Wow, I cannot believe there are still people who say this shit.
"plead guilty and only have one hand amputated, or spend a million defending yourself with the risk of execution."
would you still waste our time bring up personal responsibility?
because no one's arguing that he wasn't personally responsible for entering the server room. the issue is how unreasonable the offer is considering what he did.
How is any logical, reasoned debate supposed to follow from this? How is having a limb amputated supposed to compare to Aaron's case?
it's just the first straw-man misinterpretation you could invent to respond in any way, isn't it?
in any case, you've conceded that the reasonableness of the plea deal is the issue here and personal responsibility for entering the server room is irrelevant.
So the feigned incredulousness of that comment upthread isn't particularly convincing.