The crime of conspiracy

Crime of Conspiracy

The recent case whereby criminal charges were imposed in Aaron Swartz caused frenzy throughout the country. In my perspective, a criminal penalty was essential for this case. Swartz had announced he would be committed to opposing the law as a moral impervious to invalidate the federal laws in existence for information access effectively. In this case, one decided to disobey the law intentionally, just because he wanted to achieve a goal in an anti-democratic policy way and there is a display by both deeds and words that he will precede. It is very deliberate for the criminal law with its power to enforce a penalty under the law that the individual violated intentionally. In actual sense, the law is the fact about civil disobedience: the main function of the punishment is to focus on the same law deemed unjust. As was in this case, I think the punishment was deliberate (Samaha, 2011).

A close assessment at the case shows that Swartz was caught in the middle of the offence, which means he did not commit any harm and was not to face punishment. However, this approach is very mistaken. When the police arrest a person in the course of committing a criminal offence, hey mediate the punishment must be based on real acts in the course and not what the person had achieved before being caught. The question seeks to identify Swartz plan. In my point-of-view, Swartz was an unusual and remarkable person with focus. I also think that there is a considerable reason to have the perception that there was a certain plan in mind. He was a very serious legal nerd despite the fact that he did not go to a law school. Most of his fellows were lawyers. In many cases, he was actively involved in debates of legal topics. At the age of 15-year, he attended the Supreme Court argument as a personal guest to Larry Lessig. On a recent case, he was part of the debate over SOPA. He had an interest and an in-depth analysis of the law. His words display that he had deep knowledge concerning the Act of Computer Fraud and Abuse, under which he was charged (Gillies, 2009).

Swartz was well aware of the fact that he used in acquiring the JSTOR database was not authorized. He had played this game for a long time with the JSTOR, and MIT made repeated attempts to keep him off from accessing their networks and databases, but he always knew his way back to the files he needed. One cannot say he broke into the closet because he did not; he was only trying to do the opposite by doing what JSTOR and MIT were blocking. He hides his face from the cameras in MIT's closet. This was because he knew the act was illegal and not out of shyness. When the authorities spotted him and wanted to have a talk with him, he was not surprised at all (Samaha, 2011).