Hacker News Reader

I'm a lawyer and I completely agree with you.

In general, I think Prof. Kerr is just a lot more pro law enforcement than I am. I find that he is often very dismissive of the defendant's case. For example, he seems to take for granted that Aaron violated the CFAA. With that being said, I still think he is Volokh's best contributor.

View on HN

Is Kerr being dismissive of the case, or is he stipulating things to make his two points (that prosecutors didn't stretch the CFAA or wire fraud statutes to make a case against Swartz, and that they weren't unusually vindictive with Swartz in negotiating a plea)? It was up to a jury, not Kerr, to decide actual guilt or innocence.

>that prosecutors didn't stretch the CFAA or wire fraud statutes to make a case against Swartz, and that they weren't unusually vindictive with Swartz in negotiating a plea

Yes, he was definitely doing that and he was right to. I am not saying he ought to play jury, just address some of the counterarguments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com