Hacker News Reader

MIT didn't kill Aaron. But their decision to be the roadblock to a plea deal because it didn't include time in prison is shameful, and there is definitely some heavy responsibility on the heads of those at MIT who rejected that deal.

View on HN

Everyone involved in the case had been made aware of Aaron's depression http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/he_ll_be_safe_in_jail_fed...

They knew that this (suicide) was a risk if they kept hounding the guy - yet the Prosecutors and MIT both kept going at it - for the sake of political gain (prosecutors).

Devil's advocate: if we felt the punishment was fair then would we think the prosecutors should have been leniant because the accused person was depressed? For example if we were having this conversation about a murderer or a rapist.

> yet the Prosecutors and MIT both kept going at it - for the sake of political gain (prosecutors).

Do you have proof of this, or is it just what you believe of the situation?

Well yeah, it's also in article here on HN. They wanted him to have jail time

Articles aren't proof. Victims don't have veto authority over plea bargain negotiations in any US jurisdiction that I know of.

Veto is non necessary, pressure and willingness to pursue and unwillingness to have any plaid without jail time is what the MIT is _rightly_ accused of.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com