That's quite disingenuous. Entirely different circumstances and facts.
You're using the absolute maximum prosecutors were threatening Swartz with in order to extract a plea deal. They would not have brought anything near that to trial had it gone to trial, much less convicted him on it. In fact, in your link, this is what he was offered: "During plea negotiations with Swartz's attorneys, the prosecutors offered to recommend a sentence of six months in a low-security prison".
The statute Swartz was charged under has also widely been recognized as flawed. Not the case with what Shkreli was charged with.
That is the issue though, someone has to decide whether to "throw the book at you" or not. As long as someone is left to decide that, then you risk things like "being offensive" working against you, or "showing remorse" helping you.
The allowance for empathy, compassion and mistakes are what lead to the (to you) unfair punishment that was given.
toomuchtodo|8 years ago
Aaron Swartz was eligible for 50 years in prison and a million dollar fine based on his computer crimes. That's fair too, right?
Y'all need some empathy and compassion. People are human, and make mistakes. The punishment should fit the crime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz#Arrest_and_prosec...
cdr|8 years ago
You're using the absolute maximum prosecutors were threatening Swartz with in order to extract a plea deal. They would not have brought anything near that to trial had it gone to trial, much less convicted him on it. In fact, in your link, this is what he was offered: "During plea negotiations with Swartz's attorneys, the prosecutors offered to recommend a sentence of six months in a low-security prison".
The statute Swartz was charged under has also widely been recognized as flawed. Not the case with what Shkreli was charged with.
wintermutesGhst|8 years ago
The allowance for empathy, compassion and mistakes are what lead to the (to you) unfair punishment that was given.
s73v3r_|8 years ago