> exploited a security problem that endangers the community
Well, it's not his fault the security problem endangers the community.
The US felony system is quite absurd. This guy is now marked for life for trespassing into a public space, based on the subjective opinion of a judge that despite him not harming anybody for 3 months, he is a danger to the community.
> is why this guy [not the hacker] is getting 25 years.
No, he is not getting 25 years. He is being sentenced for a crime whose statutory maximum punishment is 25 years, for an offense which, under the circumstances put forward by the prosecutors, has a base guideline sentence of about 5 years (which is also what prosecutors have said they will seek in sentencing.)
The defense is likely to, in sentencing, challenge the prosecution position on damages, which may result in the guideline range being substantially lower. There is, basically, zero chance of a sentence anywhere close to 25 years here.
> This guy is now marked for life [...] based on the subjective option of a judge
That is not quite what this is. He hasn’t been convicted of anything; the judge is determining the conditions on which he can be released before the trial happens and making that determination requires the judge to weigh the available evidence and apply a legal standard—albeit one where ‘danger’ doesn’t align with its everyday definition-to determine if some level of monetary bail is required.
I do agree that he may well be marked for life and in the sense that Google will remember this event forever, even if he is acquitted at trial.
Just as no one accidentally falls on a crucifix in the shower.
https://worldnewsdailyreport.com/catholic-priest-hospitalize...
reply