Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ortiz-Heymann: the Prior Generation

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the not-as-good-as-the-original-series dept.

The Courts 57

theodp writes "Two decades before the White House was petitioned to remove U.S. Attorney Carmen Ortiz and her Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephen Heymann from their jobs for the allegedly overzealous prosecution of Aaron Swartz, the Boston Globe reported on allegations of 'sometimes heavy-handed tactics and inaccuracies' of an NFL investigation into sexual harassment charges made by a sportswriter against the New England Patriots that was led by Watergate prosecutor Philip Heymann (Stephen's father) and included Ortiz. 'From the day Philip Heymann and his colleagues walked into Foxboro Stadium to investigate Lisa Olson's charges of sexual harassment,' the Globe reported, 'the New England Patriots were on the defensive, and apparently, they stayed there to the end. One day after conducting a preliminary six-hour interview with Olson, Heymann introduced each investigator to the Patriots and outlined their backgrounds at a meeting he later called benign. Yet he also said two weeks ago, "They were frightened from the beginning by the way I introduced people. I said that Jerry O'Sullivan had been US Attorney. I said Jim Ring had been FBI special agent in charge of organized crime."'

Regarding Ortiz, the Globe reported, 'Heymann investigator Carmen Ortiz wrote in a memo of her Oct. 18, 1990, interview with [Lisa Olson] that she took no notes and did not tape-record the conversation. Yet she used direct quotes when writing up her 15-page report on the session. When asked to explain, she referred the Globe to Heymann.' Aside from transcripts of two interviews (the tapes of which were destroyed), the Globe reported the NFL kept no notes on its interviews with 89 other people. '"It was contemplated that there would be a motion such as this [a lawsuit by Olson] and we did not want to create that type of document," an NFL attorney explained. According to the Globe, an attorney representing the Patriots said that 'one reason the tapes were destroyed may be that the NFL did not want anyone to hear raised voices or pounding of tables. He said some of those interviewed were not allowed to leave the room and had their livelihoods threatened if they did not cooperate.' Curiously, the elder Heymann featured prominently in a recently-upheld DOJ motion to keep the names of key people involved in the Aaron Swartz case secret — a postcard threat received by Philip Heymann was cited by Ortiz's office as evidence of why such secrecy was necessary."

cancel ×

57 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Gov't discriminates, news at 11. (3)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year ago | (#44020225)

Government discriminates and over time government grows to become more and more abusive, especially when government connected people's interests are at stake, news at 11.

Re:Gov't discriminates, news at 11. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020369)

No Comment!

Re:Gov't discriminates, news at 11. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44024481)

Re:Gov't discriminates, news at 11. (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year ago | (#44020381)

What's that have to do with investigating alleged crimes?

Re:Gov't discriminates, news at 11. (1)

anagama (611277) | about a year ago | (#44021811)

Thank you for the apathy. I'm sure that will do a lot to improve things. In fact, everything will just get better if we stop hearing about government abuses at all. Brilliant plan.

Re:Gov't discriminates, news at 11. (1)

davester666 (731373) | about a year ago | (#44026633)

Why can't the news just focus on firemen getting cats out of tree's like they are supposed to?

They both need to be removed from their positions (5, Insightful)

WOOFYGOOFY (1334993) | about a year ago | (#44020239)

They both need to be removed from their positions. Their conduct demonstrates such a gross lack of proportionality and such a funhouse mirror-like distortion of the relative importance and societal significance of Aaron's crimes that their continued employment represents an ongoing threat to the respect we need society to have for its laws and for the judicial system generally.

If we want people to respect laws, we need prosecutors who at the very least have good judgement .

We would actually prefer prosecutors who had wisdom.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020433)

Obama needs to be removed from his position. I'm at scandal overload right now. It does not matter anymore that Obama was not directly involved in some of the scandals. It is obvious that he has been appointing hacks and assholes, so he should have to answer for their crimes.

Recent scandals:
* Aaron Swartz 'murder by prosecution'
* IRS targeting conservatives
* State dept covering up a coverup about a US Ambassador soliciting prostitutes
* NSA spying using writs of assistance
* DOJ spying on reporters/threatening reporters

Oh, and now the asshole is trying to get us involved in Syria. Obama promised the rebels guns. Now Iran is giving the regime troops and Russia is giving them anti-aircraft missiles. I can't wait to hear Obama's next move there. Fucking proxy wars.

Impeach and then remove Obama. I say this as a Democrat.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020889)

George Bush scandals:

  • Murder of thousands of people in Iraq over "Weapons of Mass Destruction"
  • Iraq reconstruction "loses" $12 Billion
  • Interior Department officials having drug and sex parties with oil-company employees
  • State Dept. official found in DC Madam scandal
  • NSA begins spying program without bothering with "writs" or "due process"
  • Journalists and bloggers paid to support Bush policies.

So let's try to keep things in perspective.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year ago | (#44020911)

George Bush scandals:

  • Murder of thousands of people in Iraq over "Weapons of Mass Destruction"
  • Iraq reconstruction "loses" $12 Billion
  • Interior Department officials having drug and sex parties with oil-company employees
  • State Dept. official found in DC Madam scandal
  • NSA begins spying program without bothering with "writs" or "due process"
  • Journalists and bloggers paid to support Bush policies.

So let's try to keep things in perspective.

well the highest obama scandal is saying(or at least implying) putting a change on it, to close gitmo etc.
then doing fucking nothing about it and adding drone strikes to the agenda. because hellfires from remote controlled aircraft is "starting a constructive dialog"...

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (2)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | about a year ago | (#44021119)

Idiots like you are what is wrong with this country.

Just because Bush should have been tossed out too does not mean we still shouldn't toss out Obama.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021229)

What the both of you are failing to remember is that the office of president isn't meant to wield power, but to draw attention away from it.

Look to long standing lobbyists, senators, congressmen, and generals if you want to direct your anger at the head rather than the puppet.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021355)

Idiots like you are what is wrong with this country.

Just because Bush should have been tossed out too does not mean we still shouldn't toss out Obama.

Idiots like you who just rant and don't actually do anything are what's wrong with this country. When you figure out how to get perfection then you can start complaining about the people who worked for and contributed to the Obama campaign (both times) because he was better than the alternatives. Who did you prefer? Romney? Paul? Santorum?

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44021493)

So you had your chance for BOTH at the mid term elections.

Now you are whining. Too late.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44024001)

I was too young for one, and I tried with the other. Go fuck yourself.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020905)

It is obvious that he has been appointing hacks and assholes, so he should have to answer for their crimes.

I think most hacks and assholes have a much longer history on their job than any president. The president's job is to bring them in line while he's around, and it's a comparatively small ratio that gets appointed during his term(s). Obama is making the mistake that he tries doing this based on mutual respect. Which is a mistake since the notorious hacks and assholes aren't interested in respecting the president or the constitution. they are interested in their paycheck. And in power. Both of which he lets them keep.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020999)

You can say it as mayor McCheese if you want.. It's not going to matter one damm bit at this point.

as a democrat YOU are part of the problem.

Anyone who has voted D or R in the last 30 years or so.. This is your fault. 100%. You all fucked up. And kept fucking up monumentally while telling yourselves it was the OTHER side fucking up worse.

It's all bullshit. You're all guilty as fuck of putting our country where it is now.

And yet... next voting season.. YOU'LL FUCKING DO IT AGAIN! and elect more of the same ol corrupt evil bastards who got us here.
While pissing and moaning about 'impeachment' when it FINALLY it becomes obvious you fucked up AGAIN!

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (2, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44021095)

The 'IRS targeting conservatives' story is a bit inaccurate. The IRS wasn't targeting conservative groups specifically, it was targeting anti-taxation groups - there's an obvious motive there. It just happens that most anti-taxation groups have conservative affiliation.

The IRS wasn't trying to shut them down, it was just being stricter in ensuring compliance with the very vague restrictions on the political activities permitted to 501(c) organisations. It's a very fuzzy area of the law, and one that is very frequently and openly violated by organisations on both side of the political divide. The accusation is one of selective enforcement: While most organisations applying for tax-exempt status got a quick glance over their records by an accountant, anti-tax pressure groups were subjected to months-long intensive auditing and investigation.

The IRS is in a real political mess right now - with Republicans and Democrats still fighting over healthcare reform, the IRS has the unenviable job of having to enforce the tax-credit/subsidy aspect, which means not just lots more work but becoming a political target of those opposed to the reform too. Republicans have been able to use the political bias scandal as a means to 'punish' the IRS by cutting their budget, with the aim of reducing their ability to handle the new workload and so render the healthcare reform unworkable. Now is not a good time to work at the IRS.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (1)

datavirtue (1104259) | about a year ago | (#44024475)

According to former IRS agents there was never a good time to work there.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#44021399)

Remove Obama and you get Joe Biden as President.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021735)

what scandals? this is the repubs trying to do anything and everything to discredit Obama.. if you pay attention to the game of politics this has been going on for years, the dems did this with Bush. Nobody is perfect and it really doesn't matter since they are hand puppets, do you honestly think the have any "ruling power" over anything?

Arron's case is do to both sides passing a terribly written law, which has been in place for sometime.

NSA having the power they have again been in place for awhile and both sides agreed to allow this..

DOJ, part of the underbelly of intelligence, they've been doing this to the press/media since before Nixon..

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021955)

The IRS targeting conservatives is a bit of a manufactured controversy seeing as how more groups than conservatives were targeted, and that conservatives took advantage of the particular part of the tax code more than liberals did--so one would kind of expect investigations into such groups to target them more. It doesn't really help their case that these groups, in many caes because they were being run by people new at this with no knowledge of the rules, actually were guilty of the things they were accused of.

That said, those other things really are problems and really do need addressing. I do find it refreshing that at least we HAVE scandals now. Back when Bush was president, anybody who dared to try to report on the slightest problem was branded as unpatriotic and run out of town, except of course for those liberal and non-kool aid drinking conservative internet reporters who dared report on the truth. They had a lot less proof back then though, but pretty much everything on the list of actual, provable scandals these days was also going on then. Much of it was going on before Bush was president, too, especially in the case of the NSA, FBI, CIA, whoever, illegally spying on the American public. It's just that now we have actual proof of it.

That's not to say Obama shouldn't be impeached. As a liberal he's a terrible failure (because he's never been a liberal) and as a President he's certainly no better than his law breaking predecessors. He failed to put a stop to this crap and that makes him guilty of it too. It's just that if by some turn of events that actually comes to pass, we need to have someone in the office who will not act like him and those who came before him. That's a little trickier. Can anybody really look back at the last two elections and say that had either turned out the other way that we would not be in the same boat? The only difference would be the conservatives would still be trying to cover it up and intimidate those who want to report on it.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022009)

Just like Jim Crow laws, you support the abuse of people you don't like by the government.

Re:They both need to be removed from their positio (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020493)

not trying to troll, but this is exactly the type of stuff that is a waste of tax money, over zealous prosecution on petty NON-crimes. I think it is time that the prosecutors start having the same happen to them, rack up a bunch of charges and threaten them to plea guilty or go to prison for the next 30-50 years, and imprison the politicians who put the laws in place and left said laws so wide open.

Telling (3, Interesting)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#44020255)

... a postcard threat received by Philip Heymann was cited by Ortiz's office as evidence of why such secrecy was necessary.

When prosecutors are more worried about covering their own asses than seeing that justice is done, you know things have gotten seriously f*ed up.

Re:Telling (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020393)

... seeing that justice is done ..

Of course, they saw justice was done. It's why they got a postcard threat. It's obvious who the criminal is.

"I'm smart, you're dumb; I'm big, you're little; I'm right, you're wrong, and there's nothing you can do" — Harry Wormwood, 'Matilda'

Re:Telling (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#44022197)

"Of course, they saw justice was done. It's why they got a postcard threat. It's obvious who the criminal is."

What a stupid goddamned thing to say.

TL;DR (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020313)

Two paragraphs? No way.

Re:TL;DR (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021155)

2 sentences?

NSA got tax records, IRS, Credict cards (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020379)

More lies:
"When asked by Maine Senator Susan Collins if Edward Snowden's claim that he could he could tap into virtually any American's phone call or e-mails. True or false?" Alexander said, "False. I know of no way to do that. "

The system is knowns as DCSNet, it lets them tap any phone in the country remotely:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DCSNet

He's just a fucking liar. He knows how the systems work, he's trying to mislead the Senate and Congress. With the FBI data sharing, he gained access to DCSNet just as he got the telephone records. and he knows how phones are tapped FFS! The NSA *does* tap phones, its disingenuous to pretend he doesn't know how!

He also revealed they got your financial data too.

They got the same broad FISA warrants to grab tax data, credit card data etc. In the talking points the NSA says it isn't allowed to collect real names [using the phone FISA warrant law], and cannot convert IP addresses to names. The credit card data records your IP address used to make transactions, and has your real name data.
Likewise your email sent from your phone has your phones identity in it, and email data they sucked down from the net.

http://killerapps.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/06/12/nsa_boss_tells_lawmakers_the_govt_wants_to_collect_even_more_data

" National Security Agency chief Gen. Keith Alexander may be under fire for collecting millions of Americans' phone records and Internet data. But the nation's top electronic spy told a Congressional panel Wednesday that he wants the feds to slurp up even more information - and distribute it more widely throughout the government."

"During the same hearing with Senate Appropriations Committee, Alexander claimed that the intelligence collected by the NSA has potentially foiled "dozens of terrorist events." But he wouldn't give more specific number, or delve into specific plots. It was all part of a Capitol Hill hearing that saw the four-star general pledging more transparency -- yet deferring many details on the matter to a classified session tomorrow."

"The reason I want to get this exactly right, Senator, is I want the American people to know that we're being transparent in here," said Alexander in response to questions from Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy. The general then promised to give more specific unclassified numbers within a week on the amount of potential attacks that have been thwarted by the millions of pieces of electronic data."

"We do want to get this right and it has to be vetted across the community [so that] what we give you, you know is accurate," said Alexander.

"Sen. Dick Durban revealed that there's been a huge spike in the amount of times U.S. government has requested authority under Section 215 of the Patriot Act to obtain phone records and possibly medical records, tax records, Internet search records and credit card records -- some 212 times last year compared to the 21 such instances in 2009."

"(Section 215 allows the goverment to ask a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or FISA court to order a business to hand over customer records to federal investigators.) "

Re: NSA got tax records, IRS, Credict cards (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020447)

More fun coming soon to USA:
http://homment.com/cia-fbi-access-finance-data

"Via Reuters"

"The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters."

"The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates."

"Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of "suspicious customer activity," such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)."

"The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN."

"The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes."

"The planning document, dated March 4, shows that the proposal is still in its early stages of development, and it is not known when implementation might begin."

Also Google has been ordered to hand over data to the FBI (which in turn hands it to the NSA, see leaked FISA warrant):
http://news.yahoo.com/judge-orders-google-hand-over-personal-user-data-182526071.html

"Judge Susan Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Friday ruled that Google must comply with the FBI’s warrantless request for private information. Google had previously refused to give the agency access to personal data such as the search history of its users, claiming such demands were illegal without a warrant. The judge rejected Google’s bid to modify or dismiss 19 “National Security Letters” it received from the FBI asking for confidential data, CNET reported. National Security Letters allow FBI officials to secretly request phone and Internet companies to disclose a user’s name, address, length of service and other information to the agency without requiring approval from a judge. The FBI issued nearly 200,000 National Security Letters between 2003 to 2006, 97% of which contained a mandatory gag order."

Re:NSA got tax records, IRS, Credict cards (2)

WOOFYGOOFY (1334993) | about a year ago | (#44021647)

Note the weasel words: "I know no way of..."

So allegedly if the govt. ever wanted to prosecute him for lying to Congress, he'd have that to fall back on. Seems very very very very far fetched. Very.

The govt and it's agents should stop pulling plays from old playbooks like "stonewalling " and "legal weasel words" and just let us have this much needed national conversation in full light of all the facts.

This is partly an "old man problem", or the effect of having old men in positions of power.

Old men are
1) in charge
2) incapable of changing anymore
3) viewing the world through a Prism whose time is well past.
4) subject only to the review of other old men.

Curious (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#44020407)

Curiously, the elder Heymann featured prominently in a recently-upheld DOJ motion to keep the names of key people involved in the Aaron Swartz case secret

I don't think it's really very curious, considering the entire internet hates them........

Re:Curious (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020491)

I don't think it's really very curious, tiny minority of little shit heads hates them........

Fixed that for you.

The prosecutors in the swartz case need to be rewarded for a job well done. There is now one less scumbag alive making the entire world a better place.

Re:Curious (1)

Sique (173459) | about a year ago | (#44020763)

There is now one less scumbag alive making the entire world a better place.

Making the world a better place should be punished by dead?

Re:Curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021013)

Having the world be a better place is our reward for the scumbag Swartz's death.

Re:Curious (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021055)

No, Swartz needed to be *convicted* Mass. prosecutors have repeatedly failed to properly prosecute computer criminals.They and the federal prosecutors responded to the NSA "get out of jail free" card when Robert T. Morris was caught releasing the Morris Worm. (You youngsters should look it up: Morris's dad was the head of the NSA at the time, and Robert never served a day of jail time and is now an MIT professor in the Computer Architecture Group, which doesn't mention his name anywhere in their public website but he's still there.) They missed the boat with David LaMacchia running a warez site inside an MIT computer room. (MIT stonewalled the investigation, David graduated, and also was never convicted.)

This time, they had the guilty guy dead to rights. Harvard staff member, caught on video abusing MIT's and JSTOR's systems, MIT wasn't able to stonewall, and Harvard very noticeably took *no* responsibility for him. Too bad for him he wasn't an MIT student or had a dad who runs a famously corrupt spy agency.

Re:Curious (3, Interesting)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44021111)

Things were different back in the days of the Morris worm. It was expected that future computer experts would get up to no good and play around a bit, and there was a sort of understanding in the field that you didn't want to ruin someone's life for a little curiosity - if you got hacked, good on them, just fix the hole and make repairs. It was seen as a crime akin to graffiti vandalism - not something to lock someone in jail for years over.

Computers are just so much more important to society, infrastructure and economy these days that there is no room left for this blind-eye approach. Ignoring curious hackers was very well when they were stealing a few documents and wasting an administrator's weekend restoring backups, but now they can potentially cause millions of dollars in damage.

Re:Curious (2)

wbr1 (2538558) | about a year ago | (#44022465)

We still need to be able to discern the difference between a hacker that "pockets a bag of cheetos at the general store", and one that "performs armed robbery of millions."

Treating one as the other is unfair at best, an insane use of law to further prosecutorial careers at worst.

Not really a huge surprise... (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#44020431)

If your job title is "Prosecutor", it's not a huge secret that(whatever lip service is paid to due process and rule of law and other such highflown nonsense) your job performance is being judged based on how much prosecution you can dish out. People who end up advancing up the ladder in that particular industry should, quite naturally, turn out to be very effective indeed at at least being seen prosecuting, if not actually doing a lot of it.

The trouble is, of course, that this creates an incentive to take cases that provide maximum visible product per unit work, and to do whatever is necessary to get results. Nobody wants to hear your whiny excuses about how you only handled one case this year because the target was heavily lawyered up and quite savvy(even if many of society's most dangerous malefactors are exactly these things, and would be far more deserving of prosecutorial attention) and 'acquittal' = 'you are a loser', even if justice was done.

It's an unfortunate misalignment of incentives.

Re:Not really a huge surprise... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020515)

> Nobody wants to hear your whiny excuses about how you only handled one case this year because the target was heavily lawyered up and quite savvy

Or innocent.

A prosecutors job is to be the defendant's worst enemy. To make the world - and thus the jury - hate the defendant. By any means possible within the law.

Re:Not really a huge surprise... (2)

Manfre (631065) | about a year ago | (#44021089)

Wrong. The prosecutor's job is to use the facts of the case to ensure guilty parties are prosecuted and innocent parties are not. Everyone charged with a crime is not actually guilty and this mentality is one of the worst corruptions of our legal system.

Re:Not really a huge surprise... (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44021131)

In theory, they are supposed to be acting in the interests of justice by building and presenting a solid case based on the evidence against the accused.

You are describing the reality: The prosecutor's job depends upon getting a guilty plea or conviction by whatever legal means they can, even if that means surpressing evidence that proves innocence, using details of the accused's persona life to turn a jury against them or siezing assets on a pretext to the accused cannot afford competent legal representation. That isn't how the system is supposed to work, but how it does work.

Re:Not really a huge surprise... (4, Interesting)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#44021123)

The worst role in law is public defence. Your job is to make your boss's boss look bad - so he'll deliberately overwork you to the point you can't give more than an hour to each case, and if by some miracle you manage to get too many non-guilty verdicts you just get fired or 'promoted sideways' to a position you can't do so much damage in.

The effective role of the public defender isn't to help the clients, it's to convince them to accept a plea bargin and save the state all the expense of having to go to trial.

Re:Not really a huge surprise... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021921)

Except they seem to ignore the savvy and society's most dangerous malefactors, and instead focus all their power on the lowest hanging fruit, to put them on display case. Just like in the Dark Ages really!

Yeah, it's a hell of an incentive. However, individually and for the criminals it maximizes profitable returns, so must be doubleplus good.

What a long and confusing summary (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020581)

tl;dr

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44020735)

Who prosecutes the prosecutors?

The shock! The horror! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021011)

Privileged superstars get treated like suspects. Shocked, *shocked* that they're not catered to, brought orange juice,and given foot massages.

Film at 11.

writing!!! its not jyst stringing words together (2)

decora (1710862) | about a year ago | (#44021141)

most writers like to have something called "a point". they put at the front of the "story" so people will "know what the fuck you are talking about".

then inside the story, you explain your point and give further detail.

"secrecy was necessary" (1)

Anomalyst (742352) | about a year ago | (#44021195)

If they are not doing anything wrong then they should mot have anything to hide. All interpersonal interactions of all government functionaries with public citizens should be recorded and filed electronically by the media audio/vidieo and metadata to be made available immeadiately following the conclusion of the inquiry/investigation. Make them responsible for their (in)actions. Any extensions beyond a sunset date must be individually approved and summary reports published on how many extensions were approved made on a monthly basis. Let the cockroaches scurry for the baseboards when the light comes on.

Muckraking (1)

goodmanj (234846) | about a year ago | (#44021853)

Without taking a stand on either case, I have to say that digging back through 23 years of Ortiz's career to find some vague evidence of misconduct is pretty much the definition of muckraking. Honestly, if you have to look this hard to find some dirt on a U.S. attorney, she's remarkably clean for someone in her career.

The author is clearly going for a hatchet-job rather than honest investigative journalism, and as such, their motives are not to be trusted.

Re:Muckraking (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44023913)

... evidence of misconduct ...

If she has done nothing wrong, she has no reason to hide.

... someone in her career ...

So you expected dirty deals? Who would expose these dirty deals? The accused is obviously in jail or robbed of his material assets. The press says little about police thuggery and even less about the dishonesty of plea-bargaining.

Lisa Olson case (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44021923)

This is a case I happen to be familiar with, having been a Boston sports fan at the time, although not at the insider level of detail. The short version is that if they're trying to dig up cases from the prosecutor's distant past (now that's a surprise they would do that, right) where they railroaded some innocents, I would've expected them to come up with much more sympathetic defendants.

The New England Patriots NFL team had a succession of clownish owners and terrible head coaches in the late '80s and early '90s. Among the owners was Victor Kiam, the CEO of Remington who used to star on cringeworthy TV ads where he said "I like the shave so much, I bought the company." This became a bitter joke among the (few remaining) Patriots fans as the team continued to finish at the bottom of the standings with castoffs and misfits from other teams. The nadir came when Lisa Olson, a sportswriter with the Boston Herald (one of the city's two daily papers) went into the team's locker room after a game to do some interviews. Now football players have never been known for political correctness, and 20 years ago the idea of women reporters in the locker room was a relatively new occurrence. Protocols hadn't been set up. Plus the team was the laughingstock of the league, the stands were empty at home games and the players were fed up. So some of the Patriots players didn't bother to hide their private parts, and some of them yelled sexist stuff at Olson, probably something like "hey baby, you want some of this? Come get it!" A more seasoned reporter maybe would've shrugged it off (the way Suzy Kolber later handled a drunken on-air pass from Joe Namath [americansp...online.com] ) but Olson apparently was intimidated and frightened by this juvenile crudeness. She later resumed her career in Australia.

After Olson complained, the owner Victor Kiam dismissed it as the whinings of a "bitch", and the stakes grew exponentially. The NFL, as always, was trying to court more female fans, so they stepped in and came down hard on the Patriots. Frankly, the team at that point was a mess top to bottom, both on and off the field, so they didn't have much fan support in this particular incident, although there were some who criticized Olson. Kiam shortly after sold the team, after yet another change of hands it was purchased by Bob Kraft, who owns it to this day.

Keep the pressure on elected officials about it! (1)

nickserv (1974794) | about a year ago | (#44022193)

I wrote up a plain text summary, from the /. submission, and personalized it a bit so, if you want to copy / paste and sign it and email it to your reps, senators and Obama you can grab it from here: http://pastebin.com/VvHbTaZ8 [pastebin.com]

Find your reps and links to their contact info with your zip code here: http://app.leg.wa.gov/districtfinder/ [wa.gov]

If you're too apathetic to think it can make any difference no need to reply. Thanks much!

the fact is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44022323)

You guys just can't deal with a strong Latina.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>