But really, that is some twisted way to use that law. I can understand it in a business setting but this is abusing a loophole to punish people that have done very little wrong apart from piss off police.
Ultimately, I think they just throw as many charges as possible at a person, knowing that the overwhelming majority wouldn't stick if they actually went to trial. I feel it's a way to scare a person into pleading guilty and taking a deal; it's probably extra effective on those who aren't familiar with US customs in general and the justice system in particular. The prosecutors would rather make the conviction the easy way, rather than taking the risk that a jury will acquit due to sparse evidence and stretched interpretations of legal precedents like Sarbox.
view the rest of the comments →
mr_skeltal ago
That's a crime in America?
Edit: I just read the next paragraph, this is why you shouldn't prematurely comment.
voatergoater ago
Good catch and question.
mr_skeltal ago
But really, that is some twisted way to use that law. I can understand it in a business setting but this is abusing a loophole to punish people that have done very little wrong apart from piss off police.
downtherabbithole ago
Ultimately, I think they just throw as many charges as possible at a person, knowing that the overwhelming majority wouldn't stick if they actually went to trial. I feel it's a way to scare a person into pleading guilty and taking a deal; it's probably extra effective on those who aren't familiar with US customs in general and the justice system in particular. The prosecutors would rather make the conviction the easy way, rather than taking the risk that a jury will acquit due to sparse evidence and stretched interpretations of legal precedents like Sarbox.