Comments:"Linus Torvalds - Google+ - I haven't bothered to mention the whole sad Aaron Swartz…"
URL:https://plus.google.com/u/0/102150693225130002912/posts/ggzfzKyrcRQ
The thing is she shouldn't apologize, because she doesn't actually have any remorse over this.
Oh, and here's the thing. They were seeking the maximum penalty, the only stipulation was that was if it had gone to trial.
That's still seeking the maximum penalty, regardless of spin.
Never understand why people hold the right to s trial so lightly in the country. The process goes like this:
1. You figure you are innocent of the charges as stated, and will prevail at trial.
2. The prosecution offers a plea deal because they want a slam dunk win.
3. You turn them down, because you figure you are in the right.
4. They pile on more charges, because they want to pressure you.
5. You have second thoughts, because you never know how a jury will react and besides your money to pay lawyers is getting low.
6. Well, too late, that plea deal was a one time offer. The prosecution may make another, worse offer. Or they may decide you are right to be worried and they can prevail at trial and offer nothing.
Basically, once you turn down the plea bargain and assert your right to a trial, regardless of second thoughts, the prosecution is now seeking the maximum penalty. (In fact, Ortiz and Heymann "discovered" a bunch of new charges to charge him with at this point. Wonder why they didn't figure out those in the first place, har, har, har.)
All because you thought for a moment that you preferred a jury of your peers to determine your sentence rather than a prosecutor who wanted your head for a trophy to mount on her wall. If we want the justice system to operate that way, why have juries or prosecutors at all? We can just have street judges like in Judge Dredd who arrest and sentence people immediately.
So much more efficient.