comScore
Tech Thursday, January 17th 2013 at 5:15 pm

Here’s What U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz Has to Say About the Prosecution of Aaron Swartz

Aaron Swartz‘s suicide last week was just the beginning. The public outcry from the tech community has been massive, with a petition to remove the prosecuting attorney for Aaron’s case, one Carmen Ortiz, from office hitting the required number of signatures for an official White House response relatively quickly. In large part, a majority of these complaints center around the opinion that the prosecution was overzealous at best. Ortiz, for her part, has remained mum on the subject. Until last night, that is. Her office has released an official statement on the matter of Swartz’s prosecution and, uh, it’s… definitely something.

Basically, Ortiz excuses the actions of her office. Her “office’s conduct was appropriate in bringing and handling [Swartz's] case.” They didn’t do anything wrong during the course of their prosecution. They were just following the law, people! They’re not the bad guys here. That’s the argument, anyway.

The statement also seems to contradict reports that the prosecution was trying to throw the book at Swartz, as it says, “[a]t no time did this office ever seek – or ever tell Mr. Swartz’s attorneys that it intended to seek – maximum penalties under the law.” Is it just me, or does that sound like splitting hairs? Maybe they never told Swartz’s attorneys that they were seeking maximum penalties, but that wouldn’t stop them from, you know, suggesting that he could potentially receive a stupid number of years in prison.

Overall, the whole thing smells, but maybe my perception of it’s skewed. Go ahead and give it a read. It’s reproduced in full below:

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.

(via The Wall Street Journal, The Verge, image via Deval Patrick)

Relevant to your interests

Filed Under |
  • TheBoost

    It’s not the responsibility of the DA to make defendants feel better. I’m not sure what the author wants; Ortiz to say “We’re sorry if Swartz was worried about getting in trouble. Our bad.”?

  • Jack Bond

    I agree with TheBoost. Her response was appropriate, and pretty much validated what I thought. She and her office are not to blame for anything that happened. They were just doing their duty to the most reasonable level they thought possible.

  • Susan Taylro

    I

    It is a real tragedy that Aaron Swartz chose to end his life and equally
    hard for his family to process their loss.
    But, bottom line here is that he
    made the choice based on the fact that he broke the law and for whatever reason
    did not want to take responsibility for his own actions. This realization is
    hard for any family to digest. Atty.
    Carmen Ortiz was doing her job in prosecuting him. He stole a product
    from MIT and no matter how lofty his motives were, no matter how kind, no matter how altruistic he thought he was he still took information that in view of
    current laws he had no right to take. Mr. Schwartz’s own actions caused
    his depression and ultimate death not the actions of Atty. Carmen Ortiz’s.

    My late husband killed himself because the company he worked for decided to
    stop producing the product that he supervised and after nearly 25 years of
    employment found himself out of a job. Yes,
    I am sure that this was a contributing factor but it was my late husband’s
    choice to kill himself and not the fault of his company. When you’re the
    family that is left behind after a suicide there is a mountain of blame and
    anger that just begs to be put some place any place but on your diseased loved
    one. But, the truth of the matter is: it
    was their choice to end their lives and not anyone else. It is all too easy
    to play the blame game especially when it comes to suicide. Everyone looks at
    everyone else wondering who could have done more to help the person or who
    turned their back on the person. There
    is a collective guilt that strikes at everyone who knew the person. But with
    this said, it is most important to
    remember is that Mr., Swartz was not a child being bullied over and over again
    by classmates rather he was a full grown adult being made to face the responsibilities
    and repercussions of his own actions.
    Sincerely,
    Susan Taylor

  • Rollin Bishop

    It’s not the DA’s responsibility to make a defendant feel better, but they’re definitely meant to prosecute on an even keel rather than throwing the book at someone.

    The folks on Aaron Swartz’s side of things have previously said that Ortiz’s office was threatening the maximum, and I’m sort of leaning toward believing them. Deciding whether your own office acted appropriately is… not how it should be done when you’re the one accused.

  • Rollin Bishop

    How is her office even remotely capable of deciding that they acted appropriately? That’s like tobacco companies saying they definitely never sold to kids. Don’t worry about any kind of independent party investigating.

    Trust us.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mark.sung.92 Mark Sung

    I totally agreed on the point. No one (maybe other than Swartz himself) argued that he was right in “stealing” from JSTOR, but the argument was, the DA is letting fraud in Wall Street get away while trying to put Swartz behind bar for 30 yrs, for a crime they now admitted was not for personal gain. They were trying to crucify Swartz to set an example. That, was the problem.

  • Sam Groves

    “He stole a productfrom MIT” – No.

    “he still took information that in view of
    current laws he had no right to take” – No.

    While I appreciate your opinion and feel for your loss, please actually inform yourself on what you are talking about before doing so, not after.

    What Aaron Swartz was ‘guilty’ of was using MIT’s -PUBLIC- network to access the JSTOR web site and download articles. JSTOR – Short for Journal Storage – is a digital library. They were founded to house and distribute electronic copies of academic journals as an alternative to the old way of every university having to build a wing dedicated to archives of old journals. It’s important to note here, most if not all of these journals are in the public domain having been funded by government grants.

    The issue here is that JSTOR is a foundation that charges for access to their network and while many academic libraries pay for this access, it means that the normal public is left out in the cold as the fees are prohibitively expensive for an individual.

    Aaron, using the fact that MIT has an open network and is a subscriber to JSTOR, used this to download as many articles as possible from JSTOR so they could be made accessible to the public.

    It should be noted that as Aaron was a fellow at Harvard which also is a subscriber to JSTOR, AND MIT’s network is open to the public on purpose, he, at this point, was doing absolutely NOTHING wrong.

    When his activity was noticed, JSTOR moved to block his access to their network. After which he ‘broke the law’ by circumventing that block and downloaded more articles.

    THAT is what they went after him for, downloading public domain information from an open to the public network.

    What Carem Ortiz’s team did was reprehensible, regardless of whether Aaron had committed suicide or not.

    What he did was the equivalent of you going into a public library and tying up a bunch of the computers, and after being kicked off of them, going to another set and doing the same thing. The WORST that should have happened at that point should have been being ‘uninvited’ and being told to not come back. NOT being charged with the same level of offense that is used for people who hack into bank accounts or steal credit card information.

    There are only two ‘good’ explanations as to why Aaron’s case even appeared on Mrs. Oritz’s radar, and neither of them have anything to do with justice.

    A. Aaron WAS and IS a big name, and Carem’s reputation was essentially built on bringing down a spate of ‘big name’ politicians in her state. Having another feather in her cap for having taken down ‘famous hacker’ would have been good if she wanted to seek office.

    B. Aaron had done something similar to PACER back in 2008, PACER is the system used to distribute court records, again a public domain repository, which is famous for being stuck in the 1980′s techwise, to the point where they still charge something around 10 cents a page to access documents. And despite in that case he hadn’t done anything illegal, it caused enough of a stir that the FBI investigated him.

    Neither of those things, however, warrant turning what would have been for any ‘normal’ Joe a simple ‘get the hell out of here and don’t come back’ into a what was coming up on a two year long court ordeal with the possibility of 35 years in jail as a FELON.

    Bringing those sort of charges wasn’t rational, it wasn’t reasonable, and it sure as hell wasn’t right.

    Nor is ascribing the motivation to Aaron that this was simply him not being willing to ‘face the responsibilities and repercussions of his own actions.’

    Aaron, like your husband, lost a battle. It’s a battle many people fight, and not all of them win. Yes, some of those people have character flaws that make it easier for them to ‘lose’.

    But NONE of them deserve have their memories disrespected by making it their fault for losing the battle.

    Mrs. Ortiz and her team should be ashamed of themselves, not because Aaron died, but for their own actions. The fact that Aaron died simply brought those actions to light, it didn’t make them wrong. They were already that.

    Should the parents of children who bullied other children only be concerned if the bullied end up taking their life?

  • loik

    You couldn’t be more wrong about everything.

  • http://twitter.com/datsneefa Jim Terwiliger

    Now we are hearing that this office has been actively seeking out cases against popular people who are against SOPA/PIPA like legislation

  • http://twitter.com/datsneefa Jim Terwiliger

    funny how Carmen Ortiz likes to try and sentence people longer for committing crimes without financial gains than crimes that to do have financial gains

  • Jack Bond

    I agree they acted appropriately, though. There’s no solid evidence they were going to pursue the maximum punishment. Swartz clearly deserves SOME punishment, and it’s Ortiz’s office’s job to make the pursuit. I don’t think a group could do a job any better.

  • http://www.facebook.com/elaine.nishime Elaine Nishime

    As one who has had a family member pursued relentlessly by a Fed Prosecutor for 5 years…until my sister folded under the extreme stress and suffered eventual poverty that the prosecution wrought as well a a sentence to 22 months in minimum security…(no picnic in any prison…”camp is a misnomer) …I deeply feel the helplessness and sadness that this loss has brought to the family. What the heck did this guy do to warrant your attention Ms. Ortiz? Try look at your children..do you know who they are…what they like an who are their best friends or did you spend 12 plus hours a day making this non-criminal case against Aaron and thus driving him to to fold in his cards? And for what end? To protect some big companies dollars keeping information from the public? Look at his face…honest, brilliant, sincere and full of the idealism of youth. Shame on you Ms. Ortiz. Think of Aaron every night you pray… Was it worth it?

  • http://www.facebook.com/elaine.nishime Elaine Nishime

    Sue..get off the high horse….how does AARON compare to the Wall Streeters who bankrupted the middle class and still sit on their billions?

  • http://twitter.com/dbarthlow David Barthlow

    Ms. Ortiz’s office’s political ambitions clearly trumped common sense in the ongoing prosecution of this case. Resignation of those involved is warranted. Rest assured Ms. Ortiz, your political career is over. You will end up working for a Company whose interests your lack of common sense prosecutions somehow advanced and perpetuated. Shame on you.

  • Anonymous

    Everytime I think about this, I get the same sore sinking feeling I get everytime I read about the Nuremberg Trials at the end of the Second World War… The Nazi defendants’ excuse was Uniform: “We were only doing our Duty: we were only following orders.” Excuses, excuses… I still don’t care who was cutting Mrs. Ortiz’s and her office’s orders and I won’t. Say what you like. I had to put up with being faulted for WWII for ever, just for being of German descent… I don’t feel sorry for that DA: I reserve that for Swartz’s family, or any family whose member commits suicide.

  • Kumar

    Carmen Oritz aka Fucking Moron

  • http://twitter.com/twyndyllyngs7 Jack

    To hell with you Carmen Ortiz. You have no friends in this world. I often feel a little sick when people online gang up on some widely-hated person, but not for you.

  • krypton

    This is an ancient DA tactic: threaten the maximum penalty to try to get the accused to plead guilty. And it’s especially common when the DA thinks the case could actually be resisted in court. This kind of prosecutorial aggressiveness is also used to wring testimony against others out of people in jail under a charge. Think: Alan Turing… Just further proof that the law may be just but John Law is a predatory beast.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Peter-Haag/1242265033 Peter Haag

    Seeing how I would get less time in prison for bashing Carmen Ortiz over the head until her eyes fell out, would that make it a lesser crime than what Aaron Schwartz did ? I am going to say yes and seeing how what Aaron did was not bad at all than me getting less time for bashing Carmin Ortiz over the head would make destroying her very insignificant wouldn’t you say ?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Peter-Haag/1242265033 Peter Haag

    Just doing my job blah blah blah, just enforcing the law blah blah blah, just a mindless souless automaton, a filthy cog in some dirty machine that grinds people up blah blah blah.

  • Orestis

    Yes, Ms. Ortiz: Aaron’s blood is on that hand of your’s..

  • TWer

    She’s a liar. Aaron’s attorney spoke at his funeral. When he asked her to go easy on him, she replied “I’ll keep him safe. I’ll lock him away…” The attorney’s opinion was that to the DA, Aaron was a trophy to put up on the mantle, a big name to brag about for whoever put him away. It disgusts me to think that there is at least some truth in what he was saying and that these petty little people are destroying lives in the name of justice.

  • Anonymous

    US Attorneys work for Google and General Dynamics. This evil bitch and her faggy tweetey-bird husband are the ones that need locking up. Not sweet kids that try to do the right thing.

  • Anonymous

    Guaranteed Ms. Ortiz got her education on the public’s nickel via affirmative action educational grants and has her sights set on higher office. The A.G. runs a bunch of thugs going after small potatoes that check out too many books at the library. However they did not put one single wall street bankers suits in jail for the massive frauds they committed upon the American public, if you look in the dictionary for the meaning of travesty of justice Ms. Ortiz is the poster child…!!!

  • Anonymous

    Of course you do know that MIT refused to prosecute this. You do know that, right Ms. Taylor…? MIT refused to prosecute…!!! Ms. Ortiz on the other hand wanted to make a federal case out of it….!!!

  • Anonymous

    You are a J.O.

  • Jack Bond

    And you wish you could taste my cum.