The problem here isn’t that Heymann and Ortiz violated the standards of their profession.  The problem is that they didn’t.  I’d love to see all sorts of nasty things happen to those two.  But however loathsome they are, two individuals don’t make a systemic problem, and getting rid of them won’t fix it.

But I’m still signing the petition :)

Signatures needed by February 11, 2013 to reach goal of 25,000:

857 signatures

then all those people will have to do is kill themselves

You phrase it as though killing one’s self is a triviality.  Do you really mean to imply that?

Even people outside the USA could take an equivalent step by contacting their various reps and asking them to make public statements condemning both the prosecution’s behavior and that, as somebody above noted, that it’s evidently now SOP here in the US.  It’s one thing for citizens around the world to be disgusted; when the people making decisions start complaining, however…

Also, just as a side note, I hope you plan to address the long (smear) article on Swartz over in the “tech” area of Slate.com in some manner.  (At least, it struck me as being a smear piece; maybe you’ll feel differently.)

I don’t believe this petition is childish.

http://www.volokh.com/2013/01/16/the-criminal-charges-against-aaron-swartz-part-2-prosecutorial-discretion/

This kind of activity is retrograde bullshit for a simple reason — it does not teach prosecutors to avoid this sort of behavior. It teaches them to avoid it when dealing with individuals with powerful and important friends, to treat prominent people differently than ordinary citizens. Even if unsuccessful, you’ve succeeded in taking a legal system that already has two tiers of defendants and made it worse.

So you’re asserting their was misconduct, without evidence, and want a guy to lose his job and his health insurance because you don’t like what happened?

Why don’t we just have a petition to do an investigation?

Why fire this guy before we know all the facts?

It’s ironic that we have a mob with online petitions rather than pitchforks who want to punish someone without a trial over how they were trying to carry out a trial.

Nerds need to grow up.  

If she runs for office … any office … it will only validate what many, many people around Boston have long thought of her: she’s out to advance her career at any cost. Inspector Jaevert would be right at home working with her.

That she is STILL in office is something that must be remedied. That Heymann is still there is a complete outrage. If they had any honor, they would resign.  

As if.

I just created my account and signed it.

10, 898 signatures to go.

Get on it and pass the word!

ecoponderosa

It’s important that we remember her later when she runs for public office.

It’s good to cross paths with you again, Moulton. You might remember me as Macro, back on Micro. (That was not intentional, for the record.)

My God, it would be like having to play Russian Roulette at work every day!

Now, it is true that these firings might encourage other prosecutors to do better at their jobs, but that is largely a side effect.

But that doesn’t really help with the problem; there’s always something you can be charged with.  What we really need to fix is the systemic motivation to write poor laws, and to misapply the law to harass individuals.  That’s a much harder job, but it’s the only solution that can stick.

(Fixing computer law is still worth doing, of course, but it’s patching the holes, not solving the problem.)

But my sympathy for these prosecutors is zero.  This is exactly how prosecution works in the current US system; having dished it out to so many, they are in no position to complain if the tables are turned.

If this happened to me, I would want the police to take it seriously.  Then investigate.  Then realise it was an utterly unimportant misdemeanour, and drop it.

And yes, it is the job of prosecutors to make ethical judgements.  Because it’s the job of everybody.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/were-listening-seriously

Think of the chill this could send through prosecutors.  They may have to stick to seeking completely disproportionate sentences against people who are unknown or cared for by only their families and immediate friends.

The dream of crafting a just society is such an unrealistic objective that few among us have the hubris to make it their life work. And the few who do tend to live uncommonly brief lives.

I suppose it’s little consolation that some of these quixotic souls have religions, holidays, or laws named after them.

To my mind, controlling or manipulating people by trafficking in fear is a manifestly unwise practice. It tends to drive human drama toward tragedy. Is our species so foolish as to embrace and defend the practice of intimidation and fear-mongering as a sensible means of governance under the color of law?