<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19394">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV id=article-header>
<DIV class=series-navigation>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>The US has become a society in which political and
financial elites systematically evade accountability for their bad acts, no
matter how destructive. Those who torture, illegally eavesdrop, commit systemic
financial fraud, even launder money for designated terrorists and drug dealers
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/12/hsbc-prosecution-fine-money-laundering"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>are all protected from criminal
liability</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>, while those who are
powerless - or especially, as in Swartz's case, those who challenge power - are
mercilessly punished for trivial transgressions. All one has to do to see that
this is true is to </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/the-tragic-case-of-aaron-swartz-unequal.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>contrast the incredible leniency</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG> given by Ortiz's office to large companies and executives
accused of serious crimes with the indescribably excessive pursuit of
Swartz.</STRONG></FONT></P><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/series/glenn-greenwald-security-liberty"><IMG
class=image-badge alt="Glenn Greenwald on security and liberty"
src="http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2012/8/14/1344953928955/Glenn_Greenwald_620x140.gif"
width=620 height=140> </A></DIV>
<DIV id=Frame2 class=" hide-on-popup"><A
href="http://oas.guardian.co.uk/5c/www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/16/ortiz-heymann-swartz-accountability-abuse/oas.html/980277313/Frame2/default/empty.gif/47412f486c3142774e623041416f3333?x"
target=_top></A></DIV>
<DIV id=main-article-info>
<H1 itemprop="name headline ">Carmen Ortiz and Stephen Heymann: accountability
for prosecutorial abuse</H1>
<P id=stand-first class=stand-first-alone itemprop="description"
data-component="comp : r2 : Article : standfirst_cta"> </P></DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=content>
<UL class="article-attributes trackable-component b4"
data-component="comp: r2: Byline">
<LI id=contrib-shift>
<UL>
<LI class=comment-count> </LI></UL></LI></UL>
<DIV id=article-wrapper>
<DIV id=main-content-picture itemprop="image"
itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" itemscope=""><IMG alt="Carmen Ortiz"
src="http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2013/1/16/1358334694834/ortiz.png"
width=391 height=290 itemprop="contentUrl representativeOfPage">
<DIV class=caption itemprop="caption"><FONT size=3><STRONG>US Attorney Carmen
Ortiz is under fire for her office's conduct in the prosecution of Aaron Swartz.
Photograph: US Department of Justice </STRONG></FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV id=article-body-blocks>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Whenever an avoidable tragedy occurs, it's common for
there to be an intense spate of anger in its immediate aftermath which quickly
dissipates as people move on to the next outrage. That's a key dynamic that
enables people in positions of authority to </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/04/remember-the-pepper-spraying-cop-uc-davis-releases-a-powerful-report/255903/"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>evade consequences for their bad acts</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>. But as more facts emerge regarding the conduct of the federal
prosecutors in </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/12/aaron-swartz-heroism-suicide1"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>the case of Aaron Swartz</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>
- Massachusetts' US attorney Carmen Ortiz and assistant US attorney Stephen
Heymann - the opposite seems to be taking place: there is greater and greater
momentum for real investigations, accountability and reform. It is urgent that
this opportunity not be squandered, that this interest be
sustained.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>The Wall Street Journal </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324581504578238692048200404.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>reported</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> this week that
- two days before the 26-year-old activist killed himself on Friday - federal
prosecutors again rejected a plea bargain offer from Swartz's lawyers that would
have kept him out of prison. They instead demanded that he "would need to plead
guilty to every count" and made clear that "the government would insist on
prison time". That made a trial on all 15 felony counts - with the threat of a
lengthy prison sentence if convicted - a virtual inevitability.
</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Just three months ago, Ortiz's office, as
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120917/17393320412/us-government-ups-felony-count-jstoraaron-swartz-case-four-to-thirteen.shtml"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>TechDirt reported</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>,
severely escalated the already-excessive four-felony-count indictment by adding
nine new felony counts, each of which "carrie[d] the possibility of a fine and
imprisonment of up to 10-20 years per felony", meaning "the sentence could
conceivably total 50+ years and [a] fine in the area of $4 million." That meant,
as </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/14/1441211/killers-slavers-and-bank-robbers-all-face-less-severe-prison-terms-than-aaron-swartz-did/?mobile=nc"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>Think Progress documented</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>, that Swartz faced "a more severe prison term than killers,
slave dealers and bank robbers".</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Swartz's girlfriend, Taren Stinebrickner-Kauffman, told
the WSJ that the case had drained all of his money and he could not afford to
pay for a trial. At Swartz's funeral in Chicago on Tuesday, </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.suntimes.com/business/17594002-420/aaron-swartz-killed-by-government-his-father-says-at-funeral.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>his father flatly stated</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>
that his son "was killed by the government". </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Ortiz and Heymann continue to refuse to speak publicly
about what they did in this case - at least officially. Yesterday, Ortiz's
husband, IBM Corp executive Thomas J. Dolan, took to Twitter and - without
identifying himself as the US Attorney's husband - </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/prosecutors-husband-defends-push-to-jail-internet"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>defended the prosecutors' actions</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG> in response to prominent critics, and even harshly criticized
the Swartz family for assigning blame to prosecutors: "Truly incredible in their
own son's obit they blame others for his death", Ortiz's husband wrote. Once
Dolan's identity was discovered, he received assertive criticism and then
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/01/15/attorney-husband-causes-backlash-twitter-with-posts-hacker-suicide/NW3H71cvJyw0zjDvzTkabP/story.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>sheepishly deleted his Twitter account</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Clearly, the politically ambitious Ortiz - who was
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/12/07/patrick-reportedly-cites-prosecutor-vying-for-governor/0aEpGj5QqjvJfgSwgFNc7H/story.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>touted just last month</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>
by the Boston Globe as a possible Democratic candidate for governor - is feeling
serious heat as a result of rising fury over her office's wildly overzealous
pursuit of Swartz. The same is true of Heymann, whose father was Deputy Attorney
General in the Clinton administration and who has tried to forge his own
reputation as a tough-guy prosecutor who takes particular aim at
hackers.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Yesterday, the GOP's House Oversight Committee Chairman,
Darrell Issa, </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/darrell-issa-aaron-swartz-_n_2481450.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>announced</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> a formal
investigation into the Justice Department's conduct in this case. Separately,
two Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/277353-lawmakers-blast-trumped-up-doj-prosecution-of-internet-activist"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>issued stinging denunciations</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>, with Democratic Rep. Jared Polis proclaiming that "the charges
were ridiculous and trumped-up" and labeling Swartz a "martyr" for the evils of
minimum sentencing guidelines, while Rep. Zoe Lofgren denounced the prosecutors'
behavior as "pretty outrageous" and "way out of line".</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>A </STRONG></FONT><A
href="https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-united-states-district-attorney-carmen-ortiz-office-overreach-case-aaron-swartz/RQNrG1Ck"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>petition on the White House's website</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG> to fire Ortiz quickly exceeded the 25,000 signatures
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/petition-to-remove-carmen-ortiz_n_2479458.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>needed to compel a reply</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>, and </STRONG></FONT><A
href="https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fire-assistant-us-attorney-steve-heymann/RJKSY2nb"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>a similar petition</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> aimed
at Heymann has also attracted thousands of signatures, and is likely to gather
steam in the wake of </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/justinesharrock/internet-activists-prosecutor-linked-to-another-h"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>revelations</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> that another
young hacker committed suicide in 2008 in response to Heymann's pursuit of him
(You can [and I hope will] sign both petitions by clicking on those links;
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/fire-assistant-us-attorney-steve-heymann/RJKSY2nb"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>the Heymann petition</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> in
particular needs more signatures). </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>In sum, as CNET's Declan McCullagh detailed in
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57564212-38/prosecutor-in-aaron-swartz-hacking-case-comes-under-fire/"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>a comprehensive article this morning</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>, it is Ortiz who "has now found herself in an unusual - and
uncomfortable - position: as the target of an investigation instead of the
initiator of one." And that's exactly as it should be given that, as he
documents, there is little question that her office sought to make an example
out of Swartz for improper and careerist benefits. Swartz "was enhancing the
careers of a group of career prosecutors and a very ambitious -
politically-ambitious - U.S. attorney who loves to have her name in lights," the
Cambridge criminal lawyer Harvey Silverglate told McCullagh. Swartz's lawyer
said that Heymann "was going to receive press and he was going to be a tough guy
and read his name in the newspaper." Writes McCullagh: </STRONG></FONT></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>"If Swartz had stolen a $100 hard drive with the JSTOR
articles, it would have been a misdemeanor offense that would have yielded
probation or community service. But the sweeping nature of federal computer
crime laws allowed Ortiz and [] Heymann, who wanted a high-profile computer
crime conviction, to pursue felony charges. Heymann threatened the diminutive
free culture activist with over 30 years in prison as recently as last
week."</STRONG></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>For numerous reasons, it is imperative that there be
serious investigations about what took place here and meaningful consequences
for this prosecutorial abuse, at least including firing. It is equally crucial
that there be reform of the criminal laws and practices that enable this to take
place in so many other cases and contexts. </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>To begin with, there has been a serious injustice in the
Swartz case, and that alone compels accountability. Prosecutors are vested with
the extraordinary power to investigate, prosecute, bankrupt, and use the power
of the state to imprison people for decades. They have the corresponding
obligation to exercise judgment and restraint in how that power is used. When
they fail to do so, lives are ruined - or ended. </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>The US has become a society in which political and
financial elites systematically evade accountability for their bad acts, no
matter how destructive. Those who torture, illegally eavesdrop, commit systemic
financial fraud, even launder money for designated terrorists and drug dealers
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/12/hsbc-prosecution-fine-money-laundering"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>are all protected from criminal
liability</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>, while those who are
powerless - or especially, as in Swartz's case, those who challenge power - are
mercilessly punished for trivial transgressions. All one has to do to see that
this is true is to </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://hcrenewal.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/the-tragic-case-of-aaron-swartz-unequal.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>contrast the incredible leniency</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG> given by Ortiz's office to large companies and executives
accused of serious crimes with the indescribably excessive pursuit of
Swartz.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>This immunity for people with power needs to stop. The
power of prosecutors is particularly potent, and abuse of that power is
consequently devastating. Prosecutorial abuse is widespread in the US, and it's
vital that a strong message be sent that it is not acceptable. Swartz's family
strongly believes - with convincing rationale - that the abuse of this power by
Ortiz and Heymann played a key role in the death of their 26-year-old son. It
would be unconscionable to decide that this should be simply
forgotten.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Beyond this specific case, the US government - as part
of its war to vest control over the internet in itself and in corporate factions
- has been wildly excessive, almost hysterical, in punishing even trivial and
harmless activists who are perceived as "hackers". The 1984 Computer Fraud and
Abuse Act (CFAA) - enacted in the midst of that decade's hysteria over hackers -
is so broad and extreme that it permits federal prosecutors to treat minor,
victimless computer pranks - or even violations of a website's "terms of
service" - as major felonies, which is why Rep. Lofgren </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57564193-93/new-aarons-law-aims-to-alter-controversial-computer-fraud-law/"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>just announced her proposed "Aaron's
Law"</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> to curb some of its
abuses.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>But the abuses here extend far beyond the statutes in
question. There is, as I wrote about on Saturday when news of Swartz's suicide
spread, a general effort to punish with particular harshness anyone who
challenges the authority of government and corporations to maintain strict
control over the internet and the information that flows on it. Swartz's
persecution was clearly waged by the government as a battle in the broader war
for control over the internet. As Swartz's friend, the NYU professor and Harvard
researcher Danah Boyd, described in </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2013/01/13/aaron-swartz.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>her superb analysis</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>:</STRONG></FONT></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>"When the federal government went after him – and MIT
sheepishly played along – they weren't treating him as a person who may or may
not have done something stupid. He was an example. And the reason they threw
the book at him wasn't to teach him a lesson, but to make a point to the
entire Cambridge hacker community that they were p0wned. It was a threat that
had nothing to do with justice and everything to do with a broader battle over
systemic power. </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>"In recent years, hackers have challenged the status
quo and called into question the legitimacy of countless political actions.
Their means may have been questionable, but their intentions have been
valiant. The whole point of a functioning democracy is to always question the
uses and abuses of power in order to prevent tyranny from emerging. Over the
last few years, we've seen hackers demonized as anti-democratic even though so
many of them see themselves as contemporary freedom fighters. And those in
power used Aaron, reframing his information liberation project as a story of
vicious hackers whose terroristic acts are meant to destroy democracy . . .
.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>"So much public effort has been put into controlling
and harmonizing geek resistance, squashing the rebellion, and punishing
whoever authorities can get their hands on. But most geeks operate in gray
zones, making it hard for them to be pinned down and charged. It's in this
context that Aaron's stunt gave federal agents enough evidence to bring him to
trial to use him as an example. They used their power to silence him and
publicly condemn him even before the trial even
began."</STRONG></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>The </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-manning-cruel-inhuman-treatment-un"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>grotesque abuse</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> of
Bradley Manning. The </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/may/11/us-opens-wikileaks-grand-jury-hearing"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>dangerous efforts</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> to
criminalize WikiLeaks' journalism. The </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/23/anonymous-trial-wikileaks-internet-freedom"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>severe overkill</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> that
drives the effort to apprehend and punish minor protests by Anonymous teenagers
while ignoring far more serious cyber-threats aimed at government critics. The
Obama administration's </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleblowers-stuxnet-leaks-drones"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>unprecedented persecution of
whistleblowers</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>. And now the obscene
abuse of power applied to Swartz. </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>This is not just prosecutorial abuse. It's broader than
that. It's all part and parcel of the exploitation of law and the justice system
to entrench those in power and shield themselves from meaningful dissent and
challenge by making everyone petrified of the consequences of doing anything
other than meekly submitting to the status quo. As another of Swartz's friends,
Matt Stoller, wrote in </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/01/aaron-swartzs-politics.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>an equally compelling essay</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>:</STRONG></FONT></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>"What killed him was corruption. Corruption isn't just
people profiting from betraying the public interest. It's also people being
punished for upholding the public interest. In our institutions of power, when
you do the right thing and challenge abusive power, you end up destroying a
job prospect, an economic opportunity, a political or social connection, or an
opportunity for media. Or if you are truly dangerous and brilliantly
subversive, as Aaron was, you are bankrupted and destroyed. There's a reason
whistleblowers get fired. There's a reason Bradley Manning is in jail. There's
a reason the only CIA official who has gone to jail for torture is the person
– John Kiriakou - who told the world it was going on. There's a reason those
who destroyed the financial system 'dine at the White House', as Lawrence
Lessig put it. </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>"There's a reason former Senator Russ Feingold is a
college professor whereas former Senator Chris Dodd is now a
multi-millionaire. There's a reason DOJ officials do not go after bankers who
illegally foreclose, and then get jobs as partners in white collar criminal
defense. There's a reason no one has been held accountable for decisions
leading to the financial crisis, or the war in Iraq. </STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>"This reason is the modern ethic in American society
that defines success as climbing up the ladder, consequences be damned.
Corrupt self-interest, when it goes systemwide, demands that it protect
rentiers from people like Aaron, that it intimidate, co-opt, humiliate, fire,
destroy, and/or bankrupt those who stand for
justice."</STRONG></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>In most of what I've </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.salon.com/2011/01/10/fear_12/"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>written</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> and
</STRONG></FONT><A href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfBUjRao7kk"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>spoken about</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> over the
past several years, this is probably the overarching point: the abuse of state
power, the systematic violation of civil liberties, is about creating a Climate
of Fear, one that is geared toward entrenching the power and position of elites
by intimidating the rest of society from meaningful challenges and dissent.
There is a particular overzealousness when it comes to internet activism because
the internet is one of the few weapons - perhaps the only one - that can be
effectively harnessed to galvanize movements and challenge the prevailing order.
That's why so much effort is devoted to destroying the ability to use it
anonymously - the Surveillance State - and why there is so much effort to
punishing as virtual Terrorists anyone like Swartz who uses it for political
activism or dissent.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>The law and prosecutorial power should not be abused to
crush and destroy those who commit the "crime" of engaging in activism and
dissent against the acts of elites. Nobody contests the propriety of charging
Swartz with some crime for what he did. Civil disobedience is supposed to have
consequences. The issue is that he was punished completely out of proportion to
what he did, for ends that have nothing to do with the proper administration of
justice. That has consequences far beyond his case, and simply cannot be
tolerated.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>Finally, there is the general disgrace of the US justice
system: the wildly excessive emphasis on merciless punishment even for small
transgressions. Numerous people have written extensively about the evils of
America's penal state, including me in my last book and </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/12/hsbc-prosecution-fine-money-laundering"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>when the DOJ announced that HSBC would not be
prosecuted</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> for money laundering
because, in essence, it was too big to jail.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>All the statistics are well known at this point. The US
imprisons more of its citizens than any other nation in the world, both in
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.prisonstudies.org/info/worldbrief/wpb_stats.php?area=all&category=wb_poptotal"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>absolute numbers</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> and
</STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.dailymarkets.com/economy/2011/03/06/worlds-largest-jailer-by-far-its-not-even-close/"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>proportionally</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG>. Despite
having only roughly 5% of the world's population, the US has close to 25% of the
world's prisoners in its cages. This is the result of decades of a warped,
now-bipartisan obsession with proving "law and order" bona fides by advocating
for ever harsher and less forgiving prison terms even for victimless
"crimes".</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>The "drug war" is the leading but by no means only
culprit. The result of this punishment-obsessed justice approach is not only
that millions of Americans are branded as felons and locked away, but that the
nation's racial minorities are </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.project.org/info.php?recordID=115"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>disproportionately harmed</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>. As the conservative writer Michael Moynihan </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/01/15/aaron-swartz-s-death-should-change-america-s-absurd-legal-system.html"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>detailed this morning</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> in
the Daily Beast, there is growing bipartisan recognition "the American criminal
justice system, in its relentlessness and inflexibility, its unduly harsh
sentencing guidelines, requires serious reexamination." As he documents,
prosecutors have virtually unchallengeable power at this point to convict anyone
they want.</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>In sum, as </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://www.salon.com/2009/03/28/webb_2/"><FONT size=3><STRONG>Sen Jim Webb
courageously put it</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT size=3><STRONG> when he introduced
a bill aimed at fundamentally reforming America's penal state, a bill that
predictably went nowhere: "America's criminal justice system has deteriorated to
the point that it is a national disgrace" and "we are locking up too many people
who do not belong in jail." The tragedy of Aaron Swartz's mistreatment can and
should be used as a trigger to challenge these oppressive penal policies. As
Moynihan wrote: "those outraged by Swartz's suicide and looking to convert their
anger into action would be best served by focusing their attention on the
brutishness and stupidity of America's criminal justice
system."</STRONG></FONT></P>
<P><FONT size=3><STRONG>But none of this reform will be possible without holding
accountable the prime culprits in this case: Carmen Ortiz and Stephen Heymann
[MIT officials have </STRONG></FONT><A
href="http://business.time.com/2013/01/14/mit-orders-review-of-aaron-swartz-suicide-as-soul-searching-begins/"><FONT
size=3><STRONG>their own reckoning to do</STRONG></FONT></A><FONT
size=3><STRONG>]. Their status as federal prosecutors does not and must not vest
them with immunity; the opposite is true: the vast power that has been vested in
them requires consequences when it is abused. It is up to the rest of us to
ensure that this happens, not to forget the anger and injustice from this case
in a week or a month or a year. A sustained public campaign is necessary to
bring real accountability to Ortiz and Heymann, and only then can further
urgently needed reforms flow from the tragedy of Swartz's
suicide.</STRONG></FONT></P></DIV></DIV></DIV></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>