[PrudenceYuris]

Then do something about it.

This prosecutor is quite the collector and displayer of awards: http://www.necc.mass.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Carmen-O...

She is a PR asset to this university: http://www.pr.com/press-release/366324

Evidently some people want her to run for higher office: http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_politics/2013/01/...

Governor Ortiz? Make sure it isn't: http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/12/07/patrick-reported...

And if you are a big biotech company, you can readily negotiate a deal to avoid prosecution: http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/gsk/plea-ex-k.pdf

Oh, and piling on in the JSTOR case, while pleading down to two years for an actual money-stealing ATM skimmer with real victims: http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/11/08/romanian-man-who...

Make sure this black spot eclipses them all. Contact the organizations she is a member of and/or a recipient of some award. Make sure the leadership of that organization knows that she lacks a sense of proportion and that this tendency to overreach cost a good man his life.

Make this an exercise in how to correct these injustices, and make her an example to other prosecutors.

[Niten]

OK but before we all get on the public shaming bandwagon, I ask whether you know for sure that Ortiz is the primary target of Lessig's (rightful) criticism here? I know Ortiz was involved, but Lessig doesn't explicitly name Ortiz in this article and he refers to the prosecutor as a "he".

And please pardon my skepticism if it is in fact Carmen Ortiz, but I'm not familiar with the case and I think a healthy dose of skepticism is a good idea whenever "internet justice" is called upon.

Anyway, rest in peace Aaron.

[gyardley]

Lessig's probably referring to one of the two assistant district attorneys who did all the day-to-day work - their names are mentioned elsewhere in this thread. Carmen Ortiz is their boss.

[rprasad]

This is quite possibly the worst idea ever.

Let's not just go after one person, let's go after everyone she ever knows, even if they have no involvement in this particular incident? Are you going to suggest we tar, feather, and lynch them too?

Make this an exercise in how to correct these injustices, and make her an example to other prosecutors.

You do this by airing ads against her if she ever runs for office or seeks higher appointment. You do not attack other people associated with her; that crosses the line.

[PrudenceYuris]

You need to reread that.

Contact her professional network, and let them know you don't approve of her actions. No tar. No feathers. Just make your own opinion known in the circles that matter to her career.

[rprasad]

Let me get this straight: you want to contact a group of judges and prosecutors and "let them know you don't approve of her actions."

What exactly do you hope to accomplish by this? Federal judges and prosecutors already get this every day from people who do this for a living. And you know what? It doesn't work.

Who cares if you don't approve of what they're doing? They don't measure themselves based on your approval. They measure themselves based on their record of convictions, however they are earned. They are not directly accountable to you.

If you want to change something, let your local Congressional representative know you disapprove of how this prosecutor conducted herself. Your Congressperson is accountable to you, and he/she is the one in the best position to make change happen in this context.

[PrudenceYuris]

Her entire career, professional circle, and reputational supports have made an error in backing her, and they need to hear that directly.

She hounded someone to suicide, and the repercussions for that are light if they are limited to ending her career.

[rprasad]

I don't know how much more clearly I can state this:

Most criminal defendants do not kill themselves. It was Aaron's choice to take his life, not hers. Her professional and personal contacts will never agree with you that she hounded someone to suicide. Telling them "she did wrong" when it is not clear that she did anything out of the ordinary in this case will have zero effect on getting her "shamed" and will have no effect on ending her career.

The internet does not determine whether these people get jobs. People in the legal industry and in the federal government determine that. And right now as a member of the legal industry, I can tell you that despite my extreme distaste for prosecutors, based on all publicly available facts about this case she did not do anything wrong. She did her job, pursuant to the laws as they are written. You don't like that? Change the laws.

Going after her without changing the laws will not work.

[PrudenceYuris]

"she did not do anything wrong"

That's a pretty arrogant statement in light of the general opinion regarding this case. It's also arrogant to think that someone, somewhere, will not find some means to destroy her career when at least tens of thousands will try.

You simultaneously claim that attempts to make an example of her will fail, and that such attempts should not even be made. Pfft. Something something before a fall.

[darkarmani]

> Going after her without changing the laws will not work.

Making it a political liability for prosecutors to act a certain way will surely influence things.

[PrudenceYuris]

Here is half the phone conversation from tomorrow morning:

Mr. President, one of your appointees made it to the top of the petition list...

No, sir, it's not good news

Shall we draft a response for your approval?

No you don't know her personally...

Hey, at least she's not Deval's Lt. Gov.

[jlgreco]

The notion that voicing an opinion is equivalent to fucking lynching of all things is a disease that serves to highlight just how little people actually believe in fundamental ideas backing democracy.

"Restrict your protest to the appropriate democratic channels" is the rallying cry of those who wish to suppress dissident.