And I'm shocked to see how many people misinterpret those geeks. We don't believe he was absolutely going to end up in jail for 35 years; we believe it was hung over his head to extort a plea deal, while remaining a real possibility.
> Journalists like to quote the "up to" numbers because they sound dramatic, and as a functioning member of society you need to know what that means and doesn't mean.
We're not talking about the concept; we get that. We're talking about a prosecutor that had large discretion in which, if any, charges to bring and brought multiple charges that had high maximum penalties for a reason. It's disingenuous to come back later and try to downplay the real charges with the real prospect of 35 years in jail, even if its real purpose was extortion.
It's easy to say "you need to know what that means and doesn't mean" until you're the one actually facing those penalties and financial ruin. I'm sure reminding you how the game works will be very comforting.