewhere. Schwarz' case is certainly bad, but it's not unprecedented and not the worst by a long shot. It's a particularly visible example of an eternal problem, and is only as discussed as it is because the people who are concerned about it happen to be relatively wealthy and knowledgeable. There have been situations where entire police departments 'raise money' by pulling over poor minorities who are carrying cash (often for car purchases or such, since they lack banking or credit), and confiscating the cash for being 'drug proceeds'. It's bullshit, of course, but they tend to do this to families who are away from home - they threaten to have the kids thrown in foster care unless the parents cop a plea. Of course, the 'evidence' isn't returned, and now the victims haven't got any money either.

          It's basically highway robbery in an almost comically literal form. But you don't hear about it, because poor people don't have web sites devoted to poor-people-stuff like tech guys do tech-guy-stuff.

          There's plenty of injustice in the world that eclipses the Schwarz case. And that injustice is neither something we should ignore *nor* a reason to declare the system a total loss and pretend that it's as bad as North Korea or Zimbabwe or Iran. Because it isn't.

          Saying the problem is so much worse than it is doesn't make you a brave truth-teller or an anti-establishment rebel; it makes you a coward - because if all hope is lost, you no longer have to fight.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: US Gov on over drive

        I guess you have never been hounded by someone misusing the law. It can cause PTSD as well as poverty.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Facepalm

    "Let's see... these prosecutors requested a disproportionate jail term that resulted in the death of an innocent man. Most people are on our side and we have the moral high ground. What should the next step be in order to maximize the possibility of positive change? Should we try to uncover other similar abuses and publicize them? Should we work with the family to try to use Aaron's fate as a rallying point for further action?"

    "No, no... That doesn't make any sense. I know! We'll threaten to CUT THEIR HEADS OFF!"

    "Yeah! That'll show 'em! The public at large will definitely see how serious we are and realize that moderation and appropriate responses are the key to real justice!"

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Yes, a stupid reaction but borne out of frustration that ordinary people can no longer influence the political process.

      Amusing that the US gets the aloof, elitist Miliband and the UK gets the next that wants to get back to doorstep democracy.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        "ordinary people can no longer influence the political process."

        This is demonstrably untrue. If people insist on shooting themselves in the collective foot by engaging in worse-than-useless, self-aggrandizing vigilante photo-ops, then of course they won't be able to influence the political process.

        But do you think Barack Obama would have been elected and re-elected if Big Korporate Amerika truly had the nation in a death grip? Not a chance. And do you think that Obama really *isn't* any different from Mitt Romney in terms of policy, when Romney essentially advocated defaulting on the debt and cutting the safety net out from under the poor at the same time?

        No. People have plenty of influence left. But if those same people spend all their time whining about how the only thing worth doing is making some kind of half-assed Zetas-wannabe death threat - that will in actuality harm their own cause immeasurably and possibly get them thrown in jail, handing even more power to the people they hate - then of course nothing will change. And the Big Bads won't have had to lift a finger - the work will all have been done for them.

        1. Stevie

          Finally, a Sane Voice.

          Well said David.

          The problem, it seems to me, is that far too many "activists" don't know the process for getting change enacted in the laws of their own land/state, and believe that just because they can get 3 dozen "likes" online this carries weight in the real world.

          But then, it is easier to grab a library of scripts and start bullying from you mother's cellar than to actually learn the civics involved and start working for real change. Has any one of these photoshoppers written to their representatives in congress or the senate to press their views?

          Silly me. You have to sign such writings with your name. Then they'd know who you are and a Black Helicopter would come to take you away.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          I would agree with your argument if your President had real power, but his power is limited. What matters is how many elected representatives are beholden to big business. So long as it is a majority, the people can elect who they like as President. Remember the closure of Guantanamo Bay?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Terminator

            "I would agree with your argument if your President had real power, but his power is limited."

            True, but consider what the situation would be like if Romney had been elected. He'd have almost free reign. He'd be appointing the next few Supreme Court justices - which is insanely important.

            We could pretty much immediately write off healthcare reform, rip huge chunks out of social spending, and probably throw a bunch of whatever gets saved back at the wealthy and at the defense industry.

            Put another way, imagine what would have happened if Gore had been elected (err, well... if he'd taken office, let's put it that way) in 2000 instead of Bush: Do you think Gore would have ended up invading Iraq, promoting loose monetary policy, giving insane tax cuts to the wealthy? I doubt it.

            So, yeah, Obama hasn't got the power to *undo all the damage* that's been done, or to fix every problem that exists. But Romney would have had an incredible ability to do *more* damage. That in itself makes Obama being elected meaningful even if he just sat around doing nothing. Which, by the way, he hasn't - he's actually accomplished quite a bit, and suggesting otherwise by trotting out a list of obnoxious-but-relatively-insignificant-in-the-scheme-of-things pet causes like Guantanamo is disingenuous. Part of Obama's problem is that he *has* focused on getting things done and on prioritizing, which has meant more real progress in the long term but fewer feather-in-cap type bullet points. I'm fine with that.

            And I'm sure as hell glad we don't have to find out the hard way that Romney isn't the same as Obama, the same way we found out that Bush was most definitely not the same as Gore would have been.

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

  14. panhead20

    Don't feel sorry for these bottom feeding prosecutors.

This topic is closed for new posts.